Full Council - 21 February 2023

To:      ALL MEMBERS OF THE THREE RIVERS DISTRICT COUNCIL

You are hereby summoned to attend a meeting of Full Council on Tuesday 21 February 2023 at 7.30pm to be held in the Penn Chamber, Three Rivers House, Northway, Rickmansworth for the purpose of transacting the under mentioned business:-

AGENDA

1.  APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

2.  MINUTES

22-12-13-council-minutes

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 13 December 2022 to be signed by the Chair.

3.  CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

4.  RECEIVE ANY PETITIONS UNDER PROCEDURE RULE 18 none

5.  QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC UNDER PROCEDURE RULE 15 none

6.  FINANCIAL PLANNING

-06-23-023-21-cl-i-budget-proposal-to-council-21-february-2023-consolidated-report

To consider the recommendations on the Financial Plan (Members are referred to the Rule 17 for budget setting - see attached)

procedure-rule-17-for-budget-setting

7.  SPECIAL EXPENSES 2023/24

-07-23-02-21-cl-i-special-expenses-report

8.  COUNCIL TAX – DISTRICT ELEMENT

-08-23-02-21-cl-i-council-tax-2023-2024-district-element-report

9.  SETTING THE COUNCIL TAX

-09-23-02-21-cl-i-council-tax-2023-2024-setting-the-council-tax-report

10. STRATEGIC CORPORATE AND SERVICE PLANNING 2023-2026

-10-23-02-21-cl-i-strategic-corporate-framework-service-plans-10i-23-02-21-cl-i-new-2023-2026-corporate-framework-10ii-23-02-21-cl-i-strategic-corporate-framework-eqia

service plans can be viewed here:

Community Partnerships 2023-2026 (PDF)
Community Services 2023-2026 (PDF)
Customer Experience 2023-2026 (PDF)
Elections 2023-2026 (PDF)
Emergency Planning and Risk 2023-2026 (PDF)
Finance 2023-2026 (PDF)
Housing and Residential Services 2023-2026 (PDF)
Property Services and Economic Growth 2023-2026 (PDF)
Regulatory Services 2023-2026 (PDF)
Legal and Committee Services 2023-2026 (PDF)
Revenues and Benefits 2023-2026 (PDF)
Planning Policy and Conservation 2023-2026 (PDF)

11.  COUNCIL PAY POLICY STATEMENT 2023/24

-11-23-02-21-cl-i-council-pay-policy-statement-2023-report

-11i-23-02-21-cl-i-council-pay-policy-statement-2023

12.  LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING FUND

-12-23-02-20-cl-i-la-housing-fund

13.  TO RECEIVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING ON 23 JANUARY 2023 ON THE LOCAL PLAN

-13-23-02-21-cl-i-recommendations-from-p-r-committee

Link to P&R Committee papers here  and link to P&R Committee minutes here 

14.  APPOINTMENT OF THE COUNCIL’S MONITORING OFFICER

-14-23-02-21-cl-i-appointment-of-mo

15.  ANNUAL REPORT ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNCIL CONSTITUTION

-15i-23-02-21-cl-i-table-of-amendments-to-constitution-15ii-23-02-21-cl-i-minor-amendments

16.  QUESTIONS TO THE LEADER,  LEAD MEMBERS, CHAIRS OF COMMITTEES AND REPORTS FROM THE CHAIRS OF THE COMMITTEES AND QUESTIONS ON THE CHAIRS REPORTS

Questions to Councillor Sarah Nelmes, Leader of the Council, from Councillor Sara Bedford

16a) As Councillors should be local champions for their communities, can the Council please ensure that all Councillors elected for an area are informed when a major incident or issue occurs, not simply the Lead Members?

Written response: In accordance with the Council’s Emergency Plan, if a major incident is declared or an event occurs, the Leader of the Council, Group Leaders, relevant Lead Members and relevant Ward Members will be informed. If this has not occurred for a particular incident or event, please do let me know and I will find out why not.

16b) Why was the wreath-laying protocol vastly extended beyond its previous simple guides to preventing unseemly arguments over which Councillor laid the wreath?

Written response: The protocol was amended in 2022 in order to make it clear that it related to the laying of wreaths at Remembrance Sunday services and added schools and removed reference to CofE places of worship.  Any community group organising a remembrance event and wishing to have a Councillor lay a wreath on behalf of officers and members could approach the Council to ask for it to be added to the list and such a request will be considered at a further review of the protocol and bought to P&R well in advance of November.

16c) Will the Council look to amend the wreath-laying protocol to ensure that all places of worship and community venues are treated equally, and that those who are asked by community groups to lay wreathes on behalf of the residents of Three Rivers are able to do so?

Written response: I think the answer to the previous question covers this, and yes, if within the protocol then in place.

Question to Councillor Sarah Nelmes, Leader of the Council, from Councillor Ciaran Reed

16d) In light of evidence uncovered under an FOI, would the Leader of the Council agree that she has responsibility for presiding over a culture where elected members can be misled or provided with incorrect information?  If the Leader of the Council does not have responsibility, then who does?

Written response: I absolutely disagree that there is any such culture in this Council. I would refer you to the officer/member protocol on this matter and will not make any further comment.

