Agenda item

Action points from the previous meeting


The Chairman advised there were no outstanding action points from the previous meeting.


Councillor Tindall referred to page 15 and noted there was an ICT budget of £50 per year for each councillor. He asked if there was a document that provided more information on exactly what formed part of the standard ICT equipment issued to councillors and what the additional £50 budget could be used for.


M Brookes advised that the response to the action point was the information they proposed to circulate in member’s news but there was no specific document that contained the information.


Councillor Tindall highlighted that the response says the £50 does not form part of the standard ICT issued to councillors. He suggested that if there was a standard ICT package issued to councillors then it must be written down somewhere.


L Roberts confirmed the ICT department had that information. M Brookes asked for that information to be sent on to members.     Action: L Roberts


Councillor Symington referred to her question from the previous meeting regarding the TTRO (Temporary Traffic Regulation Order) in Berkhamsted High Street. She asked if the response had been circulated to all members as she didn’t recall seeing it.


B Hosier advised that communication was still ongoing between Berkhamsted Town Council and the Leader of Dacorum Borough Council. He believed there was a meeting that took place last night but he wasn’t aware of the outcome as yet.


Councillor Symington drew attention to the action point response. She asked if HCC (Hertfordshire County Council) had given their approval so that the Portfolio Holder Decision sheet could be drafted, and where we were in the call-in process.


B Hosier explained that the Portfolio Holder Decision hadn’t been submitted yet due to late changes made by Berkhamsted Town Council. He advised that there was full agreement with HCC about the proposals but Berkhamsted Town Council wanted something changed in terms of the number of parking spaces so they have been in dialogue with the Leader of the Council and had a meeting last night to decide what they were formally going to propose to the Leader. The Leader would then make a decision and it would depend on that decision whether a Portfolio Holder Decision would need to be submitted or not.


Councillor Symington asked if it was possible for the decision to be communicated to members.


B Hosier confirmed he would share the information once he has been advised of the decision.


Councillor Symington said it was her understanding that the TTRO was Covid related to improve circulation in the High Street. She was curious to know why the process was taking so long, given that we were now trying to come out of the Covid period that we’ve been living with for the past 15 months. She said she understood that it was a temporary TRO but felt an explanation was needed as to why it was taking so long to implement something that other councils have implemented all over the country. She added that HCC were now consulting those that did put TTRO’s in place to find out whether they want them to remain in place and yet, we haven’t even been able to put one in place.


Councillor Williams explained that the main changes in Berkhamsted High Street were subject to a TTRO which can be implemented without public consultation, on the basis that we would require public consultation to make it permanent. He said a lot of work went on between HCC and the Town Council without the Borough Council being aware of it, but when we did become aware of it we had significant concerns about what was being proposed. The scheme in Berkhamsted, unlike other areas where there was limited or very narrow pavements, was not only related to Covid but a wider desire to reduce the amount of parking and increasing pavement activities within Berkhamsted. He explained that the issue that had arisen was part of the scheme proposed can’t be implemented as a TTRO, it has to be a permanent TRO because it changes the nature of paid-for parking bays. HCC have advised that can’t be done temporarily. Agreement was reached between the three parties on the changes to be made but then the Town Council requested further changes to what had been agreed in relation to the permanent Traffic Order required on a cost basis. Councillor Williams said he responded to that request and that was what the Town Council discussed at last night’s meeting. The decision of last night’s meeting will determine whether we proceed with the Portfolio Holder Decision or not. He summarised that it was the Town Council’s decision to make, and they may decide they do not wish to proceed with the scheme at all.


Supporting documents: