Agenda and draft minutes

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting.

Action points from the meeting dated 20^th January

Action: PRayner to send link to web pages to Member Support who in turn will forward to Mr Kazer by email. – Completed

Action: JDoe to provide figures on self-build in the Borough – Completed

Action: JDoe & team to look at simplifying reporting of monies – Will be looked at in the future

Action: PRayner to circulate figures – Completed

Action: PRayner to circulate rules on CIL as per example above.- Completed

Cllr McDowell said he hasn’t received any of the documents as per the actions above.

Action: LFowell to Check Cllr McDowell receives all documents sent by JDoe & PRayner listed as action point at the meeting of the 20^th Jan, and to check he is on SPAE mailing list

The minutes from the meeting of 20^th January were agreed by the members present to be signed by the Chairman at the next available opportunity.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Barrett and Councillor Hobson

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest

No Public Participation

None

General Fund

JDeane confirmed that there were no changes affecting the remit of the committee so there is nothing to report.

Cllr Birnie congratulated JDeane on putting in annex A which was the explanation on what comes under the different categories, it’s very useful.

JDeane said thank you and that it has been in a few years and they were considering removing it, he said if there are ever any ideas to make it clearer to let them know.

Cllr Birnie asked for questions from the committee.

Cllr Birnie referred to appendix A, He said there are 2 figures one for RSA 940K and another for Council Tax deficit of 150k, he said he can’t understand why they don’t go through to the final estimate and was it an accounting thing he didn’t know about?.

JDeane explained if you follow through on the revenue support grant line, the 1^st column you have zero for 2021, and then the assumption was that it would be suspended this year and we would have a negative hit. When this came to the 1^st meeting in December that assumption was still there because we hadn’t had the settlement, he said the final version is a zero because we have now had confirmation within the local government finance settlement the negative RSG is being suspended so we haven’t got any growth in that area.

Cllr Birnie asked if it was the same in Council Tax

JDeane confirmed he wasn’t sure why this was a zero at the end and said that the report went to cabinet in December it is an estimate and they do the final version at the end of December It goes to Cabinet for approval and that’s the version they use to set the baseline budgets for the amount of Council Tax they expect to get in, that takes into account all the timing delays that feed in from the previous year so you get slight movement in the tax base. He said in terms of the ins and out on the report, they have had a reduction in the tax base, the tax base is less that they thought as the growth was less than they assumed within the NTFS for this year which is understandable as they have slowed the delivery of new builds and were expecting more people to move into the council tax support system next year.

Cllr Birnie asked if the final zero should in fact be 151

JDeane said no that’s is showing that we have had movement, we were forecasting growth, they had growth of 150k in our tax base, the tax base is correct it shows we have had movement throughout the process and it’s a very small percentage of the overall tax base.

Cllr Birnie asked if it was a case of one is negative and the other positive so they cancel each other out.

JDeane said no there is movement, he said its one of those lines that are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

CThorpe advised that the old Tree and Woodland policy ran out late last year, the new one is a bit late however they wanted to make sure it was fit for purpose, reflected corporate initiatives and was user friendly for the end user. He said they’d hoped they had managed to do that. He further added that although the policy doesn’t refer in great detail to climate change it does give a commitment to the initiatives that will no doubt evolve over the course of the policy. This will in no doubt be coming back to the overview and scrutiny committees with ideas we’ve got for contributing to carbon emissions reduction. He said that it also refers to a new system that places an amenity value on the council’s trees that seeks to recoup damages from residents who choose to take matters into their own hands if they don’t like a species of tree or the placement of trees, in terms of removing or pruning it.

Cllr Birnie said he feels the report is very well presented and is glad the point has been raised about recouping costs., He said if we are going to start being punitive we may need to issue some kind of information leaflet explaining what we are going to do if residents take matters into their own hands.

CThorpe said what they have seen over the last year, with people being at home more, is that they don’t like the trees near their property that they feel its impairing their view or interfering with a TV signal and as we only deal with them if it’s a safety issue, it leads to them taking matters into their own hands.

LJohnson ran through the tree policy for the committee.

Cllr Timmis said she is pleased to see a tree policy. She said once someone has taken down a tree it’s often too late. She said she had 2 points. She referred to a builder who cleared a site of trees, as they often do, at a weekend when the tree officers are not around. Once that tree is cut its too late. She said she had a resident that had a tree flapping against her house and they have reported but it hasn’t been resolved. She said she would also like to know about TPO’s. There are a number of trees with TPO’s and it seems that TPO’s are only put on when a member of the public asks for that to happen. Should inspection take place by us so that we identify trees that require a TPO? She said that people should not be able to take down trees and that she has had it around her a lot recently where they are not replaced.

LJohnson responded that their work programme is delayed due to Covid. It’s been a very difficult year for the contractors and they are trying to squeeze a years’ worth of work into 8 months and in addition to the Covid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Cllr Birnie asked if anyone had anything that hadn’t been added to the work programme that they wish to add. He commented that there are some items that have been scheduled in the work programme and a long list of those that have not yet been scheduled. He asked that members bear with him on this as he has a meeting booked with officers on the 10^th February to schedule these items.

Cllr Timmis wanted to mention that Luton airport has re- submitted its Condition 10 variance plus the expectation of being able to expand to 19 mil passengers by 2024. She said this will be the 3^rd consultation, a year or so after the last consultation. She said the decision has to be in by 17^th February and that Dacorum will be making a submission and she feels the committee should be aware that despite the current circumstances Luton Airport are still pressing ahead with this huge expansion thus breaking the conditions of the original 2013 planning application,

JDoe said that the DBC submission is ready and Cllr Sutton will be briefed tomorrow and he will also liaise with the officer responsible for Luton Airport.