Question to Councillor Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development, from Councillor Reena Ranger

16e) The residents of Sandy Lodge Way have been asking for two years for the parking restrictions in The London Borough of Hillingdon section of the road (1 hour parking restriction) to be replicated in the Three Rivers section. This council’s convoluted consultation questions and processes have left our residents and ward councillors frustrated and this simple request still seems out of reach. Does the lead member find these delays acceptable and what must our residents and ward councillors do to have this request realised?

Written response: Statutory processes have to be followed in the investigation and implementation of any parking scheme and associated Traffic Regulation Orders.  This does require significant consultation with the public and Members, and a number of varying and often opposing views are received which the Officers have to explore prior to determining if a final scheme is delivered.

With specific regard to the Sandy Lodge Way parking scheme the initial response rate was low but Officers extended the consultation period, as requested by Members from March to November 2022, to ensure a robust consultation.

Ward members were written to the again 11 January with the full details of the extended consultation and asked to reply.  One ward member said they and others could not reply until the end of January. Ward members were again contacted on 1 February for their views.  With no replies they were again written to the 7 February but have still not replied to the full details sent to them on the 11 January. They have now suggested a further different consultation which if carried out will delay any scheme and have to wait until those in the pipeline that have been consulted on and agreed by ward members are implemented. Officer spoke to a Local Ward member on 10 February who agreed to the progression of Sandy Lodge Way parking scheme with external consultants to next stage.

As with other current parking schemes, work has had to be rescheduled due to workloads and other priorities and with the recent departure of the Senior Transport Officer.  Notwithstanding this, Officers are currently reviewing the Transport and Parking Projects team work streams and priorities and are investigating how the schemes can be delivered. The post has been advertised and had no suitably qualified experienced candidates to date. Members will be updated as appropriate.

Question to Councillor Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development, from Councillor Rue Grewal

16f) The latest statistics show that Three Rivers is one of just three Councils in England where the number of public electric vehicle charge points has fallen in the last three years. This is despite the City of Westminster installing 1,300 in that time. Here in Hertfordshire, Welwyn Hatfield has installed 130. Given that nine-fold increase in Welwyn Hatfield, how does the lead member justify his record of reducing the number of charge points in Three Rivers and will he retract his claim that this is due to Hertfordshire County Council's policies

Written response: TRDC has NOT reduced the number if charging points in Three Rivers and the member is misinformed and incorrect.

There is an uneven geographical distribution of charging devices within the UK and this is not something which is always within the Council’s control. Most of the provision of this infrastructure has been market-led, with individual charging networks and other businesses (such as hotels) rather than the Council, choosing where to install devices.  Indeed in the last few years a number of providers, including in Three Rivers who originally installed charges have since gone out of business leading in some places to reductions of EV points.

Further it is acknowledged in the government published statistics that there are limitations to the accuracy of the figures in that they are sourced from “zapmap,”  represent only devices reported as operational at midnight on a given day and cover 95% ( not 100%) of publicly accessible devices. The total count of charging devices in the UK (when accounting for privately installed devices) will therefore be higher and we have no way of assessing whether data coverage is better in some geographical areas than others.

That said, it is acknowledged that there is still much work to be done in the District in this area and we continue to work with our colleagues at the County Council who as the Highway Authority have responsibility for on-street charging. It is notable that the County Council’s emerging objectives with regards to their EV strategy lean heavily to the promotion of charging at destinations rather than on-street charging, with on-street charging allowed only in exceptional circumstances. Whilst there is a clause in the Department for Transport’s ORCS (On street residential charging scheme) funding for off street ( car park) charging , there are very specific criteria for this which mean our own Council Car parks are ineligible for these funds. Once the final HCC Strategy is published, District Councils including Three Rivers, will be in a better position to consider whether the County’s approach addresses local need.

What is clear is that HCC has taken a very long time to agree a county wide strategy and has been discussing this since June 2021. The last version of this was presented to County Councillors on 1 November 2022 and the final version as at the now has still not been adopted by HCC and HCC has confirmed at the Highways & Transport Panel on 31 January that it still not sort to undertake a procurement exercise for this that TRDC might be able to opt into to secure on–road charging points , something a lot of our residents want but we cannot progress without HCC approved and adoption of its polices so  the delay in that area rest firmly with HCC.

If there are opportunities for a District Council to apply for funding we will consider it.

Question to Councillor Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development, from Councillor Andrea Fraser

16g) Can you please confirm the commitment to maintain 1 hour free parking in Rickmansworth?

Written response: The District Council will continue to provide the 1 hour free parking to shoppers to ensure in Rickmansworth that the short-stay car parks are well used and help support local business.  As I and other Lead Members have told Council several times before, the 1 hour free parking with just £1 for the second hour means that TRDC remains one of the cheapest, if not the cheapest in Herts and the country, for shopper parking where we do charge to encourage turnover and prevent all day parking.

Question for Cllr Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development from Cllr Chris Mitchell

16h) A public consultation was carried out, in July 2022, on the views of the parking which were brought in during 2020 in Croxley Green. The officer in charge has now left the council so can you please confirm when the feedback will be given to the residents?

Written response: Members were sent the draft report in October, as is the norm, for comment.  The results were positive with most support the scheme with a few minor adjustments required. The detailed changes to regulations is being prepared and this will be issued as soon as resources allow.

