The meeting was opened with a prayer.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Butt, Richards and Thomas (D).

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 1 February 2012 and the Adjourned meeting of the Council held on 8 February 2012.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 1 February 2012 and the adjourned meeting held on 8 February 2012 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman

(i)         welcomed Stuart Elliman, Lifeboat Operations Manager from the Torbay RNLI lifeboat station and presented him with a framed copy of an article which is displayed on the Cruise Liner Aurora in recognition of the rescue of a sick passenger on Monday, 19 September 2011;

(ii)        congratulated Councillor Hernandez on winning ‘Online Councillor of the Year’ at the 2012 Local Government Information Unit and CCLA Councillor Achievement Awards for her use of social media to promote local democracy and participation in local government;

(iii)       thanked all the people who had brought tickets to the Civic Ball which was being held on 2 March 2012;

(iv)       thanked Members for their good behaviour over the past year whilst he has been Chairman of the Council; and

(v)        advised that prayers would continue at Council meetings for the next two years in Torbay.

Approximately 137 signatures, to be presented to Council.

In accordance with Standing Order A12, the Council received a petition against the pool closure at Cockington Primary School, Torquay (approximately 137 signatures).

At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr Tostevin addressed the Council in relation to the petition.  It was noted that the petition would be referred to the Governors of Cockington Primary School who will be making the decision on this issue.

Approximately 65 signatures, this petition has been referred to the decision maker (Highways Services Manager, Patrick Carney in consultation with the Executive Lead for Safer Communities and Transport, Councillor Robert Excell).

In accordance with Standing Order A12, the Council noted the receipt of a petition requesting the removal of grass verges to make more parking spaces, to reduce accidents, making it safer for children to play and be more accessible for using the Woodend Project (approximately 65 signatures).

It was noted that the petitioner had requested their petition to be submitted direct to the decision-maker and it would be referred to the Highways Service Manager for consideration in consultation with the Executive Lead for Safer Communities and Transport.

Approximately 179 signatures, this petition has been referred to the decision maker (Highways Services Manager, Patrick Carney in consultation with the Executive Lead for Safer Communities and Transport, Councillor Robert Excell).

In accordance with Standing Order A12, the Council noted receipt of a petition objecting to the St Michaels Traffic Action Zone Scheme (approximately 179 signatures).

It was noted that the petitioner had requested their petition to be submitted direct to the decision-maker and it would be referred to the Highways Service Manager for consideration in consultation with the Executive Lead for Safer Communities and Transport.

To hear and respond to any written questions or statements from members of the public which have been submitted in accordance with Standing Order A24.

‘Dartmouth Road Crossing

In 2011 I with a number of other people with a visual impairment attended a Transport Council meeting to ask for Dartmouth Road crossing to be relocated so that it could become a controlled crossing.

The Highways manager had already carried out a site visit and acknowledged that this would the best position for a controlled crossing and that it would have been the most desirable position for the crossing when it was first installed.

At the meeting I presented a petition of over a 1000 signatures demonstrating support for the crossing, this included a number of older residents who are in support and have passed on comments to the council that the current crossing is unsatisfactory and dangerous.

The councillors in attendance of the meeting agreed that something should be done as I should not be left isolated in my own home and prevented from visiting my local shops, amenities and from using the bus stop to catch the local bus into town.

Despite strong support by the council and local residents a final commitment has not been made by the council to allocate money for the work to go ahead.

There has been opposition by local businesses because some parking spaces will be lost, however, there is no evidence that alternative arrangements have been looked at, such as the use of additional parking at the pub ample car park or the use of the community church parking facilities.

I have been campaigning for this improved crossing for many years and want to be able to use my local shops and amenities, independently like other residents and members of the community.

Could the council please provide assurances that money will be allocated for this important work? Provide evidence that all avenues have been examined and carried out to find alternative parking and for local businesses to understand the need of local and vulnerable members of the community?’

In accordance with Standing Order A24, the Council heard from Mrs Hewitt who had submitted a statement and question regarding the Dartmouth Road Crossing.  The Executive Lead for Safer Communities and Transport responded to the statement and question that had been put forward, plus a supplementary question asked by Mrs Hewitt.

To answer any questions asked under Standing Order A13.

Members received a paper detailing the questions, as set out at Appendix 1 to these Minutes, notice of which had been given in accordance with Standing Order A13.

Supplementary questions were asked and answered by Councillor Pritchard (question 1), Councillor Excell (questions 2 and 5) and the Mayor (questions 3 and 4).

This council is aware that the Coalition Government is considering the introduction of regionalised pay for the public sector.  Such a policy could have the following negative impacts on Torbay:

1)    It could reduce incomes in the public sector resulting in an even further reduction of wages.

2)    Increase the brain drain that Torbay already suffers from.

3)    Regional pay is unlikely to have any measurable impact in making house prices more affordable.

In light of the above this council requests the Torbay Development Agency to conduct research into the impact of this Government policy on Torbay and share with the Government its findings.

Submitted by Councillors Darling and Pentney

Members considered a motion in relation to regionalised pay for the public sector notice of which was given in accordance with Standing Order A14.

It was proposed by Councillor Darling and seconded by Councillor Pentney:

This Council is aware that the Coalition Government is considering the introduction of regionalised pay for the public sector.  Such a policy could have the following negative impacts on Torbay:

1)      It could reduce incomes in the public sector resulting in an even further reduction of wages.

2)      Increase the brain drain that Torbay already suffers from.

3)      Regional pay is unlikely to have any measurable impact in making house prices more affordable.

In light of the above this council requests the Torbay Development Agency to conduct research into the impact of this Government policy on Torbay and share with the Government its findings.

