Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Ashbee, Game, Day and Howes.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting of Council held on 14 July 2016, copy attached.

Subject to the amendment of a typographical error in item 8B where Councillor Fairbrass should be referred to as the Deputy Leader, it was proposed by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Grove and Members agreed that the minutes of the Council meeting held on 12 May 2016 be approved and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman, Leader, Members of the Cabinet or Chief Executive in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 2.2 (iv).

Members welcomed Councillor Rusiecki and Councillor L Piper to the meeting and offered congratulations on their recent election to office.  Members also welcomed Charlie Friedlander, the new Chairman’s attendant.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members in accordance with Council Procedure rule 2.2 (v)

To receive petitions from the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12.

Mr Murray presented a petition containing 59 valid signatures as follows:

“From residents of Minster/Monkton for a change in the route of No.9 bus that goes between Ramsgate and Canterbury to include Minster/Monkton on its route.”

In accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme, the petition was referred to Cabinet without debate for a report to the Council within three ordinary meetings.

Mr Wright presented a petition containing 340 valid signatures as follows:

“We call upon Thanet District Council to “stand against hate” – to state their opposition to racism, xenophobia and hate-crimes; ensure resources and support are available to do this and to affirm their continuing intent for unity, compassion and understanding.”

In accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme, the petition was referred to Cabinet without debate for a report to the Council within three ordinary meetings.

It was noted that no questions from the press and public had been received in accordance with council procedure rule number 13.

Councillor K Gregory asked Councillor Brimm the following question:

“Could Councillor Brimm please tell me when the public toilets at Minnis Bay are next due to be refurbished?”

Councillor Brimm responded with the following points:

-  The provision of public toilets was not a statutory responsibility of the Council and had an annual cost of £528,000.00, of which £20,000.00 was allocated for general maintenance.

-  There are 32 sets of public toilets across Thanet.

-  The largest single cost in the current financial year was £21,000.00 for the provision of temporary toilets at Westbrook; however this had been budgeted for separately.

-  As part of the Council’s review of assets, the provision of public toilets would be assessed.  No refurbishment works would take place until this assessment had been completed.

Councillor K Gregory asked a follow up question enquiring whether the provision of portable/temporary toilets was considered at Alpha Road Car Park in Birchington while the public toilets were closed.

Councillor Brimm advised that there had been a leak at the toilets which the Council had been working with Southern Water to address.  Members of the public were advised that they could use toilets in the library (during library opening times) until the car park toilets reopen.

Councillor Savage asked the Leader the following question:

‘On 20.7.2016 TDC received £3m from Cardy Ramsgate for the freehold of the site of the Royal Sands project. With the subsequent changes to the directorship of that company, can he provide us with an update that can satisfy concerns for the completion of the project within the timespan agreed?’

The Leader responded with the following points:

·  All legal obligations and agreements made originally with Cardy Ramsgate Ltd would remain enforceable despite their change in name and directorship.  This included the option for the Council to buy back the site if specified milestones were not met within agreed timeframes.

Councillor Savage asked a follow up question enquiring whether the Leader felt that the £3 million Cardy paid the Council should be ring-fenced in case it became necessary to buy back the site.

The Leader advised that the £3 million could be ring-fenced; however he currently believed that it would be better to use the money for other projects within Ramsgate.

To receive any Notices of Motion from Members of Council in accordance with the Council Procedure Rule 3.

It was noted that no motions on notice had been received in accordance with council procedure rule 3.

To receive a report from the Leader of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 2.4.

During his report the Leader covered the following areas:

·  The UKIP administration was to be different from the previous Conservative and Labour administrations that the Leader felt had left the Council with a number of negative legacies to overcome. Some of these legacy issues included:

o  The Pleasurama site in Ramsgate

o  The Dreamland site in Margate

o  The Local Plan, drafting of which began in 2011 but was not yet complete. 

·  Balancing the budget in an environment of growing demand, austerity cuts and rising costs was difficult.  An asset disposal review was underway to establish what could be sold to fund the capital programme.

Councillor Bayford as Leader of the Conservative Party responded with the following points:

·  Some of the Leaders comments regarding negative legacy issues were hypocritical as the Leader was a member of the Conservative cabinet when the Council was Conservative led.

·  The UKIP administration was elected on the promise to reopen Manston Airport; however the Leader appeared to be defaulting on that promise.