As with other current parking schemes, work has been delayed and, with the recent departure of the Senior Transport Officer there is no confirmed delivery date of this parking scheme.  Officers are currently looking at how the schemes can be delivered and will update members as appropriate.

Question for Cllr Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development from Cllr Joan King

16i) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising the date by which desperately needed double yellow lines will be installed at road junctions in Oxhey Drive and whether any further consultation is required and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: As already noted work has had to be rescheduled due to workloads and other priorities, and with the recent department of the Senior Transport Officer there is no confirmed delivery date of this parking scheme.  Officers are currently looking at how the schemes can be delivered and will update members as soon as possible.  We are seeking to engage external consultants to progress this and other projects to enable delivery as soon as possible.

Question for Cllr Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development from Cllr Stephen Cox

16j) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising the date by which consultation will be concluded on proposals for waiting restrictions and a residents only parking outside The South Oxhey Leisure Centre scheme in Gosforth Lane and Otley Way will be concluded and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: As already noted work has had to be rescheduled due to workloads and other priorities, and with the recent department of the Senior Transport Officer there is no confirmed delivery date of this parking scheme.  Officers are currently looking at how the schemes can be delivered and will update members as soon as possible. We are seeking to engage external consultants to progress this and other projects to enable delivery as soon as possible.

Question for Cllr Paul Rainbow, Lead Member for Transport and Economic Development from Cllr Stephen Cox

16k) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising the date by which new parking bays will be installed in Birstall Green and Ballater Close and the reason for the delay and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: The verge hardening works are expected to commence in February, as advised by the contractor.  This is as programmed as part of the Verge Hardening Programme.

Question to Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Lead Member for Infrastructure and Planning Policy from Councillor Sarah Nelmes

16l) Has the Lead Member for Planning Policy had as chance to consider what
was in consultation on national planning policy issued on December 22 and
what the Council will be required to respond to by 2nd March?

Written response: I have received an initial briefing from officers on the consultation’s contents. Officers are currently working on a response to the consultation to be shared with the Lead Member for Planning Policy prior to being discussed at Local Plan Sub-Committee on the 28 February. Following on from the 28 February Local Plan Sub-Committee final amendments will be made by officers before the response is submitted to the Government.

I have to say there are several aspects that concern me given the headlines promoted by some about both the abolition of “mandatory” housing targets and the protection of the Green Belt.

There is suggested new wording in para 142 "Green Belt boundaries are not required to be reviewed and altered if this would be the only means of meeting the objectively assessed need for housing over the plan period."

If we take the proposed NPPF wording at face value: the objectively-assessed housing need is not changed, still based on 2014 calculation but once we have done everything we can in terms of urban land, density, building on top of commercial buildings etc., we are not required to go into Green Belt.

But as far as I can see there is no change to the wording in new para 61 which says that any alternative calculation of housing need must (a) be based on exceptional circumstances (which does "not" include being forced to use Green Belt - that is not exceptional) and (b) "should also reflect current and future demographic trends and market signals" – the 'market signals' bit means we have to consider not only demand from within Three Rivers but also the fact that many people currently want to live in Three Rivers but cannot afford to - that means I suspect any calculation officers will do could end up with a number not very different from 12,624 target had been set by the government.

At best might be marginally lower if we use more up-to-date basis for the calculation.

Plus the provisions around presumption of sustainable development etc. all remain in NPPF (para 79) - so if we are not meeting our housing needs number, developers will be able to go to inspectors and potentially get permission that way anyway.

In other words, as suspected,  this could be just a ruse by the government to say "we're not mandating any numbers - up to you, local Councils" while in effect still forcing councils to find space somehow for the whole number - or leave all Green Belt sites at risk via appeals.

Obviously I wait to see what are adopted policies and irrespective of the above as agreed by all councillors at the December Full Council we will come forward later this year with our own local Plan with our own housing numbers.  Under my watch will not put a Local Plan to government with 12,624 housing figures they had mandated we have.

Questions to Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Lead Member for Infrastructure and Planning Policy from Councillor Philip Hearn

16m) In light of the new measures proposed in the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill which clarifies that "local authorities are not required to review Green Belt to deliver homes" can residents be reassured that there will be no changes to the Green Belt boundaries in the upcoming Three Rivers District Council Local Plan?

Written response: The Member is wrong in that  the statement is not yet in the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill but in a government consultation issued on 22 December and this not a “fact” . The answers to my earlier question covers this in some detail.

The Government is currently consulting on the proposed changes to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill. The Government needs to consider consultation responses prior to publishing any changes to the National Planning Policy Framework or changes to the Bill itself. Until these changes come into force the Council will be judged against the existing policy and legal framework. The Council has already agreed to consult on an alternative version of the Local Plan with a reduced housing target taking local circumstances into consideration. This alternative approach would result in less impact on the Green Belt.

