Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Clare Cleary, Paul Cox and Gareth Molineux.

There were no declarations of interest or dispensations.

To approve the Minutes of the last meeting of Cabinet held on 10^th October 2018.

The Minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 10^th October 2018 were submitted for approval as a correct record.

The Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group expressed concern about the recent crime and security issues on Warner Street.  The Leader of the Council reported that the Business & Marketing Co-ordinator would be liaising with local businesses and the Police in the town centre and that there would a report submitted at a future meeting.

The Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group reported that she had raised questions about the Town Centre Events Programme at a previous Cabinet meeting and had had no response.  The Leader of the Council indicated that he would ask the Business & Marketing Co-ordinator to provide an update.

Resolved                               -   That the Minutes be received and approved as a correct record.

To receive the Minutes of the following meetings:

Regeneration and Housing Panel – 17^th September 2018

Cabinet Waste and Recycling Group – 4^th October 2018

Local Plan Member Working Group – 15^th October 2018

The Minutes of the following meetings were submitted for noting:

Regeneration and Housing Panel Held on 17^th September 2018

Cabinet Waste and Recycling Group on 4^th October 2018

Local Plan Member Working Group on 15^th October 2018

The Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group referred to page 2 of the Cabinet Waste and Recycling Group minutes and the use of I-phones by Enforcement Officers and asked for further information.  The Executive Director of Environmental Services and Town Centres reported that technology had been introduced to record evidence and reduce administration.

Resolved                               -   That the Minutes be received and noted.

There were no reports submitted by Cabinet Members.

Report Attached.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Resources submitted a report to enable Members to consider the findings of the survey conducted by Licensed Vehicle Surveys and Assessment (LVSA).  She asked Cabinet to consider the report be LVSA and to consider what action to take in light of the findings of the survey. 

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The Council currently has a policy of restricting the number of hackney carriage licences issued.  However in maintaining such a policy the Council has to provide evidence that there is no significant unmet demand for hackney carriage services in the area in order to be in a position to refuse any new applications for additional licences.  For this purpose it has been considered necessary to commission an independent survey to assess the level of demand for hackney carriage services, and that the survey should be carried out by an organisation specialising in that area.

The present legal provision on quantity restrictions outside London is set out in section 16 of the Transport Act 1985. This provides that the grant of a taxi (hackney carriage) licence may be refused, for the purpose of limiting the numbers of licensed taxis 'if, but only if, the [local licensing authority] is satisfied that there is no significant demand for the services of hackney carriages (within the area to which the licence would apply) which is unmet.'

Around three quarters of local licensing authorities do not impose quantity restrictions.  The Department for Transport Best Practice Guidance states that 'Where restrictions are imposed, the department would urge that the matter should be regularly reconsidered.  The Department further urges that the issue to be addressed first in each reconsideration is whether the restrictions should continue at all.  It was suggested that the matter should be approached in terms of the travelling public - that is to say, the people who use taxi services.  What benefits or disadvantages would result for the public if the controls were removed?  Was there evidence that the removal of controls would result in deterioration in the amount or quality of taxi service provision?'

Members were informed that if they took the view that a quantity restriction could be justified, the question of the level at which it should be set should be considered.

During the summer of 2018 LVSA carried out a survey on the demand for hackney carriage services in the Borough.  During the survey the number of hackney carriage vehicles that were actually licensed was 60, although the current limit on the issue of hackney carriage plates had been set at 62.  Two plates had been allowed to expire and had not been renewed and it was decided that the Council should await the outcome of the survey so that members could determine whether there was a need to re issue the plates.

The findings of the survey have been presented by LVSA and are contained in the report.  Members were requested to note that even  ...  view the full minutes text for item 239.

Report Attached.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Resources submitted a report relating to the Prudential Indicators Monitoring and Treasury Management Strategy to update Cabinet on activities in the area since the start of the financial year 2018/19.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

‘Treasury Management’ relates to the borrowing and cash activities of the authority, and the effective management of any associated risks.  On 22^nd February 2018 in the same report referred to at 4.1 above the Council also set out and then approved its current Treasury Management Strategy.  This was in accordance with the CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy) code of practice on treasury management in public serves, the Council having previously adopted, via Cabinet, the then revised code of practice.  Associated treasury management Prudential Indicators were included in the February 2018 report. 

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

None applicable.

Resolved                                  -   That the report be noted.

Report Attached.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Resources submitted a report to inform Cabinet of the financial spending of the Council up to the end of October 2018 and the financial forecast outturn position for the Accounting Year 2018/19.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The spend for the first 7 months of the financial year to the end of October 2018 is £6,206,244 compared to a budget of £6,223,269 giving a small positive variance of £17,000 over the first seven months of the year.

The current forecast spend to the end of the financial year in March 2019 is £11,107,000 compared to a budget of £11,174,000.  This forecast produces a positive variance of £67,000.  Environmental Services are predicting a positive variance for the year.  Culture & Leisure Services are predicting a small adverse variance.  There are more significant adverse variances on Planning & Transportation and Regeneration & Property Services along with Policy & Corporate Governance.

