Agenda item

(Members are reminded this is a debate, not a question and answer session)

To consider the following recommendations to Council:

 

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube.

 

(i) Cabinet – 3^rd March 2026

 

Councillor Ring, seconded by Councillor Beales, proposed the recommendation from Cabinet on 3^rd March 2026 for CAB140: Adoption of the Property Disposal Policy.

 

Councillor Ring spoke in support of the proposals and outlined the input of the Panels into the Policy including consideration at the Regeneration and Development Panel and the matter being called in for consideration at the Corporate Performance Panel.

 

Councillor Ring highlighted the key amendments to the policy, and the need for clear asset management as the lack of previous plans and policies had resulted in ad hoc decisions.  He explained that the policy provided guidelines for officers and Members, aiming for more effective management of the Council’s asset portfolio.

 

Councillor Parish stressed the importance of not disposing of assets which were valuable to local communities, and ensuring that community representatives were involved in decisions relating to asset disposal.

 

Councillor Long referred to improper practices in the past.

 

In summing up, Councillor Ring commented that in the past some assets were un register and this policy ensured proper processes going forward.

 

RESOLVED: The recommendation from the Cabinet meeting held on 3^rd March 2026 in relation to the Adoption of the Property Disposal Policy was approved by Full Council, as set out below.

 

Cabinet resolves to recommend to Full Council the adoption of the Property Disposal Policy attached at Appendix 1, with the following amendments to the Governance Arrangements and Oversight section:

 

During potential asset disposals portfolio holders, ward members, parish councils and other community representatives where necessary may have confidential/commercial information shared with them.  It is important that the constitution is adhered to in this regard in particular “Part 2 – Articles – Rights and Duties of Councillors, paragraphs 2.05 to 2.07”.

 

(ii) Electoral Arrangements Committee 12^th March 2026 – Hilgay Community Governance Review – Next Steps.

 

The recommendation from the above Committee was proposed by Councillor Beales and seconded by Councillor Ring.

 

In proposing the recommendations from the Committee, Councillor Beales commented that this was the recommendation from the Committee, however did not reflect his view and he felt that Council should reject the recommendation.  He provided background, explaining that there were representation issues and community feedback, with the results of the consultation supporting the establishment of separate councils.

 

Councillor Beales provided Council with information relating to precepts, assets and the council tax base, noting that there were smaller Parishes, to those proposed, already in existence.

 

Councillor Lintern shared the concerns of the Electoral Arrangements Committee regarding the number of Parish Councillors and difficulty recruiting, however noted there were smaller parishes in existence and it was important to ensure all residents were represented.

 

Councillor Heneghan commented that it was important that local views were taken into consideration.

 

Councillor Osborne explained he would be voting against the recommendation from the Committee and felt that the creation of two Parish Councils was viable.

 

Councillor Long indicated he would be supporting the creation of two Parish Councils as arrangements were currently not working well.

 

Councillor Joyce commented that relationships had broken down and there needed to be a split.

 

Councillor Hodson, as Ward Member for Hilgay commented that there were irreparable differences and he agreed with the separation.

 

Councillor Parish referred to the correspondence sent from representatives from the Parishes, following the Electoral Arrangements Committee and suggested that the matter be referred back to the Electoral Arrangements Committee for consideration.

 

Councillor Ratcliffe commented that she had experienced disruption within Parishes and it took a long time to resolve.  She supported splitting the Parishes into two.

 

Councillor Storey, as County Councillor for the Parish noted the recent issues within the Parish and stated that a split benefited both Parishes and the Council should listen to the views of Ten Mile Bank residents.

 

Councillor de Whalley commented that small parishes could function well and he supported the split.

 

Councillor Squire commented that local democracy was important.

 

Councillor Blunt, as a Member of the Electoral Arrangements Committee stated that the Committee had proposed mediation and support to the Parish, which he felt was a good option at the time and he had listened to the debate at this meeting.

 

Councillor Moriarty commented that it would not be appropriate to refer the matter back to the Electoral Arrangements Committee.

 

Councillor Ring, as seconded to the proposal explained that if he had attended the Electoral Arrangements Committee he would have voted in favour of establishing two Parishes and acknowledged the existing successful small parish councils in existence.

 

In summing up, Councillor Beales apologised for not making his views clearer at the Electoral Arrangements Committee.  He stated he was not judging either Parish, but felt that they would be better separated and hoped Council would support the split.

 

The Mayor clarified that Councillors would be required to cast a vote on the recommendation put forward by the Electoral Arrangements Committee as set out below:

 

Option 1:

1.     Hilgay Parish and Hilgay Parish Council to remain unchanged and continue to be a warded Parish Council, comprising of:

                        ·Hilgay Ward &

                        · Ten Mile Bank Ward

This will formally close the Community Governance Review.

 

2.     To request that the Monitoring Officer provide assistance to the Parish Council in terms of Governance and Decision Making.

 

On being put to the vote this proposal was lost.  The Mayor then asked Council to vote on the alternative option presented to the Electoral Arrangements Committee.  This was put to the vote and carried.

 

RESOLVED: Full Council agreed to Option 2, as set out below:

 

Option 2:

 

            (A) That Hilgay Parish is abolished, and Hilgay Parish Council is dissolved

            (B) That a new civil Parish be formed using the ward boundary of Ten Mile             Bank ward, and that the civil Parish be named ‘Ten Mile Bank’

            (C) That Ten Mile Bank should have a Parish Council, consisting of 5             members, and that it is not warded

(D) That a new civil Parish be formed using the ward boundary of Hilgay ward, and that the civil Parish be named ‘Hilgay’

            (E) That Hilgay should have a Parish Council, consisting of 9 members, and             that it is not warded

            (F) Fixed assets (such as buildings and fields) will be allocated to the Council,             according to the proposed boundaries

            (G) Non-fixed assets to be divided proportionately between both Councils,             where it is possible to do so

(H) The initial Parish Precepts would be based on the 72/28 split and would be approximately £25,100 for Hilgay and £9,800 for Ten Mile Bank.