Agenda and minutes

Councillor Roberts proposed and Councillor Cantrill seconded the nomination of Councillor Jeremy Benstead as Mayor for the Municipal Year 2016/17.

 

Resolved that:

 

i.             Councillor Jeremy Benstead be elected for the Municipal Year 2016/17. Councillor Benstead then made the statutory declaration of acceptance of the office of Mayor.

Councillor Perry proposed and Councillor Gillespie seconded the nomination of Councillor Holland as Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2016/17.

 

Councillor Cantrill proposed and Councillor Holt seconded the nomination of Councillor Pippas as Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2016/17.

 

 

Resolved (by 26 votes to 13 votes) that:

 

i.             Councillor Holland be elected Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2016/17. Councillor Holland then made the statutory declaration of acceptance of the office of Deputy Mayor.

Minutes of the 14^th April enclosed seperately.

The minutes of the meeting of the 23 March and 14 April 2016 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

It was noted that the following had been elected to the Office of Councillor.

 

·        Abbey:                          Richard Johnson                  

·        Arbury:                          Mike Todd-Jones                 

·        Castle:                          John Hipkin

·        Cherry Hinton:              Robert Dryden

·        Coleridge:                     Rosy Moore

·        East Chesterton:                   Margery Abbott

·        Kings Hedges:             Nigel Gawthrope

·        Market:                          Tim Bick

·        Newnham:                    Lucy Nethsingha

·        Petersfield:                             Richard Robertson

·        Queen Edith’s:             Jennifer Page-Croft

·        Romsey:                       Sophie Barnett

·        Trumpington:                Donald Adey

·        West Chesterton:         Mike Sargeant

 

It was noted that the following had been elected to the Office of Councillor.

 

·        Abbey:                          Richard Johnson                  

·        Arbury:                          Mike Todd-Jones                 

·        Castle:                          John Hipkin

·        Cherry Hinton:              Robert Dryden

·        Coleridge:                     Rosy Moore

·        East Chesterton:                   Margery Abbott

·        Kings Hedges:             Nigel Gawthrope

·        Market:                          Tim Bick

·        Newnham:                    Lucy Nethsingha

·        Petersfield:                             Richard Robertson

·        Queen Edith’s:             Jennifer Page-Croft

·        Romsey:                       Sophie Barnett

·        Trumpington:                Donald Adey

·        West Chesterton:         Mike Sargeant

 

The Council noted the appointment of Alan Bateman as the Mayor’s Chaplain for the Municipal Year 2016/17.

Resolved (unanimously), on the proposal of Councillor McPherson, seconded by Councillor Tim Moore that:

 

i.             The Council expresses its appreciation of the manner in which the duties of Mayor were discharged by Councillor Dryden, during his period of office and that the Common Seal be affixed to a copy of this resolution for presentation at the next Council meeting.

APOLOGIES

 

There were no apologies.

 

CIVIC CHURCH SERVICE - SUNDAY 29 MAY

 

Members noted that the Mott Sermon would be preached at Holy Trinity Church on Sunday 29 May at 9.30 a.m.      Members were asked to let Lucy Milazzo know if they planned to attend the service.

 

OUTGOING MAYOR’S DINNER – THURSDAY 9 JUNE

 

The Mayor reminded members that the Mayor’s outgoing dinner was to take place at Corpus Christi College and that tickets could be purchased from Lucy Milazzo.

 

PROCLAMATION OF MIDSUMMER FAIR – WEDNESDAY 22 JUNE

 

The Proclamation was scheduled to take place on Wednesday 22 June and details would be circulated.

 

MAYOR’S DAY OUT

 

The Mayor confirmed that the Mayor’s Day Out was to take place on Wednesday 17 August and the venue was once again Great Yarmouth.

 

Councillor Rosy Moore proposed that Councillors Gawthrope, McPherson, Pippas and T.Moore be appointed as Bailiffs.

 

Resolved that Councillors Gawthrope, McPherson, Pippas and T.Moore be appointed as Bailiffs of the City for the Municipal Year 2016/17.

