Agenda and minutes

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos.11 and 35 a period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the meeting on any matter relating to the work of the body in question.  Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman or person presiding will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers. Members of the public are not required to give notice to use this facility. However, as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours’ notice is encouraged.

Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given.

Mrs Liz Braithwaite sought clarification regarding what the Macclesfield Forum was, as referred to in the Proposed Role of an Enhanced Service Delivery Committee.

It was noted that this referred to the make it Macclesfield Forum, which was a local voluntary economic forum whose general principles were to look at the regeneration of the area. This would be clarified in the final documents relating to the proposed enhanced Service Delivery Committee and Assembly meetings.

RESOLVED

That the minutes be approved as a correct record.

In accordance with the request made at the last meeting of the Committee to consider the practical arrangements which might be made for the running of a local allotments service. 

As agreed at the previous meeting of the Committee, consideration was given to the practical arrangements which might be made for the running of a local allotments service. 

Agreed – That a small working group, comprising Cllrs K Edwards J Jackson and M Hardy, be established to work with officers to consider options for a more locally focused method of managing the allotments service, to enable the Committee to consider any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet in respect of this matter.

At the meeting of the Community Governance Review (Macclesfield) Sub-Committee (CGR Sub-Cttee) on 16 January it was resolved that this matter be referred to the Local Service Delivery Committee for consideration. 

As this meeting had already been convened, and in order to be able to report back to the CGR Sub-Cttee at its next meeting, the Chairman has, in accordance with Section 100B (4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, agreed to allow consideration as of this item as a matter of urgent business. 

At the meeting of the Community Governance Review (Macclesfield) Sub-Committee (CGR Sub-Committee) on 16 January it had been resolved that this matter be referred to the Local Service Delivery Committee for consideration. 

As the Local Service Delivery Committee meeting had already been convened, and in order to be able to report back to the CGR Sub-Committee at its next meeting, the Chairman had, in accordance with Section 100B (4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, agreed to allow consideration of this item as a matter of urgent business. 

Consideration was given to a report requesting the Committee to give consideration to the proposed role of an Enhanced Local Service Delivery Committee and Assembly Meetings. In considering the report the Committee made the following comments and suggested amendments.

·         Macclesfield Assembly – Amend to say no voting powers for non

           elected members, who should be invited to a general meeting

           and not  be part of  the decision making body. Suggested that the 

           general meeting  take place  once a year, as an AGM.

·         Consideration to be given to extending the period of notice for questions - 24 hours notice is not long enough.

·         Add faith group representatives.

·          make it clear that the forum is the “Make it  Macclesfield – Macclesfield  Economic Forum”  

·        Delete the word “principal “ from paragraph 3 of appendix A (page 4)

           to reflect the legal advice  

• Amend point 10 – appendix A (page 4) to reflect the legal advice re: management of assets.

• Amend point 1 – appendix A (page 4) to read “To investigate and monitor the delivery….”

• Consultation document – (page 14) – Under the paragraph on cost of SDC change the words “ … may be met from part of the Council Tax … to read “may be met from an additional tax …”

• Make it clear in communication materials that a Town or Parish Council will not be the same as the former Macclesfield Borough Council

• Page 14  - Need to make the costs clear. Other areas of the Borough could claim that the cost of a Service Delivery Committee would be “double taxation” for Cheshire east residents outside of Macclesfield. The cost of the Service Delivery Committee may need to be met by a special expense levy.  Financial advice would be sought on this point.

•  Once the role of the Service Delivery Committee is clear, it will be necessary to explain the main differences between Parish Councils and a Service Delivery Committee – e.g. LSDC may just be advisory, whereas a Parish Council has powers to act. A mandate via a community governance review would be needed to proceed with establishing a Parish Council as it is a precepting body, whereas all the other options could be set up by a Council decision. 

• In the draft leaflet , option 2 (page 13)  – Take out the paragraph on the  Local Area Partnership and change the order of the remaining paragraphs, so that “An Enhanced Service Delivery Committee” comes first, followed by the paragraph  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

To consider the date and time of the next meeting.

To be agreed.