Minutes of the:

(a)       Ordinary meeting held on 8^th October 2012

(b)       Special meeting held on 23^rd October 2012

Council agreed to approve:

(a)       Minutes (previously circulated) of the ordinary meeting held on 8^th October 2012 subject to the following minor amendments:

(1)       In minute 45 (Sheriff’s Announcements) to amend the minute to read as follows:

The Sheriff informed Council that the annual Sheriff’s Drive on Port Meadow had taken place on 10^th September 2012 and while the date was usually kept secret, it had somehow been disclosed.  Despite this, Councillors and volunteers had rounded-up 300 cattle in difficult conditions.  On two separate occasions while the Meadow has been exceptionally water logged members of the public and vehicles become stuck and the local Fire Service came to the rescue.

(2)       In minute 46 (Statement by the Deputy Lord Mayor) delete the word “amended” and insert the word “appended”.

(b)       Minutes (previously circulated) of the special meeting of Council held on 23^rd October 2012.

Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests they may have in any of the following agenda items. Guidance on this is set out at the end of these agenda pages.

Councillor Rae Humberstone declared a pecuniary interest in agenda item 21(3) (Motions on Notice – Day Centre Charges) as he was an employee of the Oxfordshire County Council.  (Minute 94 refers).

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Sajjad Malik and David Rundle.

Council is asked to appoint a Parish Representative to the Oxford City Council Standards Committee.

The Chair of the Standards Committee will make a report to Council.

Councillor Gill Sanders, Chair of the Standards Committee informed Council that Gordon Roper, Chair of the Blackbird Leys Parish Council had been nominated to sit on the Standards Committee as the Parish Council representative.

Council agreed to appoint Parish Councillor Gordon Roper as the Parish Council representative on the Standards Committee for the remainder of the 2012/13 Council Year.

The Lord Mayor informed Council of the recent death of Kevin Einon, Private Sector Team Manager (Housing) who had been an employee of the Council for 38 years, and the recent death of former Councillor David Townsend who had served as Councillor for the former South Ward in two periods between 1973 and 1986.

Council stood for a minutes silence as a mark of respect.

No announcements were made.

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) made the following announcement.

Oxford Stadium – Closure

The City Council supports the retention of the Oxford Stadium site as a venue for greyhound racing, go-karting, fitness training and other leisure activities, and would welcome an initiative to bring back speedway racing, for which a large fan base still remains. With its first-rate facilities, the Stadium has a long-standing place in the affections of City residents, and it is regrettable that the current owners of the Stadium have not sought to build on the widespread support which it has maintained through the recent difficulties. The Council is appalled that the decision to cease operations at the Stadium was taken so close to the Christmas period and without consideration for the staff who work there. The Council's planning policy towards the site is clear; it is not included as a potential housing site in the Sites and Housing DPD, and remains a leisure and recreation site. As part of the City's leisure and recreation strategy, the Council would be happy to work with the current owners to identify an alternative operator who would be willing to continue and extend the current valuable contribution which the Stadium makes to the range of facilities that is available to the residents of Oxford and the neighbouring areas.

No announcements were made by the Chief Executive, the Chief Finance Officer or the Monitoring Officer.

To hear addresses from members of the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.8 for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 13^th December 2012) and the full wording of the address has been given to the Head of Law and Governance.

Council received and took five addresses to Council from members of the public.  (The text of the addresses are appended to these minutes).

(1)       Jayne Woodley – Surviving Winter Campaign 2012

(2)       Sushilla Dhall – Damage to Port Meadow

(3)       William Clark – Blackbird Leys Leisure Facilities

(4)       Nuala Young – Planning and leisure facilities

Following the address from Nuala Young, Councillor Mary Clarkson who had been named, asked for Nuala Young to provide her with the meeting and date of when she was alleged to have said the comments in Nuala Young’s address.

(5)       Jane Alexander – Recycling in Oxford and Carbon Emission reduction

Following the address from Jane Alexander, Councillor John Tanner who had been named, said that he did not recall all conversations with Jane Alexander, but he did recall Phylis Starker who was a Councillor at the time and supported recycling wherever possible.  He added that he would speak with Councillor Van Coulter (Board Member for Leisure) with regard to the recycling issues raised concerning the Temple Cowley Pools.

To hear questions from the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.9 to the Leader or other Members of the City Executive Board for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 13^th December 2012) and the full wording of the question has been given to the Head of Law and Governance, and to hear responses from those Members.