Councillor	Item	Interest
Roberts	16/36/CNLa	Employed by Cambridge University vested interest in staying in the EU.
Sarris	16/36/CNLa	Employee of Cambridge University
Smith	16/36/CNLa	Works for the University
Todd-Jones	16/36/CNLa	Employee of Cambridge University
Gehring	16/36/CNLa	Employee of Cambridge University
Sinnott	16/36/CNLa	Intermittent employee of Cambridge University
Gawthrope	16/36/CNLa	Intermittent employee of Cambridge University
Hart	16/36/CNLa	Works subject to EU Directive.

 

Resolved (unanimously) to:

 

i.             Note the changes to the Executive portfolios (as attached to the agenda).

Appointment of Committees:

 

Resolved (by 28 votes to 0) to:

 

i.             Agree the number and size of committees and membership of committees as listed below:

 

SCRUTINY COMMITTEES

 

COMMUNITY SERVICES	NOMINATION(S)	CURRENT NUMBERS (1) =Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour           LD         Independent & Green	5 (1)           2 (1)         1   8 Total	Sinnott, Ratcliffe, Abbott, Bird Barnett R.Moore (Alt)   Austin, O’Connell   Nethsingha (Alt)     Gillespie

 

ENVIRONMENT	NOMINATION(S)	CURRENT NUMBERS (1) =Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour         LD	4 (1)         2 (1)     6 Total	Gawthrope, Perry, Ratcliffe, Sargeant Smart (Alt)   Bick, Gehring Adey (Alt)

 

HOUSING	NOMINATION(S)	CURRENT NUMBERS (1) =Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour         LD       Independent & Green	5 (1)         2 (1)       1 (1)     8 Total	Todd-Jones, Bird, Gawthrope, Moore, Smart Perry (Alt)   Avery, Page-Croft Moore (Alt)   Holland

 

 

STRATEGY & RESOURCES	NOMINATION(S)	CURRENT NUMBERS (1) =Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour       LD	4 (1)       2(1)     6 Total	Sarris, Barnett, Baigent, Sinnott Abbott (Alt)   Cantrill, Bick Gehring (Alt)

 

REGULATORY COMMITTEES

*Council agreed a departure from proportionality rules

PLANNING	NOMINATIONS(S)	CURRENT NUMBERS (1) =Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour         LD       Independent & Green	4 (1)         3 (1)       1 (1)   8 Total	Blencowe, Gawthrope, Hart, Smart Bird (Alt)   Pippas, Tunnacliffe, Nethsingha Holt (Alt)   Hipkin

 

 

JOINT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS (2)= Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINEES TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour         LD	4 (2)         2 (2)     6 Total	Blencowe, Baigent, Bird, Price, Gawthrope (Alt) Smart (Alt)   Holt, Tunnacliffe T.Moore (Alt)

 

LICENSING	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS (1)= Alternate	PROPOSED NAMES OF NOMINEES TO THE COMMITTEE
	Labour               LD	8 (1)               4 (1)       12 Total	Benstead, Bird, Ratcliffe, Gawthrope, McPherson, O’Reilly, Sinnott, Abbott TBC (Alt)   Adey, Holt, T.Moore, Pippas Page-Croft (Alt)

 

OTHER COMMITTEES

 

CIVIC AFFAIRS	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS (1)= Alternate	PROPOSED CHANGES AND NOMINATIONS
	Labour           LD	4 (1)           2 (1)   6 Total	McPherson, Benstead, Gawthrope, Robertson Ratcliffe (Alt)   Holt, Cantrill Adey (Alt)

 

 

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS SUB	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS (1)= Alternate	PROPOSED CHANGES AND NOMINATIONS
EMPLOYMENT APPEALS SUB	Labour       LD	5       3       8 Total	Price, Gawthrope, Bird, Blencowe   Holt, T.Moore, Adey
COMMITTEE/SUB COMMITTEE	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS (1)= Alternate	PROPOSED CHANGES AND NOMINATIONS
JOINT AREA COMMITTEE (with County Council)	Labour       LD	4(1)       2(1)     6 Total	Blencowe, Baigent, Bird, Robertson TBC (Alt)   Tunnacliffe, Adey Cantrill (Alt)
COMMITTEE/SUB COMMITTEE	NOMINATIONS	CURRENT NUMBERS	PROPOSED CHANGES AND NOMINATIONS
CITY DEAL ASSEMBLY	Labour LD	2 1	Price, Baigent Bick

 

 

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

i.             (By 27 votes to 0) To agree the Chairs and Vice-Chairs as follows (excluding Vice-Chair of Licensing Committee).

ii.            (By 27 votes to 13) To agree the Vice - Chair for Licensing Committee.

