Agenda and draft minutes
PDF 68 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Woodgreen, Witney, Oxfordshire OX28 1NB. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services
| No. | Item | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Minutes of Previous Meeting To approve the minutes of the ordinary and extraordinary meetings of full Council held on 29 January 2025. Additional documents:
Minutes: The minutes of the ordinary Council meeting held on 29 January 2025 were considered. A minor amendment was made under CL.222. The words “(and circulated in the supplementary pack)” were added. Councillor Andy Graham proposed accepting the minutes and Councillor Duncan Enright seconded the proposal. The minutes were voted on and agreed unanimously. Voting record – For 43, against 0, abstentions 0, did not vote 0 Resolved: To approve the minutes of the ordinary Council meeting held on 29 January as an accurate record of the meeting, subject to amendments.
The minutes of the extraordinary Council meeting held on 29 January 2025 were considered. There were no amendments to these. Councillor Andy Graham proposed accepting the minutes, Councillor Duncan Enright seconded this proposal. The minutes were voted on and agreed. Council resolved to: 1. Approve the minutes of the extraordinary Council meeting held on 29 January as an accurate record of the meeting.
Voting record – For 41, against 0, abstentions 1, did not vote 1
|
|||||||||
|
Apologies for Absence To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Steve Cosier, Jane Doughty Natalie King, Dan Levy, Martin McBride and Mark Walker.
|
|||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations from Members on any items to be considered at the meeting. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest received.
|
|||||||||
|
Receipt of Announcements To receive any announcements from The Chair, Leader, Members of the Executive, the Head of Paid Service, the Director of Finance and the Director of Governance. Minutes: In introducing the meeting, the Chair explained that item seven “Recommendations from Executive” had been missed off the agenda in error. As the Council tax support scheme needed to be agreed before the next meeting of the Council on 19 March, the agenda had been reissued with the agreement of the Chair, by reason of special circumstance under Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.
The Chair gave an overview of civic duties completed since the last meeting and highlighted upcoming events. The Chair had;
The Chair also explained that the date of next meeting was on 19 March. This meeting had been moved from 26 March due to the County pre-election period.
The Leader, Councillor Andy Graham, explained that in November the Council agreed a motion to write to the Minister for Pensions on the changes to winter fuel allowances. In the Minister’s response, it was explained that they had decided to publish the Equality Impact Assessment associated with this due to public interest. The Leader stated that they believed this to be in part due to the Council writing to the Minister.
The Leader also stated that a briefing on Local Government Devolution and Reorganisation would be taking place on 6 March.
The Deputy Leader, Councillor Duncan Enright stated that a new restaurant, Pokhara Delight, had opened on Mariott’s walk in Witney.
The Executive Member for Stronger, Healthy Communities, Councillor Rachel Crouch, announced that a new Youth Development Officer had been appointed on a full time, temporary contract for two years. The Executive Member stated that the Council had put aside an additional £10,000 to help fund local mental health support, and that the Council would be bringing together local specialists and frontline services to best understand how to use this funding. The Executive Member thanked Councillor Alex Wilson for his support on this work and highlighted the importance of cross party working.
The Executive Member for Leisure and Major Projects, Councillor Tim Sumner, explained that the maintenance programme for leisure facilities had been rolled out, with leisure centres offering community inspired events and classes for all abilities and ages.
The Chief Executive explained that in light of the English Devolution White paper, the Boundary Commission had decided to pause the West Oxfordshire Electoral Review.
There were no further announcements.
|
|||||||||
|
Participation of the Public There were no submissions for public participation received by Democratic Services before the deadline of 12.00pm on Monday 17 February 2025.
Minutes: There was no participation of the public.
|
|||||||||
|
Questions by Members The following questions have been submitted by Members of Council to Members of the Executive, in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules (Constitution Part 5A, Rule 12).
Written responses will be circulated to Members and published on the Council’s website at least one working day prior to the meeting. A Member submitting a question is entitled to ask one supplementary question at the meeting which must arise directly from the question or the response to it.
The supplementary questions and answers will be detailed in the minutes of the meeting.
Question 1 from Councillor Liam Walker to Councillor Hugo Ashton, Executive Member for Planning:
Can the Executive Member confirm when the draft housing site proposals that will be considered as part of the Local Plan review will be made public?
Question 2 from Councillor Andrew Coles to Councillor Lidia Arciszewska, Executive Member for Environment
At the full-council meeting on 25th September 2024, you agreed to undertake a review of the council's Tree Management Policy during 2025 after a number of members, from all sides of the chamber, expressed concerns about the current policy, which a previous Conservative administration imposed some years ago. At the time the previous administration didn't take on board the concerns raised by the then Environment overview & scrutiny committee. The concerns members have subsequently expressed is that the existing policy isn't meeting the needs of residents or providing best practice for West Oxfordshire. Could the Executive Member please outline when the review will take place and in what form the review will take?
Question 3 from Councillor Liam Walker to Councillor Geoff Saul, Executive Member for Housing and Social Welfare
What is the latest with the Knights Court site in Oxford? Minutes: The written questions and written responses were circulated prior to the meeting and were taken as read.
