Agenda and minutes

Brian White – Director of Regeneration Services

Harvey Patterson – Head of Legal and Democratic Services

Glenn back – Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager

Simon Thomas – Planning Applications Manager

Members agreed that items 5 and 6 would be taken together and that the annexes would be taken separately.

Apologies were received from Councillor Mrs Roberts and Councillor David Green.

To receive any declarations of interest.  Members are advised to consider the extract from the Standard Board Code of Conduct for Members, which forms part of the Declaration of Interest Form at the back of this Agenda.  If a Member declares an interest, they should complete that Form and hand it to the Officer clerking the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the Minutes of the Constitutional Review Working Party meeting held on 7 October 2009, copy attached.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 October 2009, were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

It was agreed that paper copies of the Council’s Constitution would be provided to the Constitutional Review Working Party after any changes had been made following Annual Council in May 2010.

It was agreed that following consultation a report would be submitted to Cabinet and then Council on the preferred political governance model prescribed by part 3 and Section 64 of the Local Government & Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 ‘(the Act’).

The Leader and Cabinet Executive model under the 2007 Act differs slightly from what that Act calls the “old style” Leader and Cabinet model (under the LGA 2000). The main differences being:

(i)  Under the “old style” arrangements a Leader could be “strong” or “weak”. With a “strong” Leader the Cabinet is appointed by the Leader. With a “weak” Leader the Cabinet is appointed by the full Council. Under the 2007 Act the Cabinet must be appointed by the Leader. Thanet District Council currently appoints the Leader and Deputy Leader and the Cabinet Leader then elects the Cabinet (up to 9).

(ii)  Under the “old style” arrangement it was possible for the Constitution to make provision with respect to the allocation of executive functions amongst the Cabinet – that is to say the Constitution could specify the terms of reference and portfolios of the Leader, the Cabinet collectively and individual Cabinet Members. Under the 2007 Act the Cabinet Leader will decide these matters, i.e. the position will be the same for a Leader as for a directly elected Mayor. In practice this means that in future the Leader will determine the portfolio allocation of executive functions without the input of full Council.

(iii)  Under the “old style” arrangements the Constitution “may include provision with respect to…the election and term of office of the executive leader” – that is to say, the Leader’s term of office is for the full Council to decide when approving the Constitution.  Under the 2007 Act the Leader’s term of office (in the case of a Council operating whole-council elections) will be four years.

In the Mayor and Cabinet Executive model the Mayor is directly elected for four years, appoints the Cabinet and determines their portfolios. He or she cannot be removed from office by the Council and, Members noted, if the Mayor “crossed the floor” i.e. changed political party, then the Council would immediately have a new administration until the end of the four years term of office.

The Council must consult the public and other interested person for a minimum 12 week period before drawing up proposals for a change in its political governance arrangements. In drawing up its proposals the Council will have regard to the responses to the public consultation as well as the extent to which the proposals if implemented, would be likely to assist in securing continuous improvement in the way in which the Councils functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

The Council must then resolve by not later  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Working Party considered the report of the Corporate Governance and Risk Officer which detailed the revised Governance and Audit Committee Terms of Reference (Version 4).

Moved by Councillor Gregory, seconded by Councillor Latchford and resolved that the Working Party recommend to the Standards Committee that the revised Terms of Reference be approved and referred to Full Council for ratification.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services and Monitoring Officer to follow.

Members considered the report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and Monitoring Officer regarding various drafting amendments to the Council’s Constitution in relation to Planning Matters, Councillor Calls for Action and the Terms of Reference of the Standards Committee, Standards (Referrals and Review) Sub Committee, Standards (Hearings) Sub Committee and the Governance & Audit Committee.

ANNEX 1 – PART A – DRAFT/PROTOCOL FOR THE GUIDANCE OF PLANNING COMMITTEE AND OFFICERS

Consideration was given by the Working Party to the request to add the ‘Heritage Champion’ to the list of permitted speakers at site visits.  This was not agreed as the Heritage Champion was a district councillor and the Committee intended to include district councillors on the list of those persons entitled to speak at site visits. Members also raised concerns about the restriction on public speaking if the applicant was not present as this would enable applicants to frustrate public speaking by non attendance. Consequently, Paragraph 12.6 of the Protocol should be amended to read as follows:

Amendment 1

“No public speaking will be permitted at site visits unless the Site Visit Chairman gives his consent. In such circumstances public speaking will take place in a publicly accessible location unless the applicant has given permission for the Committee and objectors to enter the site. Public speaking will be limited to not more than three minutes per contributor and contributions will be taken in the following order:-

• From the applicant or his representative;
• From one person raising points of concern;
• From one representative of the Town or Parish Council (if applicable); and
• From any District Councillor who is present”

AGREED.

The Planning Applications Manager outlined the changes to the ‘Call-In’ Procedure to the Working Party.

At 10.4 of the Protocol it states that:

“Notification will be in the form of individual letters and by means of the weekly list of planning applications circulated to all Members. Any request for an application must be made within 3 weeks of the date of the weekly list. However, should subsequently the applicant amend the application prior to decision the Members within whose ward the application site lies will be further notified by letter or e-mail and given a further specified period of not less than 7 days for requesting that the application be determined by the Planning Committee”.

However, it was noted that a heading was required at the beginning of this point. Possibly ‘WEEKLY LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS’.

Moved by Councillor Harrison, seconded by Councillor Latchford and resolved that the Working Party recommend to the Standards Committee that the revised Protocol in Annex 1, with the agreed amendments, be approved and referred to Full Council for ratification.

ANNEX 2 – PART A – UPDATED TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE

Members noted that an additional column had been added giving detailed information on the regulations for the functions relating to Town and Country Planning and Development Control. A question was raised regarding ‘Miscellaneous functions’ and the power to stop up footpaths  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services and Monitoring Officer to follow.

This item was dealt with under item 5 of the agenda and minute number 29.