It should be noted that if the changes being consulted on do come into force, they do not rule out any development in the Green Belt whatsoever. It will be for the Council to consider whether exceptional circumstances exist justifying the need for Green belt release. In doing so the Council will need to consider affordability in the District and the need to deliver affordable housing, housing for the elderly, and the jobs needed to sustain the local economy, as well as the need to provide infrastructure such as schools and healthcare facilities which would need to be funded by development. The amount of available urban brownfield land available in the District is very limited and failing to provide any development in the Green Belt may lead to detrimental effects for the District and its residents. All of these factors need to be weighed up against the harm caused by Green Belt release and this is done through the plan-making process.

It is also the case that the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill and the consultation has been called in by the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Select Committee chaired by a Conservative who has expressed unease at the proposed changes.  This is likely to delay any changes, if any and thus restrict the ability of the Council to make final decisions.

16n) Submitting planning applications can be a stressful, costly and new process for many of our residents. I am regularly hearing that residents are not getting responses to their questions or are receiving no updates on their applications until just before they are to be decided. What can the Lead Member do to support Planning Officers to be able to improve this?

Written response: It is recognised that the planning process can be daunting.  The Planning Department offer a free householder duty planning service three days a week, where an officer is available to offer brief informal advice to residents regarding householder proposals.  We also offer a more formal paid pre-application advice service where a resident can submit plans for review/comment prior to the submission of a formal planning application.  Most planning applications are submitted by a planning agent on behalf of an applicant and any contact during the application process would therefore be with the agent.  In relation to general enquiries, we aim to acknowledge these within 3 working days and respond within 10 in accordance with the Councils corporate timeframe for such.  Most planning applications are required to be dealt with within a statutory 8 week determination period and it is our practice out of courtesy, to advise planning agents (or the applicant where there is no agent) of the recommendation prior to a decision being issued, however, the nature of the process is such that this is likely to be towards the end of the statutory period.  Officers and I are not aware of any formal complaints regarding delays in response times.  If there are complaints, please provide details so that this can be investigated further. Indeed if the Member was indeed hearing of such problems I would have expected them to try to resolve them rather than waiting at two weeks (from tabling this question) to ask a question at Council.

Question to Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Lead Member for Infrastructure and Planning Policy from Councillor Ciaran Reed

16o) Why did the Denham Way CIL application’s works not start in April 2022? Did this delay cost this Council £86,750.  I attempted to ask the Lead Member this question at P&R, however he was not present and none of his colleagues were knowledgeable enough to answer. I also attempted to ask this question at the last Full Council, however he did not contribute to the discussion on this topic despite it being his responsibility and despite him being present.

Written response: Firstly, Cllr Reed appears confused. I was present at Policy & Resources on 5 December and indeed spoke on the item on CIL applications.

The Minutes and its Post Meeting notes fully explain the position and I am surprised the member has not read this for the detailed explanation and if not happy has not spoken to officers.

Officers have confirmed the original project timescales for this play area, which saw the initial stages of the project commence in April 2022.  To clarify, the Denham Way leisure project has followed the agreed project timeline commencing in April 2022. This has included public consultation, a tender process, planning permission, ongoing work with the contractor to finalise designs and costs and an application to HS2 to part fund the project, which was only recently agreed in December 2022. The additional £86,000 required towards the final project costs is purely as a result of unprecedented rises in construction costs, which could not have been predicted.

The additional monies were part of a successful Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) application.  The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a charge which allows the Council to raise funds from new developments for use on infrastructure to support the growth of the District.  The money collected from the levy is to be used to support development by funding infrastructure that the Council, local community and neighbourhoods need.  The Denham Way leisure project is one such project which has successfully applied for CIL funding.

Questions to Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Lead Member for Infrastructure and Planning Policy from Councillor Stephen Cox

16p) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising what progress if any has been made in restoring the Pavilion in Green Lane to community use and what powers it has to ensure the building is maintained in a proper condition as it is rapidly becoming an eyesore and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: This has been reported many times to Council as the Member is aware and whilst I know that Cllr Cox is not happy with the answer received many times I cannot change the facts of the matter to suit them.  As Members may be aware the Council granted a long lease of the Pavilion building, car park and surrounding land in 1990 to Whitbread. The day-to-day control of the site rests with the Leaseholder and with any plans they may have for the site in future.  The Council can only enforce against the Leaseholder in the event of any breach of the repairing obligations. Legal Counsel are of the opinion that the premises remain compliant with the lease. The council will continue to monitor the situation. Please bring any issues to the direct attention of officers as soon as you have any concerns so they act.

Question to Councillor Andrew Scarth, Lead Member for Housing, from Councillor Ciaran Reed

16q) Can the Lead Member explain why this Council has left residents in danger through its apparent failure to investigate and prosecute those responsible for damp and mould in residential properties.

Written response: Officers will always investigate any issue of housing disrepair that is reported to the Council from residents, including those that relate to excess damp and mould. In all cases, Officers will always attempt to resolve any issue of housing disrepair via informal means by working collaboratively with the landlord and tenant of the property, before the use of formal enforcement powers will be considered. The fact that no issue of housing disrepair reported to the Council by any resident has escalated to the point of formal litigation by the Council towards a landlord in the last three financial years should been seen as a positive sign that Officers are achieving satisfactory resolutions for all parties, before the need for this significant and potentially expensive intervention is required.