 

Committee	Chair	Vice Chair
Community Services	Sinnott	Ratcliffe
Environment	Perry	Gawthrope
Housing	Todd-Jones	Bird
Strategy & Resources	Sarris	Barnett
Planning	Hipkin	Blencowe
Joint Development Control (City Lead)	Blencowe
Licensing	Bird	Benstead
Civic Affairs	McPherson	Benstead
Employment Appeals Sub	Price
Development Plan Scrutiny Committee	Sarris	Gawthrope

 

 

Resolved (nem con) to:

 

i.             Confirm the appointment of Mr Sean Brady as the Council’s Independent Person and Mr Robert Bennett as the Council’s Deputy Independent Person.

Group Leaders will each have the opportunity to speak for not more

than 15 minutes on their Group’s priorities for action and objectives

for the forthcoming municipal year in the following order:

 

Councillor Herbert

Councillor Bick

Councillor Hipkin

 

The Annual Statements of the Labour Group and the Liberal Democrat Group are appended.

Councillor Herbert spoke to a written Annual Statement on the Labour Group’s priorities for the forthcoming Municipal Year, which had been appended to the agenda for the meeting.

 

Councillor Bick spoke to a written Annual Statement on the Liberal Democrat Group’s priorities for the forthcoming Municipal Year, which had been appended to the agenda for the meeting

 

Councillor Hipkin gave an oral Annual Statement on the Independent/Green Group’s priorities for the forthcoming Municipal Year.

 

The scheme for Annual Statements provides that the Statement of the Leader of the largest group on the Council shall be deemed to be a motion for adoption. It may therefore be debated and amendments proposed after which it shall be put to the vote and, if carried, shall be adopted as Council policy for the municipal year.

The Council will therefore consider the Annual Statement of the Labour Group as a motion for adoption.

 

If the adopted Annual Statement contains proposals which fall outside the Council’s budgetary or policy framework, the proposals shall not be acted upon until there has been a report to the relevant Scrutiny Committee(s) and Executive Councillor(s) in the normal way and approval at a subsequent meeting of the Council.

Under the Scheme for Annual Statements, that of Councillor Herbert was deemed to be a motion for adoption by the Council.

 

Resolved (by 29 votes to 0) that:

 

     i.        The Annual Statement of the Labour Group, as appended to the agenda, be adopted as Council policy for 2016/17.

 

Mr Hagard addressed the Council and made the following statement:

 

i.             As Cambridge City Council's only representative on the three person City Deal Executive, which comprises Councillor Lewis Herbert plus two Conservative, non-Cambridge City, councillors, who meet in private to agree major decisions about the City, can Councillor Herbert please assure those who live and work in Cambridge:

·        that he privately fought strongly for a proper scientific review of the case, for and against peak hour congestion charging, and its potential for consequent massive funding of world class bus services, and second:

·        that he privately fought against the major highway re-engineering proposals that will split the two sides of Milton Road, as proposed by the City Deal Executive, for the "removal of a large number of highway trees, with or without cycle lanes, with limited opportunities for replanting on the highway", and finally:

·        would Councillor Herbert agree that in future he will always tell the public the position that he takes on the key issues coming before the City Deal Executive, and also the evidence that underlies his future stances on these key issues, and

·        would Councillor Herbert also agree to meet and discuss the issues and the evidence with the public of Cambridge, before and after each of these critical meetings.

 

The Leader responded:

 

i.             There was the opportunity to hold him to account at Council meetings.

ii.            The meetings of the City Deal Assembly were open to the public and there was a meeting scheduled on the 2 June 2016.

iii.           There was a set of Officer proposals, which would be publicly consulted on. There would be a debate on the way the consultation was shaped.

iv.          The City Deal Board comprised 5 members and not 3.

v.           He had appeared several times in the Cambridge News detailing his opinions on City Deal issues.