Three questions were submitted by members of the public as follows:

(1)       Question to the Board Member, Leisure (Councillor Van Coulter) from Gordon Waite

            Population figures and leisure facilities

The Council has recently published figures from the latest census showing that the highest growth in population over the last ten years has been in Cowley Marsh, a figure of 41%. Communities around the Cowley Marsh ward have grown significantly, over 20% in some cases. In contrast, the population of Blackbird Leys has grown by only 4%, that is by only 233. In the wards closest to Blackbird Leys  it has grown by only 8%.

One of the main reasons the Council puts forward for a new swimming pool in Blackbird Leys is that some 10,000 people would be within walking distance, compared to about 6,000 in Cowley. These figures are based on the previous census; but the current figures from the Council demonstrate that the catchment area for a leisure facility in Cowley is at least as large as in Blackbird Leys; and Cowley is in the heart of a group of communities that are growing and will continue to do so.

Why is the Council still intent on removing leisure facilities from these growing communities in and around Cowley?

Response: The new pool and the subsequent closure of the Temple Cowley and Blackbird Leys Pools have been agreed following a robust business case that detailed the benefits in terms of cost, carbon, access, participation, quality and sustainability.

http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Direct/CompetitionStandardPoolFacilitiesAppraisalandOptionsReport.pdf

(2)       Question to the Board Member, Leisure (Councillor Van Coulter) from Nigel Gibson

            Fusion Leisure Contract

The Council has consistently claimed that the annual cost of operating Temple Cowley Leisure Centre is over £500,000. The breakdown for last year provided by your Finance Department shows that most of this figure, £248,696, was actually a ‘contracted management fee’ – not a real cost like fixing the air conditioning in the gym, or bringing the diving pool back into use, but a figure paid to Fusion that was agreed when the contract with them was signed.  In complete contrast, according to your website http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Procurement/Contract%202%20Leisure%20Services.pdf) you paid Fusion £225,297 last year for operating all the leisure centres, which is £23,399 less than your claimed payment to Fusion for Temple Cowley Leisure Centre.

Can you please explain this discrepancy, and for clarity and in line with the openness you claim on your website, provide a breakdown of these payments by year by leisure centre for the whole of the contract term? If the payments have increased since the contract was signed, can you please explain the reason and the contractual mechanism by which this has happened?"

Response: The breakdown of the annual £500,000 costs for Temple Cowley Pools has been provided to Mr Gibson on several occasions. The contract costs vary if the council make changes to service such as when we extended free swimming in April 2012. The figures referred to were accurate when they were published.

(3)       Question to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

The Lord Mayor asked Council to agree to a change in the running order (Procedure rule 11.6 in the Councils Constitution) to allow for the following agenda items to be taken earlier in the meeting:

Agenda Item 20 – Petition – Port Meadow, Oxford – Damaged View

Agenda Item 23 - Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Draft Charging Schedule

Agenda Item 24 – Barton Area Action Plan – Inspectors Report

Agenda Item 25 – Council Tax Base 2013/14

Council agreed to the change in the order of business.

The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report which advises on the procedure that Council needs to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions, and to provide information specifically on the petition entitled “Port Meadow, Oxford- Damaged view”.

Council is being recommended to follow the procedure for large petitions by hearing the head petitioner and to then debate the petition and decide how to advise the Executive.

The Head of Law and Governance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) which advised Council on the procedure that it needed to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions.  The report also provided information specifically on the petition entitled “Port Meadow, Oxford – Damaged View”.

Sushilla Dhall as Head Petitioner addressed Council on the contents of the petition.

Council debated the contents of the petition.

Councillor Bob Price moved the following Motion:

“Council notes the widespread concern about the impact of the development of postgraduate accommodation at Roger Dudman Way on views from Port Meadow, but that a fully valid planning permission is held by the University. Council also notes that the extensive level of consultation with public and statutory bodies, as set out in sections 4 and 5 of the report from the Head of City Development, fully met the requirements of the Council's procedures, and that the University also undertook consultation through a public exhibition.

As detailed in the further report from the officers, the conditions attached to the granting of the planning permission, relating to planting and screening are currently being determined, as are some amendments to the physical appearance of the flats. Council therefore determines to ask the Head of City Development to bring forward as soon as possible in the New Year, a report setting out an assessment of the scope for further measures that are legally possible and that would contribute in the long and the short term to mitigate the impact on the views looking south from Port Meadow”.