Question for Councillor Chris Lloyd, Lead Member for Leisure, from Councillor Stephen King

16r) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising what is the maintenance regime for trees owned by Three Rivers District Council and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: In 2022 the Council published its new Tree Strategy which sets out its approach to the management and maintenance of TRDC owned trees.  The strategy contains details of its tree safety inspection regime, and how it prioritises works to its trees.  The strategy also explains the Council’s approach to the inspection of damage, subsidence, and nuisance issues in relation to its trees; and its maintenance regimes for newly planted trees.  The strategy can be viewed on the Council’s website at: TRDC Tree Strategy 2022

Questions to Councillor Phil Williams, Lead Member for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainability, from Councillor Jon Tankard

16s) It was with great fanfare and jubilation that this Council, with the support of residents along with over 300 local authorities, that we declared a Climate Emergency in 2019. With the Three Rivers Baseline now confirmed and the Carbon Reduction requirements now assessed, we now realise the actual enormity of this undertaking.

Can you confirm that given this local authorities experience to date in Grant Applications for reducing C02 projects and the findings of the Skidmore Report, that without major changes to central governments management and major immediate alterations to the NPPF, that with the best will in the world, our proactive and dedicated team of officers and the tenacity of the Three Rivers Residents, that the Goal of Net Zero by 2045 will (if unchanged) remain an impossible goal.

Written response: Greater certainty of local Government funding is required in order to accurately plan a route to zero both for our own council operations and the wider district. As I have outlined in my response to the earlier question regards the time spent applying for funds, for which we may or may not be successful is a depletion of precious and limited officer time to focus on implementation of measures to progress us down that route. Without certainty it is incredibly difficult for this and other Councils to plan and deliver against our goals.  This is, however just one of many issues we face in realising our ambition to enable and inspire the district to achieve net zero by 2045. As Chris Skidmore’s report identifies,  only 30% of greenhouse gas emissions reductions required fall within the scope of local authorities, and for us to activate that 30% we absolutely need movement on NPFF and Building Regulations with regards to requirements for net zero developments, sustained investment in improvements for sustainable travel infrastructure, certainty in relation to grid decarbonisation, a funding mechanism to assist able to finance retrofit for our residents, affordable access to investment funds, and the roll out of hydrogen amongst many others things.

Three Rivers are working hard to find every opportunity to maximise our chance to keep the 2045 ambition alive. An updated and revised Climate Emergency Sustainability Strategy is in preparation and the emphasis is on doing what we can now given the parameters we find ourselves in, but we are prepared to adapt to an ever changing field in the pursuit of that goal. Dismissing our goals as impossible is not the way forward. We need to remain focused and support all our stakeholders on being equally focussed on the 2045 goal if we are to have any chance of achieving it.  Without that drive, without the belief that we can, we most certainly will not.

The government is consulting on changes to the NPPF and is working on further planning reform, however until these changes are adopted into national policy and legislation the Council must work within the existing policy and legal framework.

Question to Councillor Phil Williams, Lead Member for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainability, from Councillor David Coltman

16t) The price of a single brown bin was £40 in 2018 but in 5 years has increased 50% to £60. For how long will prices continue to increase at this rate?

Written response: Even at £60 the garden waste service is not at full recovery and it is unreasonable to expect those residents who do not have gardens or who do not use the service to subsidise those who do. Given the current high levels of inflation we will have to keep options open as to future rises.

Question to Councillor Phil Williams, Lead Member for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainability, from Councillor Shanti Maru

16u) Why does it take this Council up to 21 days for a damaged or broken bin to be replaced?

Written response: During the Covid period we extended the timescale for delivery of replacement bins to 21 days due to the reduction in staff as result of absence due to ill health, safety measures in relation to social distancing and an increase in agency staff. In reality most of the requests for replacement and new bins were dealt with well within these timescales.  The information provided on the website has recently reverted back to a delivery timescale of 10 days.

Question to Councillor Phil Williams, Lead Member for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainability, from Councillor Stephen King

16v) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising to the number of requests for new silver pod food caddies damaged through no fault of the householder and how such damage was caused and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: In 2022 we delivered or replaced 3,236 kerbside caddies. The reasons for requests were many and varied, for example;

• New properties
• Damage due to wind, mishandling by resident or crew members
• Being used for alternative uses such as storage
• Stolen
• Attacked by vermin.

Question to Councillor Roger Seabourne, Lead Member for Community Safety and Partnerships, from Councillor Sara Bedford

16w) Can the Lead Member answer the questions asked as supplementary questions in October 2022, which he refused to answer on the night or afterwards, despite having been advised of them in advance as requested.

Original questions summarised: What action has Council taken, including with partners, following the definitions of Antisemitism and Islamophobia adopted at the meeting on 1st September 2020? What has been the results of these actions? How is the success or otherwise of any actions measured?

Supplementary summarised: I was hoping to see some data on hate crime across the district regarding incidents of both Islamophobia and Antisemitism.  Could such data be supplied to members in a written response please?

I was also looking to see some more concrete actions in the fight against Antisemitism and Islamophobia. As well as statistics on the incidence of such crimes, it would be helpful to see some research on how members of our Jewish and Muslim communities felt about their personal safety. Will the Lead Member commit to such research?