Members who had submitted written questions asked supplementary questions. The verbal supplementary questions and the verbal responses to those questions are contained in the supplement to these minutes.
|
|||||||||
|
Recommendations from Executive To agree recommendations made to Council by the Executive in relation to the Council Tax Support Scheme for 2025/26.
Recommendation The Executive on 20 November 2024 recommended that Council resolves to:
Additional documents:
Minutes: The report for the item was contained in the supplement to the agenda. It had been added onto the agenda after publication at the discretion of the Chair, as explained in the Chair’s announcements.
The purpose of the item was to agree the recommendations made to Council by the Executive in relation to the Council Tax Support Scheme for 2025/26.
Councillor Alaric Smith, the Executive Member for Finance, introduced the item, explaining that it should have been considered at a previous meeting, but had been missed off the agenda. Councillor Smith explained that Council tax support was reviewed yearly and that the recommendations within the report were to adjust these for inflation. Councillor Smith proposed accepting the recommendations.
Councillor Andy Graham seconded the proposal to accept the recommendations. These were put to a vote and agreed unanimously.
Full Council resolved to:
Voting record – For 43, against 0, abstentions 0, did not vote 0
|
|||||||||
|
Purpose Section 25 of the Local Government Act 2003 places a duty on the Chief Financial Officer to make a report to the Council on the robustness of the budget estimates and the adequacy of the Council’s reserves.
Recommendation That Council: 1. Notes this report and has regard to it when making its decisions about budget and Council Tax for 2025/26. Minutes: Councillor Alaric Smith, the Executive Member for Finance, introduced the item and proposed accepting the recommendation to note the report. Councillor Smith explained that it was the statutory duty of the S151 officer to report on the robustness of the Council’s budget estimates and that Council must have regard to this report in agreeing the budget. The report concluded that the budget was prudent and robust and that the level of reserves was adequate to support the 2025-26 position, with a surplus of £91,280.
Councillor Smith explained that there was a less optimistic picture from 2026-27, with the use of reserves necessary to fund frontline services and a need to identify new sustainable income streams.
Councillor Andy Graham seconded the proposal to accept the recommendations. These were put to a vote and agreed.
Full Council resolved to:
Voting record – For 41, against 0, abstentions 0, did not vote 2
|
|||||||||
|
Purpose To provide the proposed budget for 2025/26, whilst also considering approval for: 1. The Draft Base Budget for 2025/26 2. The Council’s Capital Programme for 2025/26 to 2031/32 3. The level of Council Tax for 2025/26 4. The Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 5. The Council’s Financial Strategies 6. The Council’s Pay Policy Statement
Recommendation That Council resolves to approve: 1. The General Fund Revenue Budget as Summarised in Annex A. 2. The Updated Medium Term Financial Strategy in Annex B. 3. The Capital Programme for 2025/26 to 2031/32 as set out in Annex D. 4. The Council’s Pay Policy Statement as set out in Annex J. 5. The Council’s Capital Strategy as set out in Annex K 6. The Council’s Investment Strategy as set out in Annex L 7. The Council’s Treasury Strategy as set out in Annex M Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the item was to provide the proposed budget for 2025/26, whilst also considering approval for: 1. The Draft Base Budget for 2025/26 2. The Council’s Capital Programme for 2025/26 to 2031/32 3. The level of Council Tax for 2025/26 4. The Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 5. The Council’s Financial Strategies 6. The Council’s Pay Policy Statement
The Leader of the Council, Councillor Andy Graham, presented the budget, explaining that it was set in the context of financial pressures faced by councils across the country. In light of this, the Leader stated that the Council was committed to prudent financial management. The Leader highlighted what the administration had achieved, which included;
The Leader thanked Officers for their work.
The Leader of the Opposition responded, stating that the increase in Council Tax and green waste licence fees were detrimental to residents, that there was a lack of income in Marriott’s Walk due to empty shops and a delay in letting units. The Leader of the Opposition stated that a one-off windfall allocation had been fortuitous to the Council’s Budget and that otherwise the MTFS showed that reserves would run out by 2028. The Leader of the Opposition further highlighted that they believed the budget as presented to be a placeholder ahead of local government reorganisation, and that the majority of the capital programme had been carried over from the previous budget, with a lack of new projects.
In debate, alliance members made the following points;
|
|||||||||
|
Purpose To enable the Council to calculate and set the Council Tax for 2025/26.
Recommendation That the Council passes the resolution set out in Annex A to the report. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of the item was to enable the Council to calculate and set the Council Tax for 2025/26.
Cllr Alaric Smith proposed accepting the recommendations in Annex A of the agenda and expressed confidence in the officers who had done the work on this.
Cllr Andy Graham seconded the recommendations.