Councillor Elise Benjamin seconded by Councillor Hollick, proposed an amendment to the Motion by Councillor Price as follows:

“To delete all of the words after the first sentence in the first paragraph”.

Councillor Price, did not accept the proposed amendment by Councillor Benjamin and following a vote, the amendment was not adopted by Council.

Councillor John Goddard proposed a further amendment as follows:

To insert the words “any general lessons that need to be learned from the handling of this application” after the word “out” in the sixth line of the second paragraph.

Councillor Price accepted the amendment by Councillor Goddard and following a vote, Council agreed:

(a)       To note the widespread concern about the impact of the development of postgraduate accommodation at Roger Dudman Way on views from Port Meadow, but that a fully valid planning permission is held by the University. Council also notes that the extensive level of consultation with public and statutory bodies, as set out in sections 4 and 5 of the report from the Head of City Development, fully met the requirements of the Council's procedures, and that the University also undertook consultation through a public exhibition.

As detailed in the further report from the officers, the conditions attached to the granting of the planning permission, relating to planting and screening are currently being determined, as are some amendments to the physical appearance of the flats. Council therefore determines to ask the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

The Head of Policy, Culture and Communications has submitted a report which provides background to the development of the Culture Strategy and an overview of the vision and priorities of the proposed Culture Strategy 2012-15.

This report was submitted to the City Executive Board on 12^th September 2012 and an extract from the minutes of this meeting is also attached.

Council is asked to approve and adopt the new Culture Strategy 2012-15.

Council had before it the report of the Head of Policy, Culture and Communications with a minute extract of the meeting of the City Executive Board held on 12^th September 2012 (Both documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Price moved the report.

Councillor Campbell said that he strongly supported the three priorities under the strategy and the support the Council gave to the nine core arts and culture organisations in the City.  However he was concerned at the membership of the Culture Action Group as many small organisations were facing difficulties and he felt that having a representative from the small organisations on the Group would provide them with a voice.

In response Councillor Price said that this request had been noted and that the membership of the Culture Action Group was being looked at again.

Councillor Wolff welcomed the comments of Councillor Campbell and said that churches and folk networks also tended to fall under the radar.

Councillor Clack welcomed the strategy, but the decision of the coalition Government to cut funding had a real impact on arts and culture, but this strategy made sure in Oxford that arts and culture were at the centre.

Councillor Williams supported the comments made by Councillor Clack and felt that the document tried its best on a very small budget and the amounts should be reconsidered, as this was an investment for the City.

Councillor Darke also supported the comments made by Councillor Clack, and stated that the Government was cutting funding to the Arts Councils grant and that new EBAC qualification would not have arts and culture included in it.

Councillor Turner said people had to recognise that Oxford was a small district Council and we were trying to do our best in difficult times, but the consultation budget protected the grants budget for 2013/14.  He added that Members needed to be realistic on the amount of direct support the Council could give.

Councillor Coulter said that he was disappointed that the average tourist stay in Oxford was only 18 hours, half that of Cambridge and that more should be done to include the wider Oxford area.

Council agreed to approve and adopt the new Culture Strategy 2012-15.

The Head of Customer Services submitted to the City Executive Board on the 23^rd November 2012 a report (attached) which considered the feedback from the recent consultation on the proposed Local Council Tax Support Scheme and sought agreement of the principles of the new scheme to be drawn up for approval at this meeting of Council and to seek agreement of the Council Tax Discount and Exemption proposals for inclusion in the budget setting consultation.

An extract from the minutes of the City Executive Board held on 23^rd November 2012 is also attached.

Also attached is a report detailing comments made by the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee held on 27^th November 2012.

Also attached for Council approval is the proposed Council Tax Reduction Scheme for People of Pensionable Age and the proposed Council Tax Reduction Scheme for Working Age People, both to take effect from 1^st April 2013.  The reason these schemes are detailed separately is purely administrative, as the scheme for people of pensionable age has been more highly prescribed by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the scheme for people of working age is largely determined by the Local Authority and will require annual review.

The final drafting of this scheme into an agreed format is still to happen. 

Council is asked:

(a)       To approve the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for People of Pensionable Age and the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for Working Age People, both to take effect from 1^st April 2013;

(b)       To agree for delegated authority to be given to the Head of Customer Services to enable minor editorial changes and corrections to be made prior to the schemes coming into effect on 1^st April 2013.