Written response:

Original wording of first line: Under Rule 11(7) the Lead Member has asked the Chair of the Equalities sub-committee to answer the question, Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst

Revised wording of first line: Under Rule 14(7) the Chair of the Equalities sub-committee will answer the question, Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst

Please note the actual written response below has not changed since publication:

In terms of data on hate crime the numbers in Three Rivers are low. The Police have informed us that in the past year there have been 16 crimes recorded with a hate crime classification. Only one of these related to faith and that did not feature islamophobia or anti-semitism. As I’m am sure the Councillor will appreciate, it is not possible to share more specific details given the small number of records as this would be contrary to data protection legislation.

The Census data as it is being released will provide us with an updated insight into our communities and how they identify. This will enable the Council and its partners to better target support on a variety of services.  In terms of feelings of safety the Police have an open ended survey on Echo which is widely promoted in local areas, on social media and through the partnership bulletin. The findings of this are reviewed regularly and inform local policing. In addition the councils own resident’s survey includes questions related to community cohesion and safety. This will report results at the end of the year and inform future actions to support and engage with our communities.

It is, of course, the case that any level of hate crime in our district is unacceptable and the Council will continue to work with our partners through the Community Safety Partnership to address these issues both in terms of prevention and in taking appropriate action against the perpetrators of such crimes. In addition, is a sad truth that this type of aggression more often than not goes un-reported. As a leader in the Community Safety Partnership we are working to raise awareness of as well as trust and confidence in reporting processes to encourage more people to come forward when they experience discrimination and criminal hatred so that support can be provided and that action can be taken against perpetrators. To that end the Council’s Community Partnerships team working alongside the Three River Hate Crime officers & Hertfordshire Hate Crime Team lead have been working to increase the number and visibility of third party reporting centres. Our Healthy Hubs are now 3rd party reporting centres and our staff at the hubs trained to deal with such reports, on 13 February our staff will be presenting the benefits of becoming a 3rd Party reporting centre to our Local Parish Councils at the monthly Parish Council meeting with their lead officers and officers are working the Watford African & Caribbean Society to establish them as a 3rd Party reporting centre for any of their members currently living within Three Rivers District. This is just a snapshot of the work being done.

The Council also recognises the importance of education is the fight against hate crime. Positive messaging and demonstration of the value that all our communities add to our district both regardless of and often because of their protected characteristics is a core stand of our communications and community engagements programmes alongside awareness raising of the impacts that discrimination and criminal hatred can have on our communities. Recent examples of this can be seen in the marking of Holocaust Memorial Day last month and the sharing activities as part of Mitzvah Day in November on a very personal level by the Council Chair Cllr Morris, which I attend and was indeed very moved by and I hope can be repeated each year, as well as the celebration of Black History Month in October 2022 and participation in Islamophobia Awareness Month in November. Again this is just a snapshot of the work that is being carried out across the District, and beyond, with our communities.

If there are further actions you feel are being missed, I would be grateful if you could provide specific suggestions. The Head of Community Partnerships and I would be will be happy to meet with you, if that would be helpful, to discuss what may or may not be possible within the resources currently available.

Equally I would be happy to request an update report annually to the Equalities sub-committee on these issues, what further engagement we can undertake.

Question to Councillor Roger Seabourne, Lead Member for Community Safety and Partnerships, from Councillor Rue Grewal

16x) All Councils are required to have a designated Crime and Disorder Committees to scrutinise and improve the council and partners' response to crime in the area. The Leisure, Environment, and Community Committee is this council's designated Crime and Disorder Committee.  When was the last time that the committee considered an item to review or scrutinise the prevention of crime and disorder in Three Rivers

Written response: On 13 March 2022 the LEC committee considered, under item 5, the provision and maintenance of CCTV cameras within the District. At the same meeting, under item 9 the Committee considered the planned projects, programmes and contracts to support Community Safety and Environmental Protection for 2022-25.

Question to Councillor Roger Seabourne, Lead Member for Community Safety and Partnerships, from Councillor Abbas Merali

16y) Many of our residents are suffering from the impact of burglaries. This devastating crime leaves residents feeling unsafe in their own homes. What is the Lead Member doing to address the level of burglaries across the District?

Written response: I hope the Councillor is not suggesting I should personally deal with burglaries and that the Councillor does in fact know that residential Burglaries are a priority for Hertfordshire Police.  Our local Police officers review such crimes daily and ownership of response sits with the Police’s Local Crime Unit.

Locally the patrol plan informs Police Intervention (overt) and Scorpion (covert) resources who are also provided with information regarding reported crimes on a daily basis.  Any patterns or series are identified working with the forces Central Intelligence Bureau (CIB) and their Op Guardian PIER plan specific to Burglary is regularly reviewed, encompassing work in relation to prevention, intelligence and enforcement.

All reported crimes are followed up with any forensic or other lines of enquiry explored.  This includes house to house and CCTV as well as ‘cocooning’ around the premises i.e. visits to surrounding premises for any further potential lines of enquiry and crime prevention advice.

At a local level Three Rivers has 21,390 Neighbourhood Watch members as of 31 Jan 2023 which represents 58% of all households in the district.

During January, the local Safer Neighbourhood Team have sent 59 OWL messages to specific parts of Three Rivers (one message may be sent to a single road as OWL messaging is targeted and they are not all sent to all Neighbourhood Watch members).  These messages may relate to burglaries, thefts from or of vehicles, local events, crime prevention suggestions and much more.

