Agenda and minutes

Upon opening the meeting the Chairman expressed condolences for the recent passing of Mr. David Waring, a former councillor,  Mr B. Llewellyn, a former councillor of the first session of this Council from 1996-1999, and Mr. B. Foulser, the Consort of former Chairman, J. Foulser.  Council marked their respect with a minute silence.

Council were advised that a photographic session would be held prior to Council on 20^th March 2017.  Detail to follow.

Council received the Chairman’s report, noting an upcoming charity concert at Monmouth Leisure Centre on 31^st March, proceeds of which would go to Gwent Music and the Chairman’s charity.

There were no petitions.

County Councillor M. Hickman declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest pursuant to the Members’ Code of Conduct as trustee and treasurer of Homemakers Community Recycling.

Members agreed to declare further interests as and when.

Why is the County Council supporting a proposed development scheme, namely the M4 Corridor around Newport which if approved, will destroy the character and the environment of Llanfihangel Rogiet, an area which has been designated by this Council as a Conservation Area and is listed as such in the Adopted Local Development Plan ? Is he aware that  “Conservation Areas are widely recognised as one of the County’s key tourism and amenity areas and that these assets are irreplaceable and any detrimental impact upon them can have significant cultural, environmental and social costs and therefore it is essential that they are preserved and where possible enhanced ? “  Is he also aware that if the proposed motorway scheme is approved it will be in breach of the Council’s policy on “Development in Conservation Areas” and in particular policy HE1 which states that :-

“Policy HE1 – Development in Conservation Areas

Within Conservation Areas, development proposals should, where appropriate, have regard to the Conservation Area Appraisal for that area and will be permitted if they:

a) preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and its landscape setting;

b) have no serious adverse effect on significant views into and out of the Conservation Area;

c) have no serious adverse effect on significant vistas within the area and the general character and appearance of the street scene and roofscape;

d) use materials appropriate to their setting and context and which protect or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area; and

e) pay special attention to the setting of the buildings and its open areas.”

And how can the Leader of the Council justify such unjustifiable, irrecoverable and permanent damage to that area?

Question withdrawn.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19^th January 2017 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, with the following amendment:

Page 7, paragraph 3 should read  ‘Some Members expressed frustrations concerning Welsh language taking precedent over English, specifically on telephone calls and road signage. It was thought to be a case of the minority dictating to the majority.’

The minutes of the meeting held on 26th January 2017 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

We noted the minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 2^nd February 2017.

In doing so Councillor F. Taylor expressed frustration and disappointment that the discussion surrounding Zero Hour Contracts had not been presented back to Council as requested, and that the issue had not been resolved during this council term.

We noted the minutes of the Democratic Services Committee meeting held on 23^rd January 2017.

None received.

Council were presented a report in order to seek Council approval on the proposed strategy to initiate a procurement exercise for a new Contract for the Household Waste Recycling Centre, Transfer Station and Residual Waste Haulage services.

During his presentation, Councillor B. Jones expressed that this process was no reflection on the service received, and commended Viridor for their work over the last 20 plus years of the contract.  However, it was understood to be time to review best practices and procurement to ensure we are up to date, fit for purpose and aligned to this report of the recycling service.

During debate we noted the following:

Some Members were keen to commend the exemplary service provided by Viridor, and also the work of officers and co-operation of Monmouthshire residents.

Councillor Batrouni referred to the tender process and questioned if it was common practice to award following the initial tender, and questioned the ‘limited negotiations’. The Head of Waste and Street Services explained that this is a new procurement process introduced through the EU procurement rules and would be the first time MCC have used it.  It provides the opportunity to offer a direct award if the bid is strong enough.  Limited negotiation refers to matters of refinement on detail and clarification.

At present, officers had not received any indication that Dragon Waste intended to bid for the contract.

In response to a request for assurance regarding transition, Members were advised that, should another contractor become successful, staff would transfer under TUPE (transfer of undertakings and protection of employment) arrangements.  Council were assured that the quality of service would not change.

Upon being put to the vote Council resolved to agree the recommendations in the report:

The Council approves:

·         The procurement strategy as outlined in this report, specifically:-

              i.        Nature of services (as defined in 4.1)

             ii.        Contract length:- 7 years + 5

            iii.        Contract form:- service contract

           iv.        Procurement process:- Competitive with Negotiation

            v.        Price/Quality criteria:- 55/45

           vi.        Performance / quality outcomes

·         That delegated approval is given to the Head of Waste & Street Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member, S151 Officer and Monitoring Officer to finalise the Contract Documentation, including the evaluation matrix, prior to issue of OJEU Notice to begin the procurement process.

·         That decision to award the Contract will be delegated to the Head of Waste & Street Services in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Waste and Finance, S151 Officer and Monitoring Officer on the provision that the price remains within the current affordability envelope of the existing waste management budget (noting though the outcome will be reported to Council and our future partner will be presented to Select Committee).

·         That decision to award the Contract if it exceeds the existing budget envelope will be for the consideration of Council.

Council were presented with a report outlining the final proposals for recycling collections in order to seek Council approval for the future configuration of the kerbside recycling service 2018-2025.

During debate we noted the following:

A Member questioned the weekly collection of brown bags, suggesting that fortnightly collections during winter months be appropriate.  In response we were advised that there was no proposal to change, but this could be considered as a recommendation from Council.

A Member referred to the future proofing of the service, in terms of the legislative underpinning derived from the EU, and questioned the effects following Brexit.  Council were advised that the European legislation gives a minimum for which member states must adopt. The Welsh Government position exceeds the European regulations, and feedback from officials, and the minister, is that they intend to carry on with the current agenda, and will not be affected by Brexit.

In response to concerns that fortnightly collections would result in recyclable waste being put into black bags, officers explained that extra recycling boxes would be provided on request.

It was reiterated that a service should be provided at the refuse transfer station for red and purple waste bags.  Council heard that that service had been withdrawn as the service had been massively abused, and analysis showed that 70% to 80% of bags were full of black bag waste.  There had been some instances where residents had been abusive and physically threatening to staff at Viridor.  Should the trial take place again, it would be on the basis that it could be withdrawn.

A Member referred to the collection of yellow ‘tiger’ bags and questioned if the process could be modified.  It was explained that the service had moved to a fortnightly collection at a saving of £100,000, and there were currently no plans to change.  Accepted advice from HSE confirmed it is completely safe to continue with a fortnightly collection.  Councillor Easson disputed that this was hygienically acceptable, particularly where residents live in cramped accommodation, and questioned if officers could look at individual instances where problem situations could be resolved urgently.  This was confirmed.

In response to concerns around the potential increase in fly tipping, the Head of Waste and Street Services reassured Council that there are crews available to collect fly tipping when reported, and an increase was not anticipated.

A Member questioned if we were behind other authorities in terms of adopting these changes, the Head of Waste and Street Services explained that we were not adopting the standard kerbside sort system, and have gone for a variation considered by Welsh Government to be a satisfactory middle ground.

A Member acknowledged that this report has been through the scrutiny process and was pleased to hear that the spend on grey bags was put on hold and being reviewed.

There were concerns regarding the consultation process and Council heard that 6500 residents had been trialled, qualitative and quantitative data had been collected.  A sample drop of 1000 questionnaires  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9b

Council were presented with a report which sought Council approval for capital budget in 2017/18 for installation of new equipment and car park improvements.

During debate we noted the following:

Clarification was sought around the mention of equipment, and improvement/ refurbishment.  It was questioned if it would include provision of physical measures in some car parks to restrict their use as unofficial race tracks, particular mention was made to Welsh Street Car Park in Chepstow.  The Cabinet Member responded that ticket machines were in need of replacement, providing residents options of payment methods other than coins.  Blue Badge Spaces would be brought up to standard.  With regards to Welsh Street Car Park, consultations were underway with local residents and businesses, and within the budget resolution would be sought.

It was confirmed EV referred to Electrical Vehicles.

It was clarified that the recommendations in the Cabinet paper dated July 2016 were passed as stage 1.  This report referred to stage 2 of the process.

A Member referred to the leasehold of car parks, referring to Castle Car Park, and questioned if there was a potential risk of losing income.  The Cabinet Member explained that if we are occupying land on lease, it is dependent on the land owner but negotiations would ensue. 

Upon being put to the vote Council resolved to agree the recommendations in the report:

·         That Council approve the capital budgets recommended by Cabinet on the 6th July 2016 detailed in the report ‘Proposals for the future provision of public car parks by MCC:

That capital budgets of (i) £250,000 for new car park ticket machines, £300,000 for improvements/refurbishment to existing car parks, EV points and signage be created and that these be funded by ‘invest to save’ using revenue generated through the new car park order and management regime.