Council had before it the report of the Head of Customer Services together with a minute extract from the City Executive Board held on 23^rd November 2012.  Comments from the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee held on 27^th November 2012 were also submitted to Council (All documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Turner moved the report.

Councillor Mills, seconded by Councillor Fooks proposed an amendment to delete paragraph 20 of the Officer report and to add a new paragraph 20 containing the following words:

To mitigate the cost of the new Local Council Tax Support Scheme it is recommended that the City Council consult on the following proposed amendments to discounts and exemptions as part of its budget consultation exercise which is due to commence in December 2012.

·                    Exemption Class A – Recently built or uninhabitable due to work – 25% exemption for a time limit of 12 months

·                    Exemption Class C – Vacant – empty and unfurnished – 25% discount for a time limit of 3 months

·                    Exemption Class L – Unoccupied where the mortgagee is in possession – 0% discount

·                    Second Homes Discount – 0% discount

Council following a debate voted to:

(a)       Approve the inclusion of the amendment by Councillor Mills;

(b)       Approve the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for People of Pensionable Age and the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for Working Age People, as amended, both to take effect from 1^st April 2013;

(c)        Approve that delegated authority be given to the Head of Customer Services to enable minor editorial changes and corrections to be made prior to the schemes coming into effect on 1^st April 2013.

The Head of Housing has submitted a report which seeks approval of a Tenancy Strategy and Policy following consultation with partners, stakeholders, tenants and the public.

This report was submitted to the City Executive Board on 5^th December 2012 and an extract from the minutes of this meeting is also attached.

Council is asked to adopt a Tenancy Strategy for Oxford City and a Tenancy Policy for Council homes.

Council had before it the report of the Head of Housing together with a minute extract of the meeting of the City Executive Board held on 5^th December 2012. (Both documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Seamons moved the report.

Council following a debate voted to adopt the Tenancy Strategy for Oxford City and Tenancy Policy for Council Homes.

The Executive Director, Housing and Regeneration has submitted a report which provides information about the bid to the Government for £5m from the Urban Broadband Fund (Phase Two) Super Connected Cities Programme and recommends Council to agree the £300k capital commitment and £25k start up cost if the bid is successful.

This report was submitted to the City Executive Board on 5^th December 2012 and an extract from the minutes of this meeting is also attached.

Council is asked to approve a £300k capital commitment and £25k start up cost if the bid is successful.

Council had before it the report of the Executive Director, Housing and Regeneration together with a minute extract from the meeting of the City Executive Board held on 5^th December 2012.  (Both documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Price moved the report.

Council following a debate voted to approve a £300,000 capital commitment and a £25,000 revenue commitment for staff resources as required by the successful bid.

Council adjourned at 7.20pm and reconvened at 8.00pm

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which provides information on considerations for the Oxford Heritage assets criteria, nomination process and character statements formats arising from East and West Area Planning Committees.

This report was submitted to the City Executive Board on 5^th December 2012 and an extract from the minutes of this meeting is also attached.

Council is asked to endorse the proposal for a Heritage Assets Register and adopt the proposed criteria and selection process.

Note of the Monitoring Officer: The adoption of these arrangements is an Executive Function.  The arrangements were adopted by the City Executive Board.  If Council does not wish to endorse the arrangements it must refer the matter back to the City Executive Board.  In addition, in order to give effect to the adopted arrangements the following constitutional arrangements must be agreed:

That Council agree that:

(1)       The Area Planning Committees be authorised to decide whether or not to add heritage assets to the local list in the contexts of dealing with an individual planning applications and that their terms of reference be amended accordingly.

(2)       That the Leader agrees to amend he Scheme of Delegation such that the decision whether or not to add a heritage asset to the local list other than in the context of dealing with an individual planning application be reserved for single Executive Member Decision.

Council had before it the report of the Head of City Development together with a minute extract from the City Executive Board held on 5^th December 2012.  (Both documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Cook moved the report.

Council following a debate voted to endorse the proposal for a Heritage Assets Register and adopt the criteria and selection process as detailed in the report.

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which seeks approval to publish the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Draft Charging Schedule for consultation and subsequent submission for Examination.

Council is asked to:

(1)       approve the CIL Draft Charging Schedule for consultation under Regulation 16 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (amended 2011 and 2012);

(2)       approve the CIL Draft Charging Schedule for submission to the Secretary of State under Regulation 19 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (amended 2011 and 2012) ;

(3)       authorise the Head of City Development to make any necessary editorial corrections to the document before publication and submission; and

(4)       approve a CIL instalments policy to facilitate CIL implementation.