Any Neighbourhood Watch member can look at their account at www.owl.co.uk  (user name is their email address, they can request a new password if necessary) and within that OWL account they can see local crime information on their ‘local’ tab.  This is a really useful and interesting feature and can help residents understand what is going on in their streets.

In relation to crime prevention and support, this is obviously provided to the victims, and officers work closely with the local NHW coordinator and the strategic crime prevention advisors who are currently planning targeted crime prevention opportunities to complement the engagement work our Safer Neighbourhood Teams already regularly deliver in the community.

This issue is and will remain a priority for local police and the wider Community Safety Partnership.

Question to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared, from Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst

16z) Will the Lead Member confirm how much money the Conservative County Council has withdrawn from Three Rivers to support recycling and its effect % effect on Council tax?

Written response: There is a budget of £107,720 for the Alternative Financial Model (AFM) in the current financial year.  The current forecast is £121,000 for 2022/23.  The proposed budget for 2023/24 includes the removal of the income budget of £107,720 across the MTFP reflecting the end of the scheme.  The proposed Council Tax Requirement (CTR) for 2022/23 is £10.080m.  Of this, £7.694m relates to the district element retained by the Council; with the balance relating to Parish Precepts.   The reduction of £107,720 is equivalent to 1.4% of the district element of the proposed CTR for 2023/24.

Questions to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared, from Councillor Jon Tankard

16aa) At the December 2022 Full Council meeting the proposal to enter into a business rate pool with other councils in Hertfordshire was unanimously approved. This would have seen the residents of Three Rivers benefit from this Council retaining the majority of the increase in local business rates.  Actions taken by the UK government have now made that arrangement unviable. How much money has Three Rivers District Council and more crucially the residents of Three Rivers, lost as a result of the government's actions?

Written response: The 2023 revaluation of business rates by the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) and subsequent tariff for the Hertfordshire Business Rates Pool, set by DLUCH in the Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement, resulted in a decision to disband the pool for 2023/24.  This was because there was an increased risk that proceeding with the pool could result in a loss of business rate income due to the Council rather than an increase in retained growth.  As a result of this decision, the Council has budgeted to retain £200k less in business rate growth in 2023/24.  The actual loss can only be known following the reconciliation of business rate income completed at the end of 2023/24.  Completion of this calculation would be dependent upon other authorities within the pool sharing relevant information

16ii) The Mission Zero Report more commonly known as the Skidmore Report, highlights the inefficiency of the central governments ‘bidding’ process in the allocation for grant funding for projects to assist our route to Net Zero. This is further highlighted in the recent messy and farcical scramble for local authorities to obtain levelling up grants. Can I confirm how much time and associated financial costs have been spent and assembling and submitting Grant Applications and would you not agree that the experience and qualifications of our officers would be better spent implementing the results of these applications rather than have to constantly Assess and Implement an ever changing grant application process?

Written response: To date TRDC officers estimate that they have spent the following time ( totalling approximately 155 officer days) assembling and submitting grant applications over the past year for government sponsored projects to assist our route to NetZero:

• Public Sector Decarbonisation Fund: we applied 3 times, and were successful at the third attempt. – total officer time 60 days with an additional technical consultancy cost incurred of £7,560
• LAD1B: 2 successful bids - Total officer time 10 days (5 days each) The monitoring by BEIS of this project was extensive and occupies approximately 1 officer day per month.
• LAD3: unsuccessful – total officer time 15 days
• SHDF Wave 1: successful – Total officer time 20 days with additional extensive support provided from the bid partners Eon and the Housing Associations.  The monitoring reporting requirements occupy 1 officer day a month.
• SHDF Wave 2: awaiting result - Total officer time 20 days with additional extensive support from partners Thrive (20 days) and Ovo (10 days). If successful the reporting requirements on the implementation on this bid are onerous and anticipated to be double what has been required on current bids ( estimated 2 days per month of officer time)
• UKSPF: Successful – total officer time 40 days

The bidding for such programmes is becoming increasingly complex with every application and each new scheme, however, achieving the ambitions of this council set out in our climate emergency and sustainability strategy will require further investment, including to cover the cost of decarbonising buildings and operations. The Council cannot fund this alone, given the need to balance this work alongside the needs and demands of all other services. Greater Government investment will be needed if this and other councils across the country are to reach net zero. We currently have no option but to divert specialist officer time from implementation into work to attempt to secure the limited and often short notice, funds that HMG chooses to make available. I am pleased to say that this Council has a good track record of securing such funds and I recognise that with public money there must be robust processes to ensure its best use but yes the current mechanisms that Government has in place do provide an ongoing resourcing challenge for Councils including Three Rivers.

Questions to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared, from Councillor Sara Bedford

16bb) How many Freedom of Information requests were received by the council for each of the past three years?

Written response: There were 487 requests received in 2020, 437 in 2021 and 556 in 2022

16cc) How many of those requests were answered within the 20 day legal deadline?

Written response: In 2020, 437 were responded to within 20 working days. In 2021, 378 were responded to within 20 working days. In 2022, 499 were responded to within 20 working days.