Council resolved to: 1) Note that for the purpose of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 Section 35(2), there are no special expenses for the District Council in 2025/26; 2) Note that at its meeting held on 15 January 2025 the Executive acknowledged the calculation of the Council Tax Base for 2025/26: a) for the whole Council area as 48,742.33 [item T in the formula in Section 31B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as amended (the “Act”)]; and b) for dwellings in those parts of its area to which a Parish Precept relates as in the attached Schedule 1. 3) Agree that the Council Tax requirement for the Council’s own purposes for 2025/26 (excluding Parish Precepts and Special Expenses) is £129.38 4) Agree that the following amounts be calculated for the year 2025/26 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Act: a) £56,510,866 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(2) of the Act, taking into account all precepts issued to it by Parish Councils and any additional special expenses. b) £44,364,176 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (3) of the Act. c) £12,146,690 being the amount by which the aggregate at 4(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 4(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A(4) of the Act, as its Council Tax requirement for the year (Item R in the formula in Section 31B of the Act). d) £249.20 being the amount at 4(c) above (Item R), all divided by Item T (2(a) above), calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year (including Parish Precepts and Special Expenses). e) £5,840,407 being the aggregate amount of all special items (Parish Precepts and Special Expenses) referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act as per the attached Schedule 2. f) £129.38 being the amount at 4(d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 4(e) above by Item T(2(a) above), calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no Parish Precept or special item relates. g) the amounts shown in Schedule 2 being the amounts given by adding to the amount at 4(f) above, the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s area shown in Schedule 2 divided in each case by the amount at 2(b) above, calculated by the ... view the full minutes text for item CL.238
|
|||||||||
|
Motion A: Devolution and Local Democracy, Proposed by Councillor Rosie Pearson, Seconded by Councillor Andrew Prosser This motion seeks to establish the key principles which should underlie a democratic devolution process for the future Thames Valley region’s strategic authority. We want to see democracy enhanced, and proper accountability to residents and to the unitary authorities which will take over from district and county councils. This Council should support and advocate for the following principles:
1) Democratic oversight of combined authorities: the decisions, actions and budgets of the strategic authority need scrutiny by a body/assembly with proportional political representation from elected councillors in unitary authorities. This would ensure power is exercised transparently and in the best interests of residents, and prevent excessive power being concentrated in a single individual. Consideration should be given to mayoral candidates standing as joint mayor and deputy candidates. 2) A fairer voting system: Until 2023, mayoral elections in England were conducted under the Supplementary Vote system. This Council should advocate for a fairer voting system than First Past the Post in future mayoral elections. 3) Costs and fairness: Mayoral elections should be inclusive, without excessive financial barriers for candidates. The current costs of standing in mayoral elections (£5,000 deposit, and £5,000 candidate booklet contribution) is too high. There should be reasonable limits on election spending so that those candidates with the deepest pockets do not have an unfair disadvantage. 4) Local representation: unitary authorities should not be so large that they lose local knowledge and influence or the important connection with rural and urban communities. Town and parish councils should have enhanced powers and financial compensation. Strong lines of connection should be made between them and the unitaries, so that there is a clear chain of representation at all levels. 5) Democratic oversight of this council’s decisions: a mechanism should be found to ensure that decisions made during the devolution and local government reorganization process put the long-term future of residents ahead of any short-term political considerations. This could be, for example, a cross-party working group on devolution.
Minutes: Councillor Rosie Pearson introduced the motion. Councillor Michelle Mead proposed an amendment to the motion which was to change ‘disadvantage’ to ‘advantage’. This was agreed by the proposer and seconder as an alteration to the motion. The substantive motion as amended was read out by Councillor Pearson;
“This motion seeks to establish the key principles which should underlie a democratic devolution process for the future Thames Valley region’s strategic authority. We want to see democracy enhanced, and proper accountability to residents and to the unitary authorities which will take over from district and county councils. This Council should support and advocate for the following principles:
1) Democratic oversight of combined authorities: the decisions, actions and budgets of the strategic authority need scrutiny by a body/assembly with proportional political representation from elected councillors in unitary authorities. This would ensure power is exercised transparently and in the best interests of residents, and prevent excessive power being concentrated in a single individual. Consideration should be given to mayoral candidates standing as joint mayor and deputy candidates. 2) A fairer voting system: Until 2023, mayoral elections in England were conducted under the Supplementary Vote system. This Council should advocate for a fairer voting system than First Past the Post in future mayoral elections. 3) Costs and fairness: Mayoral elections should be inclusive, without excessive financial barriers for candidates. The current costs of standing in mayoral elections (£5,000 deposit, and £5,000 candidate booklet contribution) is too high. There should be reasonable limits on election spending so that those candidates with the deepest pockets do not have an unfair advantage. 4) Local representation: unitary authorities should not be so large that they lose local knowledge and influence or the important connection with rural and urban communities. Town and parish councils should have enhanced powers and financial compensation. Strong lines of connection should be made between them and the unitaries, so that there is a clear chain of representation at all levels. 5) Democratic oversight of this council’s decisions: a mechanism should be found to ensure that decisions made during the devolution and local government reorganization process put the long-term future of residents ahead of any short-term political considerations. This could be, for example, a cross-party working group on devolution.”
In debate, members raised the following points;
|
Carried