Council had before it the report of the Head of City Development together with a minute extract from the City Executive Board held on 5^th December 2012.  (Both documents previously circulated, now appended).

Councillor Turner moved the report.

Councillor Mills seconded by Councillor Campbell proposed an amendment to the Officer report to delete the whole of paragraph 28 and to insert a new paragraph 28 with the following words:

"It is recommended that the City Council establishes a presumption against offering discretionary relief. The system has inbuilt flexibility allowing for in kind contributions and negotiation of onsite S106 contributions including affordable housing which can be explored in the cases of demonstrable viability risks. However, the City Council would retain the right in exceptional circumstances to offer discretionary relief where not doing so would jeopardise socially advantageous developments in accordance with the conditions of regulation 55 of Statutory Instrument 2010 No. 948"

Council following a debate voted on the proposed amendment, and agreed not to adopt the amendment.

Council voted on the substantive recommendation and agreed to:

(1)       approve the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Draft Charging Schedule for consultation under Regulation 16 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (amended 2011 and 2012);

(2)       approve the CIL Draft Charging Schedule for submission to the Secretary of State under Regulation 19 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (amended 2011 and 2012) ;

(3)       authorise the Head of City Development to make any necessary editorial corrections to the document before publication and submission; and

(4)       approve a CIL instalments policy to facilitate CIL implementation.

The Head of City Development has submitted a report which seeks approval of the Barton Area action Plan.

Council is asked:

(1)       To note the conclusions and recommendations of the Inspector’s Report on the examination into the Barton Area Action Plan (AAP);

(2)       To adopt the Barton AAP as part of Oxford’s Local Plan;

(3)       To endorse the AAP’s associated documents as part of the AAP adoption (including the Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment Adoption Statement and Equalities Impact Assessment).

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) which sought approval of the Barton Area Action Plan (AAP).

Councillor Cook moved the report.

Councillors debated the report and Councillor Haines raised particular concerns of residents in the Marston area over flooding, sewerage issues and traffic.  He felt that before any development went ahead it was important that the infrastructure was safety put in place first.

Council following a debate agreed:

(1)       To note the conclusions and recommendations of the Inspector’s Report on the examination into the Barton Area Action Plan (AAP);

(2)       To adopt the Barton AAP as part of Oxford’s Local Plan;

(3)       To endorse the AAP’s associated documents as part of the AAP adoption (including the Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment Adoption Statement and Equalities Impact Assessment).

The Head of Finance will submit a report (circulated separately) the purpose of which is to set the “Council Tax Base” for 2013/14 as required by Section 33 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended).

The Head of Finance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) the purpose of which was to set the “Council Tax Base” for 2013/14 as required by Section 33 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended).

Councillor Turner moved the report.

Council following a debate agreed:

(a)       That the 2013/14 Council Tax Base for the City Council’s area as a whole be set at 41,291 (calculation shown in Appendix 1 of the report);

(b)       That the projected level of collection be set at 97%;        

(c)        That the following tax bases for each of the Parishes, and for the Unparished area of the City (calculations shown in Appendix 2 of the report) be set as follows:

Unparished Area of the City                                    34,520

Littlemore Parish                                                       1,612

Old Marston Parish                                                   1,198

Risinghurst & Sandhills Parish                                1,373

Blackbird Leys Parish                                              2,588

City Council Total                                                      41,291

(d)       That completion of the NNDR1 form be delegated to the Council’s Section 151 Officer;

(e)       That the Head of Finance provide Members with further information on paragraphs 7 and 8 (effect of the Council Tax Reduction Scheme on the Tax Base) of the report.

This item has a time limit of 15 minutes.

City Executive Board decisions (Minutes)

(1)       Minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd November 2012

(2)       Minutes of the meeting held on 5^th December 2012

Single Executive Member decisions (Minutes)

(1)       Minutes of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member, Finance and Efficiency) held on 11^th 0ctober 2012.

Council had before it minutes (previously circulated, now appended) of the City Executive Board and Single Executive Member meeting held since the last meeting of Full Council.

(a)       City Executive Board Decisions – 23November 2012 (Minutes)

Minute 52 – Tenant and Resident Involvement Strategy – Councillor Benjamin asked why was this being changed again?  There had previously been a Housing Advisory Board which had tenant representatives, but this was disbanded.  Was this a case of the Leadership not liking what they heard from tenants’?