16dd) How many requests were still outstanding after 30, 60 and 90 days respectively?

Written response: The table below shows the timescales for responding to requests in the last 3 years

2020      2021      2022

Within 20 working days      437      378      499

Between 21 and 30 working days      22      30      24

Between 31 and 60 working days      22      25      26

Between 60 and 90 working days      1      3      5

Over 90 working days      5      1      2

16ee) How many requests the Council refused to answer, and for what reason?

Written response:

One request was declined in 2020 under Section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act (Commercial Interests).

One request was declined in 2021 under Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act (Law Enforcement)

One request was declined in 2022 under Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act (Cost/Time Limits).

Questions to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared Services, from Cllr Chris Mitchell

16ff) Please will you explain where the negotiations with the Red Cross to surrender the lease to Three Rivers have reached?

Written response: The lease surrender negotiations have been largely concluded and both parties have instructed their Legal representatives to commence drafting of the contract documentation.  It is hoped that the matter will be finalised by June.

16gg) Will you commit to consult with the Croxley Green Parish Council and other community groups to consider the options for the future including preserving the existing building as an asset of community value, and bringing it back into full community use as soon as possible?

Written response: TRDC recognises that the property at Barton Way is listed as an Asset of Community Value. We understand that the use of the premises by the community in recent years has been extremely limited. Indeed recent requests for hire have been declined as it’s is no longer considered suitable for such purposes so it is unavailable for public use. It is the intention of this Council to redevelop the property to provide both new affordable homes for local residents and to re-provide space for a modern, fit for purpose community facility that will be accessible to local residents and community groups.

TRDC intend to consult with Croxley Green Parish Council and other community groups to ensure that the community space is made available to, and better utilised by local groups and residents.

Question to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared Services, from Cllr Joan King

16hh) Can the Lead Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising what this authority has already done and will do to advertise and assist with the necessity to bring photographic ID in order to vote this year and going forward and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed matter satisfactorily?

Written response:

• The Communications Team have produced information which currently appears on the Council website, this includes links to the Electoral Commission for information and the link to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate if needed.
• A leaflet, with similar information, will be included with council tax bills.
• This month Household Notification Letters (HNL’s) will be sent to all properties within Three Rivers DC; these letters include information regarding Voter ID and how to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate if one is required.
• We will continue to use the Voter ID resource pack from the Electoral Commission for social media
• We will boost social media posts by paid adverts in February, March and April
• We will update the 40 council notice boards across the district with a different design poster supplied by the Electoral Commission each month in January, February, March, April and May
• We will be adding information to our Gov.delivery email newsletters that we send each week
• We will also do a social media campaign about voting by post if customers do not wish to show identification on polling day
• We will look to provide leaflets for our Healthy Hubs in Abbots Langley, South Oxhey and Mill End

Question to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared Services, from Councillor Stephen Cox

16ii) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising the number of reports of instances of suspected voter fraud in Three Rivers received by this authority in the last decade and what was done about it and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: None. Instances of electoral fraud are a police matter and should be referred to the police for their investigations. It is for the police to decide if the instance is a case of electoral fraud.   Information can be requested via npcc.foi.request@npfdu.police.uk .

Question to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared Services, from Councillor Joan King

16jj) Can the Leader Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising to the number of current staff vacancies and where and how often each has been advertised and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: The vacancies are provided below.  Please note that a number of jobs have been advertised on standard job boards.  To avoid repeating this information the standard jobs boards are: CV-Library, Fish4Jobs, Indeed, Linkedin, Monster, Reed, Totaljobs and Jobsite and Webrecruit Jobs

16jj-question-response

Question to Councillor Keith Martin, Lead Member for Resources and Shared Services, from Councillor Stephen King

16kk) Can the Lead Member demonstrate mastery of their brief by advising why, when I asked the then Lead Member last February to demonstrate mastery of their brief and name the off-shore company now benefiting from rents on retail units at Station Approach, that I appear to have received no answer, what conclusion I should draw from this and note that a supplementary question will demonstrate that the member has not addressed the matter satisfactorily?

Written response: Officers provided an updated response to this question at Full Council on 12 July 2022 (question 12tt). A search of the Land Registry database was undertaken in June 2022. A further check of the Land Registry was undertaken on 6 February 2023 which reveals no further details of the ownership are currently available.

17.  LEADER AND LEAD MEMBER REPORTS AND TO RECEIVE ANY QUESTIONS to receive reports from the Leader and Lead Members - see attached

-17-23-02-21-cl-i-leader-and-lead-member-reports

18.  MOTIONS UNDER COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULE 11 – see attached -

-18-23-02-21-cl-i-council-motions

19.  EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC If the Council wishes to consider the remaining item in private, it will be appropriate for a resolution to be passed in the following terms: “that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act. It has been decided by the Council that in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”  (Note:  If other confidential business is approved, it will also be necessary to specify the class of exempt or confidential information in the additional items.)

1.  NOTLEY FARM

This report has been prepared in order to obtain approval from Full Council to authorise Officers to enter into negotiations for an Option Agreement relating to Council-owned land in Abbotts Langley.  Once the negotiations have been concluded, it is further recommended that the final agreed terms for the Option Agreement are presented to Full Council for consideration and approval.

&nb