In accordance with Standing Order A14.4(a), the motion stood referred to the Mayor.  The Mayor considered the recommendation of the Council as set out above at the meeting and noted the motion.  As the Council was tied in to national negotiations regarding pay he did not feel that it was appropriate to carry out any research at this time and decided to take no action on this motion,

To consider a report on the above.

The Council made the following recommendation to the Mayor:

It was proposed by Councillor Pritchard and seconded by Councillor McPhail:

That the Mayor be recommended:

(i)         that the Torbay Tree and Woodland Framework 2012 – 2017 as set out in Appendix 1 to the submitted report be approved; and

(ii)        that the Executive Head (Residents & Visitor Services) and the Executive Lead for Tourism and Environment be authorised to make minor amendments to the Framework as required as a result of feedback from the community and stakeholders. If any major alterations are made the Framework will be brought back to Council.

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared carried (unanimous).

The Mayor considered the recommendation of the Council as set out above at the meeting and the record of his decision, together with further information, is attached to these Minutes.

To consider the attached report and any recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Board on revenue budget monitoring.

The Council noted the current projected outturn for the Revenue Budget 2011/2012 based on quarter 2 information, as set out in the submitted report.

The Council considered a report on Capital Investment Plan monitoring and variations from quarter 3.  The report provided details of expenditure and funding of service and community assets within the Council’s approved Capital Investment Plan.  The Overview and Scrutiny Board considered the submitted report at its meeting on 15 February 2012 put forward a number of recommendations.

The Council made the following recommendation to the Mayor:

It was proposed by Councillor Thomas (J) and seconded by Councillor Darling:

(i)         the Board recommends improved management of the Capital Programme;

(ii)        the Board recommends the Capital Slippage be brought to the Mayor’s attention for improvement; and

(iii)       the Board recommends that information is provided on how the overspend on the Parkfield project is being financed from funds originally allocated to Ellacombe and further request that this information is provided to the Board.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Tyerman and seconded by Councillor Pritchard:

The Mayor is recommended that no further action is currently needed as the Capital Investment Strategy which was reviewed by Overview and Scrutiny and approved by Council on 8 February already contains changes to improve the management of the Capital Programme and the Mayor is already aware of the slippage being present at the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee when it was discussed and it is not the role of the Mayor to determine what information is provided to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee – any such request is already within the purview of that Committee.

The substantive motion (i.e. the amendment) was then before Members for consideration.

On being put to the vote, the substantive motion was declared carried.

The Mayor considered the recommendation of the Council as set out above at the meeting and supported the proposal to take no further action.

It was proposed by Councillor Tyerman and seconded by Councillor Pritchard:

(i)         that the latest position on the Capital Investment Plan be noted; and

(ii)        that £0.213 million of Prudential Borrowing for the replacement of some of the Council’s vehicle fleet be approved (see para A2.1 of the submitted report).

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared carried.

To consider a report on the setting of the Council Tax for 2012/13.

The Council received the submitted report on the setting of the Council Tax for 2012/13.

It was proposed by the Mayor and seconded by Councillor Tyerman:

That the Council is recommended to:

(i)         note that on 8th December 2011 the Council calculated the Council Tax Base for 2012/13:-

a) for the whole Council area as 49,021.42 [Item T in the formula in Section 31B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as amended (the "Act")] ; and

b) for dwellings in the Brixham Town Council area as 6,664.97 to which a Parish precept relates;

(ii)        approve the Council Tax requirement for the Council’s own purposes for 2012/13 (excluding Brixham Town Council) of £61,824,200;

(iii)      approve that the following amounts be calculated for the year 2012/13 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Act:

a) £317,770,300 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 the precept issued to it by Brixham Town Council;

b) (£255,753,000) being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(3) of the Act;

c) £62,017,300 being the amount by which the aggregate at 2.3(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 2.3(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) £1265.11 being the amount at 2.3(c) above (Item R), all divided by Item T (2.1(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);

e) £193,100 being the aggregate amount of all special items (Brixham Town Council) referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act;

f) £1,261.17 being the amount at 2.3(d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 2(e) above by Item T (2.1(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 relates;

(iv)       note that Devon & Cornwall Police Authority and the Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Authority have issued precepts to the Council in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 for each category of dwellings in the Council’s area as indicated in the table below;

(v)        approve that the Council, in accordance with Sections 30 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the aggregate amounts shown in the tables below as the amounts of Council Tax for 2012/13 for each part of its area and for each of the categories of dwellings; and

To consider a report on the above.

The Council considered the submitted report on the Torbay Council Annual Pay Policy Statement.

It was proposed by Councillor Pritchard and seconded by Councillor Hernandez:

That the Torbay Council Annual Pay Policy Statement be approved in order for the Council to be compliant with Section 38 (1) of the Localism Act 2011.

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared carried.

To consider a report setting out the provisional calendar of meetings for 2012/2013.

The Council received the submitted report which set out the provisional calendar of meetings for 2012/2013.

It was proposed by Councillor Pritchard and seconded by Councillor Excell:

(i)         that the provisional calendar of meetings for 2012/2013, set out in Appendix 1 to the submitted report, be approved for final ratification at the Annual Council Meeting; and

(ii)        that meetings of the Employment Committee and Civic Committee be held on an ad-hoc basis, to be determined by the Governance Support Manager in consultation with the relevant Chairman.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Darling and seconded by Councillor Pentney:

(i)        that the provisional calendar of meetings for 2012/2013, set out in Appendix 1 to the submitted report be amended so that Council meetings take place on Tuesday’s unless otherwise required in order for the Council to comply with its legal obligations and subject to this the provisional calendar of meeting 2012/2013 be approved for final ratification at the Annual Council Meeting.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared lost.

The original motion was then put to the vote and declared carried.