Councillor Seamons said there had been only one Panel with very few members and it was right to rejuvenate tenant participation.  The proposals had been widely consulted on and the Chair of the Tenants’ Involvement Monitoring Panel (IMP) had been fully involved. 

Minute 53 – Oxpens Meadow – Deed of Dedication – Councillor Benjamin said that she welcomed this, but it should include all of the Meadow and especially the part behind the Ice Rink.

Councillor Tanner said that there had been full consultation with the St. Ebbe’s New Development Residents Association (SENDRA) and that while the part behind the Ice Rink had not been included, it did not mean that this part would be developed on.

(b)       City Executive Board Decisions – 5December 2012 (Minutes)

Minute 57 – Scrutiny Committee Reports – Councillor Fooks welcomed the City Executive Board recommendations (1), (2) and (3) regarding “Area Forums – Review of the first year” especially recommendation (1).

Councillor Simmons asked what the timescale would be for the implementation of the recommendations and requested a written response.

Minute 59 – Procurement Strategy 2013-2016 – Councillor Simmons was surprised that recommendation (3) from the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee had not been accepted by the City Executive Board.

Councillor Turner said that this recommendation had appeared very late and so could not be agreed to at that stage.

Minute 63 – Domestic Waste and Recycling Collection – Policy Change for sites with communal bin storage and houses in multiple occupation – Councillor Jones welcomed the change in policy, but asked if Officer resources were available to give advice.

Councillor Tanner said that the policy had already been implemented for Council properties and it was working well.  He welcomed Councillor Jones support for the policy and felt that this policy responded to tenants in the private sector who had been pressing for better recycling facilities.

Minute 66 – Planning Annual Monitoring Report 2011/12 – Councillor Goddard welcomed that this City Executive Board had met at the Old Fire Station rather than the Town Hall, and hoped that it would meet outside of the Town Hall on more occasions.  He noted that the minutes said that his questions were appended, but were not and requested that in future anything appended to the minutes of the City Executive Board were also presented to Council.

Councillor Simmons asked that the Head of City Development circulate to Members the mid year figures when available on the University housing targets.

(b)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

None submitted.

Council received no recommendations or reports from Scrutiny and other Committees.

Questions on notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be asked of the Lord Mayor, a Member of the City Executive Board or the Chair of a Committee.

Questions on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later than 9.30am on Friday 14^th December 2012.

Full details of any questions for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.

(a)       Questions notified in time for replies to be provided before the Council meeting

(1)       Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Jean Fooks

Oxford City Cycle funds

Oxford Cycle City money was allocated in the budget in February. Consultation on how to spend it has been protracted yet most residents have not heard of it. Can Council be assured that there will be a fair and transparent process of distribution of the funds?

Response: The Cycle City Plan was signed off by City Executive Board (CEB) in July.  Before that it was prepared in consultation with key stakeholder groups with specific interest in cycling and all Councillors were invited to suggest ideas for improvements in June.  Since CEB agreed the basis for proceeding to spend the budget in the short, medium, and long term, there has been full public consultation in October and November with extensive publicity inviting suggestions for small net improvements that can be carried out immediately. Decisions on specific spend following this consultation will be agreed by the City/County Council Transport bi-lateral meeting. Therefore there has already been a fair and transparent process of distribution of the funds.

Councillor Fooks in a supplementary question asked what did the City Executive Board mean by full consultation, and which Members would be involved.

In response Councillor Cook said that he had received many calls from the Oxford Mail on this issue, and acknowledged that more consultation could always be conducted, but he preferred to spend funds on the actual physical measures having spoken to the right people/organisations in the first place.  Regarding which Members would be involved, he confirmed that it would be himself and County Councillor Rodney Rose.

(2)       Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Jean Fooks

Community Linking Places Fund

Norman Baker MP, LibDem Minister for Transport, has just announced an additional £20m for infrastructure projects to support cycling.  It is specifically aimed at increasing funds available for the Community Linking Places Fund and to Improving cycle safety at junctions. Has Oxford submitted a bid to this fund?

Response: The only appropriate body able to bid for this money was Oxfordshire County Council as the Highway Authority.  The City Council pressed the County Council to bid for project(s) in the City on at least two separate occasions.  Initially the County was intending to do so but subsequently decided to submit only a single County bid for Abingdon. The deadline was the end of November. 

