Agenda item

Mark Brookes introduced the report and picked out some key achievements.

He said they have prosecuted for the first time for a breach of the town centre public space protection order, this was for cycling through the town centre which he hoped would serve as an example not to do that.

He said that section 13 and 15 highlight the impact that Covid has had on the service, particularly car parks and leisure... He also said that members will note in the report that the multi-story car park in Berkhamstead is now complete and thanked Ben Hosier for his work on this.

Mark Brookes opened up for any questions.

Councillor Townsend referred to the case of DBC vs WE Black LTD he said this was a large development and there was a number of attempts to protect the trees in that area. He said looking at page 47 of the report he asked to what extent we’d made a choice to settle at that level of fine because from the perspective of a developer that’s a great many houses meaning a multimillion pound project. He said he had heard that although its hearsay that the developer would remove the trees and pay the £5k fine for doing so. He asked could we have gone higher with the fine and what sort of control we have, also was this a judgement that we made.

Farida Hussain responded this is prosecuted in the magistrate’s court so it is up to the court to decide the fine. She said they are able to submit witness statements and facts then it’s up to the magistrate to decide.

Councillor Townsend asked if the magistrate would be aware of the miniscule amount of the fine in comparison to the profit and loss of the development.

Mark Brookes said that they would usually present a statement of aggravating factors and things that made the offence worse so this information would be before the court. He said the magistrate would be aware of the benefit to the developer for their action and this would be taken into account, he said there are also national guidelines which the court would have to follow in terms of sentences.

Councillor Townsend asked if it was correct in law that W E Black LTD have committed a criminal act.

Mark Brookes confirmed that they will have a criminal record against them which will cause issues in various areas. He said unfortunately some developers will take view they will take the fine as they will benefit more going forward, all they can do is put the information before the court.

Councillor Tindall referred to page 50 item 11 and that the CCG have stopped their planned return. He asked if this has any financial implications for us or are they just doing this for the Covid situation.

Mark Brookes responded that they still committed to their lease terms and still have to pay the rent.

Councillor Guest said we don’t have a KPI for the percentage of complaints responded to in 5 working days, she said that this has been raised with her. She asked who decides what the KPIs are that we do.

Mark Brookes responded that the stage 1 complaints must be responded to in  15 working days which has been pretty consistent for some time.

Councillor Guest said that the initial acknowledgement was 5 working days and that used to be a KPI. She asked who it is that determines what KPI’s we look at.

Mark Brookes said the service considered what is relevant and we go through a process with the performance team.

Linda Roberts added that they are done on an annual basis and that they agree with the Leader and the Chief Executive  will agree on what KPI and if any of the measures need to change or not.

Councillor Adeleke asked if he could check on item 5 page 47 and that about 10 pavement licences have become the council’s temporary responsibility. He said there are quite a lot of claims against the council where people have fell over on pavements, he asked for clarification on what this mean and does this mean future claims would be against the council and not the county council. He also referred to Corporate and Democratic Support on committee meetings, he wanted to give commendation to the staff in that team  for the time they give to meetings and minutes.

Mark Brookes responded that there is a difference between the licencing of pavements and ownership of pavements. He said any responsibility of injury on the pavements remains the responsibility of the owner of the pavement and the Licencing is to do with the government measures to allow traders in pubs and licence premises to sit outside their premises, to try and create distance between people attending, he said that is what we have temporary responsibility for that.

Councillor Mahmood asked if someone were to put scaffolding on a pavement, would this be the council’s responsibility.

Mark Brookes confirmed that the new temporary responsibility was very specific in covering just spaces where pubs may wish to place seating outside for the Covid restrictions.

Councillor Mahmood referred to page 47 and that there was a consultation out on taxi licencing and there was a query previously from the council about the timing because of the financial impact on the taxi service.

Mark Brookes responded that the team were keen to get the consultation going because of the environmental benefit of some of the proposals. He said that there are long lead times on some of the proposals so the targets were set for quite a few years ahead so he said it’s thought this will not have an impact now as we know some of the drivers are struggling at the moment. He said that they wanted to get the consultation out and progresses but they will take on board everything we hear back from the trial and get back to the committee for decisions.

Outcome:

The report was noted.