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

Not applicable.

Resolved                                   (1) That the report be noted; and

                                                  (2) That Corporate Management Team continues to work to reduce costs and increase income over the remainder of the year to help improve the overall financial position of the Council.

Report Attached.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Resources submitted a report to inform Cabinet of the progress of the 2018/19 Capital Programme.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The Council approved Its Capital Programme for 2017/18 at its meeting on the 22^nd February 2018. 

The total value of spend authorised in the budget in February 2018 was £4.9m and this has been increased to £10.6m with carry forward projects from the previous year and new in-year authorisations.  The current predicted outturn is £10.3m.  There is underspend of £324,000 (3%) currently predicted for the year.

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

Not applicable.

Resolve - That Cabinet noted the progress on capital expenditure to date.

The following item was submitted as urgent business with the Chair’s agreement in accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the reason being to ensure the most up to date information was provided.

Report Attached.

The Deputy Leader of the Council, Environmental Services submitted a report seeking authority from Cabinet to make a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) pursuant to sections 60(2) and 61(1) (a) of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (“The Act”) which varies the borough of Hyndburn (Control of Dogs) Public Spaces Protection Order (No 2 of 2015) by adding the grounds of Churchfield House in Great Harwood and the extension to Great Harwood Cemetery to the areas which will be governed by the proposed order in so far as it required dogs to be held on leads and extended the period during which the said order was effected by a period of three years.

Approval of the report was deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

            The Act required local authorities to use PSPOs instead of dog control orders. To make a PSPO a local authority had to be satisfied that activities carried on in a public place had or were likely to have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality (s 59 (2) of the Act) and that those activities were unreasonable, likely to persist or continue and justified the making of the PSPO.  Similar considerations have to be taken into account if the local authority wished to extend the area governed by an existing PSPO (s 61(1) (a) and 61(2) of the Act.

PSPO’s are live for a maximum of three years and at that point have to be extended and varied if necessary, for them to remain in force. To extend and/or vary a PSPO a consultation exercise needs to be undertaken and a decision taken by Cabinet.

A consultation exercise was undertaken during September and October 2018. Key stakeholders such as the Police & Dogs Trust and user groups such as Sports Teams & local ‘Friends Of’ groups were consulted to ensure those most invested had a chance to comment.  As part of the consultation an online survey was available for Borough residents to indicate which of the proposals for inclusion within the PSPO they were for or against. A total of 339 responses were received via the on-line survey. The results are available in Appendix 1 of this report.

As part of the consultation an email address (pspo@hyndburnbc.gov.uk) was available for anyone wishing to make a specific point or comment about the proposals. Nine responses were received in total relevant to the consultation exercise. Eight responses were received from Borough residents, all of which objected to the proposal to exclude dogs from designated areas of Council owned sports pitches. One response was received from the Dogs Trust, this response commented on a more broad range of issues (refer to Appendix 2).       

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

An alternative option was to not extend and varythe current Borough of Hyndburn (Control of Dogs) PSPO (No 2 of 2015). This has been rejected as evidence and experience has shown that practical measures, like the current PSPO help  ...  view the full minutes text for item 243.

Recommended          That, in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following items, when it is likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there will otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Act specified at the items.

Details of any representations received by the Executive about why the following report should be considered in public – none received.

Statement in response to any representations – not required.

Resolved                               -   That, in accordance with Section 100A(4)  Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following items, when it was likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there would otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraph at Schedule 12A of the Act specified at the items.

(The report will contain exempt information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Report Attached.

Exempt Information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The Leader of the Council submitted a copy of an exempt signed Urgent Cabinet Decision form and accompanying exempt report relating to use of the Urgent Cabinet Procedure in respect of the land at Nook Lane, Oswaldtwistle.  The reason for urgency is that timescales are short due to the auction date.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The reasons for the decision were set out in the exempt decision form and accompanying exempt report.

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

The alternative options considered and reasons for rejection were set out in the exempt report.

Resolved                               -   That the use of the Urgent Cabinet Decision Procedure be noted.

(The report will contain exempt information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Report Attached.

Exempt Information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Resources submitted a copy of an exempt signed Urgent Cabinet Decision form and accompanying exempt report relating to use of the Urgent Cabinet Procedure in respect of the purchase of a loan.  The reason for urgency is that bids for the acquisition of the loan must be submitted by 12^th November 2018. 

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The reasons for the decision were set out in the exempt decision form and accompanying exempt report.

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

The alternative options considered and reasons for rejection were set out in the exempt report.

Resolved                               -   That the use of the Urgent Cabinet Decision Procedure be noted.

(The report will contain exempt information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Report Attached.

Exempt Information under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A, Paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regeneration submitted an exempt report on the proposed disposal of the Steiner Street Site, Accrington and to seek Cabinet’s approval to amend the conditions previously imposed on the sale.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

The reasons for the decision were set out in the exempt report.

Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection

The alternative options considered and reasons for rejection were set out in the exempt report.

Resolved                               -   That the recommendations as set out in the report be approved.