Councillor Fooks in a supplementary question asked which projects did the City Council suggest, and were they aware that an additional £20m in funding was available.

In response Councillor Cook said that Officers had put forward at least two schemes, but these had been rejected by the County Council.

(3)       Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor John Goddard

Annual Planning Report

How does the Executive member propose to remedy the regrettable recent shift reported in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

Statements on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be made.  Statements do not need to be directed to a specific Councillor.

Statements on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later than 9.30am on Friday 14^th December 2012.

Full details of any statements for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.

No Statements on Notice had been submitted.

With the consent of Council, the Lord Mayor adjourned the meeting at 9.40 pm to be reconvened at a future date to allow for the remaining business on the agenda to be completed.

Council Procedure Rule 11.14 refers.  The Motions (listed in the order received) that have been notified to the Head of Law and Governance by the deadline of 1.00pm on Wednesday 5^th December 2012 are attached to this agenda.

Council agreed to defer this item to the reconvened meeting of Council in January 2013 (Minute 94 refers).

Council agreed to defer this item to the reconvened meeting of Council in January 2013 (Minute 95 refers).

Following a request to the Lord Mayor from Councillor Brett, the Lord Mayor asked Council if it agreed to revisit agenda item 18 (Questions on Notice from Members of Council).  This was to allow supplementary questions to be asked by Councillors Brett and Jones on the written responses give by Councillor Price.

Council voted and agreed to revisit agenda item 18 (Questions on Notice from Members of Council) (Minute 89 refers).

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Anne-Marie Canning, James Fry, John Goddard, Michael Gotch, Shah Jahan Khan, Oscar Van Nooijen, Gwynneth Royce, Ben Lloyd Shogbesan, Val Smith, Ed Turner and Ruth Wilkinson.

Council had before it 19 Motions on Notice and reached decisions as follows:

(1)       Loan Sharks – (Proposer Councillor Mike Rowley)
 
1.         This Council expresses its deep concern about the activities of             "pay day loan" companies which target people suffering from      significant day-to-day financial pressures.
 
2.         This Council notes that "Wonga", the most prominent of these   companies, recorded a 225% rise in profits last year while             charging interest rates of up to 4,000%.
 
3.         This Council believes that the activities of these companies can           trap some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in our communities in a descending spiral of toxic debt.  We    strongly             condemn "pay day loan companies" and believe the       advertising produced by "Wonga" targeting pensioners and        students to be particularly irresponsible.
 
4.         This Council resolves:

(a)       to support the campaign for caps on the costs of credit   and a real time register to give consumers the protection        they so desperately need;

                        (b)       to request the Leader and the Chief Executive to write                            accordingly to the Secretary of State for Business,                                         Innovation and Skills; and

                        (c)        to request the City Executive Board to ensure that sound                                    advice on loans is incorporated into any    money advice                                    Council officers provide in the transition to Universal                                               Credit.

Councillor Dick Wolff moved an amendment as follows and with the agreement of Council then withdrew the proposed amendment.

To add to section 4 a subparagraph (d) as follows:

“(d)      to increase its advocacy of and practical support for local Credit                     Unions, including the Oxford and Blackbird Leys Credit Unions.”

Councillor Mike Rowley seconded by Councillor Dick Wolff moved an amendment as follows:

To add a new point 4 as follows:

(4)       This Council commends the work of Credit Unions and especially Oxford Credit Union and Blackbird Leys Credit Union, which fill an invaluable role in helping people in our City avoid falling into the clutches of loan sharks.

To add a point (d) to the original point (4) which now becomes point (5) as follows:

(d)       To continue to work closely with local Credit Union and regularly review whether there are any further ways in which the Council can support their current work and/or plans for expansion.

To amend point (5)(c) to read as follows:

(c)        To request the City executive Board to ensure that sound advice on loans is incorporated into any money advice Council officers provide in the transition to Universal Credit, and into any money advice provide by independent bodies in receipt of funding from the Council.

The mover of the substantive Motion, Councillor Mike Rowley accepted the amendment and following a debate Council voted and the amended Motion was adopted as follows:

1.         This Council expresses its deep concern about the activities     of         "pay day loan" companies which target people suffering from      significant day-to-day financial pressures.
 
2.         This Council notes that "Wonga", the most prominent of these   companies, recorded a 225% rise in profits last year while             charging interest rates of up to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

No questions were asked.