·  The Conservative group believed that there could be a working airport at Manston.

The Leader replied to Councillor Bayford’s comments with the following point:

·  UKIP’s election pledge was to start the CPO of Manston airport within seven days.  The CPO process was initiated on the first night that the UKIP administration took office, however River Oak, despite having had four chances, had repeatedly been unable to prove that they had the required funds to act as an indemnity partner.

Councillor Matterface as leader of the Labour Party made the following points:

·  It was good to hear that the receipts from the Pleasurama Site would be spent on projects in Ramsgate.

·  The CPO of Dreamland started under the Conservative administration when the Leader was a Conservative cabinet member, and it was the UKIP leadership who agreed the contract with the current lease holders on the site, who then went into administration.

·  The Overview and Scrutiny Panel were still waiting to review the Dreamland project despite Members making a request in accordance with the constitution.

·  It was hoped that the local plan would soon be finalised as there was concern that the housing allocation would continue to rise until this time.

·  All tenants potentially impacted by the asset disposal process should be informed.

·  Could the Kingdom enforcement contract come back in-house, and what was the cost of the contract to the Council?

·  The open top bus service had run during the summer holidays and had received 15,000 fare paying customers.  Next year it was expected that the bus would go from Margate Station to the paddling pool at the far end of Ramsgate.

The Leader replied to Councillor Matterface’s comments with the following point:

·  There were around 600 assets in total under consideration for disposal.  In order to ensure adequate consultation, the Leader intended to consider around 20 assets at a time.

In the absence of Councillor Ashbee, Councillor Elenor advised that he had no further comments to add on behalf of the Democratic Independent  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To receive a report from the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 15.1.

Councillor D Saunders, the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel (OSP), presented his report and the following points were noted:

·  At the Panel meeting on 16 August, Councillor Stummer-Schmertzing gave an informative presentation on the new economic development strategy for Thanet.  The Panel also considered the new events policy as part of the overall engagement and awareness process.

·  The Community Safety Partnership Working Party met with Police representatives on 3 October to discuss the issues surrounding sexual offences and support for victims. This topic formed the first of five key topics that the Working Party had identified for investigation during the year.

·  All Members were encouraged to attend the Working Party meetings.

·  A trial to allow public speaking at Overview and Scrutiny Panel meetings was currently underway, and the Chairman was also working with Democratic Services to review the Council’s scrutiny process.

It was proposed by Councillor Townend, seconded by Councillor Stummer-Schmertzing and Members agreed the recommendations as shown in the report, namely:

“That Council:

·  Notes the actual 2015/16 prudential and treasury indicators in this report.

·  Approves the annual treasury management report for 2015/16.”

PROPORTIONALITY

The Leader proposed option 1 which was seconded by Councillor L Fairbrass, and Councillor Bayford proposed option 2 which was seconded by Councillor Savage.

Upon being put to the vote Members agreed to adopt option 1 as detailed at paragraph 2.5.1 of the report, namely;

“That a seat is added to the Planning Committee and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the Licensing Board and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the Governance and Audit Committee and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the General Purposes Committee and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the Boundary and Electoral Arrangements Working Party and that seat is given to the UKIP group. That a seat is added to the Constitutional Review Working Party and that seat is given to the UKIP group.”

JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD

The Leader proposed, Councillor L Fairbrass seconded and Members agreed to adopt option 1 as detailed at paragraph 4.7.2 of the report, namely;

“That the UKIP group will gain a seat on the Joint Transportation Board and so will need to make a nomination to that Committee and the Democratic Independent Group loses a seat on the Joint Transportation Board and so will have to remove Cllr Ashbee from that Board.”

NOMINATION OF MEMBERS TO SERVE ON COMMITTEES

The Leader advised of changes to his nominations to sit on committees as summarised in the two tables below.

The Chairman proposed, Councillor Grove seconded and Members agreed that the Chairman read out Councillor Larkins’ apology which would be published in the minutes.

The Chairman readout out the following apology from Councillor Larkins;

“I wish to offer an unreserved apology for any offence caused by the recent comment made via my Facebook account.  I acknowledge this is not party policy, and realise the comment risked blaming a whole religion for the actions of the few.”

The Chairman proposed, the Leader seconded and members agreed that;

“The Council censures Councillor Larkins for bringing her role as Councillor into disrepute.”