Council were presented with the Council Tax Resolution 2017/18, and Revenue and Capital Budgets 2017/18.  The Council is bound by Statute to specific timescales for Council Tax setting and is also required to make certain defined resolutions. The recommendations that form the major part of this report are designed to comply with those Statutory Provisions.

The recommended resolutions also draw together the Council Tax implications of precepts notified by the Office of Police and Crime Commissioner for Gwent and Town and Community Councils, thereby enabling the County Council to establish its headline Council Tax levels at the various property bands within each Town or Community area.

The Cabinet Member for Resources explained that despite a better settlement than anticipated it had been a difficult process in bringing forward a balanced budget.  He thanked all officers involved in the process for their hard work during the deliberations.

The Cabinet Member advised of a revised recommendation as follows:

2.1       It is recommended that the revenue and capital estimates for the year 2017/18 as attached in Appendix 1 and 2 be approved with the following adjustments:

      i.        That charges for Trade waste collections are not increased and the service instead seek to increase the customer base to achieve the income target of £10k.

     ii.        That an additional £300k is added to the Disabled Facilities Grant capital budget, and the consequent costs of borrowing are funded from the headroom in the Treasury revenue budget.

    iii.        That the capital budgets for car parks are added to the overall capital budget as outlined in item 9c on this Council agenda.

During Debate the following points were noted:

The Leader of the opposition expressed that following a tough few years in local government, thanks should be given to Welsh Government for extra funding, despite cuts from Westminster Government.  He was pleased to note the population projections have changed, meaning a slight increase in funding for Monmouthshire.

Concerns were raised regarding school budgets, in that budgets were being cut by circa £700k. It was added that schools themselves, through the schools forum, had raised concerns, recognising the biggest cost base being staff.  The increase in cost of school meals was also questioned.

There were long-standing concerns around highways, bus services and street lighting in that the issue of loneliness and isolation with the County.  The Labour Group considers that tackling loneliness and isolation should not just be about social care, but about other Council services. 

Explanation was requested regarding a cut in funding of £200k to Chepstow School.

The Cabinet Member for Education explained that 36% of the budget, over £50m goes to schools and, as a result, standards have been raised.   We have continued to fund our schools above the Welsh average, being the second highest funder, funding per pupil is £300 more than a neighbouring authority.  With regards to Chepstow School, it was noted that a wonderful job had been done in raising numbers, but this had reduced over the last couple of years, therefore funding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10a

Council were presented with a report to adopt the annual Treasury Management Policy Statement and the Treasury Management Strategy Statement including the Investment and Borrowing Strategies for 2017/18 to 2020/21 and the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Statement for 2017/18 at Annex C.

This proposed Strategy and Policy will be monitored during the year by Audit Committee.

During debate the following points were noted:

In response to a question regarding internal borrowing, the Assistant Head of Finance advised this is the arrangement whereby we can look at our cash balance at any given time and consider using those resources to fund capital programme aspects, and avoid external borrowing.  In terms of it being a short term strategy depends on how long you have capital receipts, and general revenue receipts. 

With regards to a question raised around interest rates, Treasury Management consider interest rates may dip into a negative level before they start to increase.  Rates are monitored on a quarterly basis, and at the moment are not moving to a great degree.  

Members were reminded that changes to the MRP Policy were a cash-flow change rather than a saving. In response to a query, the Assistant Head of Finance agreed to provide an analysis of the results had we continued with the previous approach. 

In terms of ethical investments, the Assistant Head of Finance explained that the priority had been to safeguard money invested. Primarily the focus is on double a-graded institutions.  Working through who benefits from investments can be problematic, but there is nothing stopping Councillors deciding on a morally ethical policy on investments should they wish

Upon being put to the vote Council resolved to agree the recommendation:

·         It is recommended that the proposed Treasury Management Policy Statement for 2017/18 (Appendix 2) and proposed Treasury Management Strategy and Investment & Borrowing Strategies 2017/18 to 2020/21 (Appendix 1), including the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Statement for 2017/18 at Annex C, be approved together with the Treasury Limits as required by section 3 of the Local Government Act 2003.