 

Mr Hagard made the following supplementary point:

 

i.             He asked whether Councillor Herbert would commit to fight for all City Deal decisions to be brought urgently under a single democratic authority (for example under a Unitary Authority) which would be subject to full democratic scrutiny and engagement.

 

The Leader responded with the following:

 

i.             The governance arrangements for the City Deal were set up under the Liberal Democrat administration.

ii.             He could not stop majority decisions by the City Deal Board but could seek to persuade the other board members.

iii.             The City Deal was a partnership arrangement.

iv.             Comments made to the City Deal were genuinely taken into consideration.

1) Councillor O'Connell Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste

 

Does the Executive Councillor believe that the City Council is doing enough to tackle air pollution in the city and the effect it has on public health?

 

The City Council had a good record of review and assessment of air quality in Cambridge and of delivering actions to improve air quality based on the evidence gathered.

 

There had been a recognised air quality problem in the city formalised by the declaration of an Air Quality Management Area Plan in 2004.  Air quality was known to be an issue in the city centre, in particular the area around the Bus Station and at busy junctions on the inner ring road where EU Limit Values for Nitrogen Dioxide were regularly exceeded. The largest locally derived impact was from road traffic emissions.

 

Whilst significant progress has been made to reduce emissions in Cambridge a combination of challenges persisted these included: population growth which increased demand for transport and the historic streets in the city centre were constraining factors.

 

The City Council had a statutory duty to monitor, review and assess key pollutant levels through Local Air Quality Management Regulations.

 

2) Councillor Nethsingha to the Leader

 

Please could the leader tell me whether he will be supporting any new "devolution" deal which includes a directly elected mayor for the Cambridgeshire/Peterborough area?

 

The Leader advised that he would share with the political parties the best deal that Cambridge was able to get.  There were some good things which formed part of the deal however only elected Mayors were going to be able to get control on business rates and bus franchises. He confirmed that there would be a report back to Council regarding devolution.

 

3) Councillor T. Moore to the Executive Councillor for Communities

 

Last week was international Mental Health Week, and in the UK Mental Health Awareness Week. Our Council funds a variety of valuable services which can help those with Mental Health issues, and their families, in the community. What services are being provided to assist this group of residents?

 

The Executive Councillor for Communities advised that the Mental Health Awareness Week was the previous week and that this was an important issue for the City. The Council had various policies and strategies to support residents which included: the Anti-Poverty Strategy, Single Equalities Scheme, the Corporate Strategy, the Homelessness Prevention Grant, Independent Living Service and training sessions which supported people to access Council services. The Council was also a signatory to the Mental Health Crisis Concordat.

 

4) Councillor Bick to the Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places

 

Based on the feedback that has been received and the physical aftermath, what specific instructions has she issued or will she be issuing to the North Pole Experience about the running of ice rink on Parker's Piece over next Christmas?

 

The Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places advised that the ice-rink had over 80,000 visitors. Officers had met with Ice Box Limited who operated the Ice Rink to debrief the event and give the Council’s feedback from comments and complaints which had been received in 2015/2016. Ice Box Limited had considered this feedback. Proposed changes to the event would go to the West Central Area committee in early to mid-July. There was a contract in place with Ice Box Limited but it was hoped that changes could be made to the contract. Health and Safety considerations would also need to be taken into consideration. 

 

5) Councillor Pippas to the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport

 

Does the executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport believe it is a good idea to implement a 20 mile per hour speed limit throughout the city of Cambridge?

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport advised that the Council was fully committed to the introduction of 20mph controls across the majority of streets in Cambridge. 

 

6) Councillor Nethsingha to the Leader

 

Is he aware of the serious public concern about the changes to street lighting proposed in Burrell's Walk?

 

The Leader was aware of the serious public concern over the County Council’s street lighting proposals.

 

There had been a close dialogue with the Open Spaces Team regarding the street lights which had led to the use of DW Windsor heritage style Class One columns.  These street lights would be fitted with the iconic Cambridge brackets. There would be 9 street lights compared to the 18 street lights before. The Open Spaces Team would ensure that the trees were trimmed as this was a heavily used pedestrian and cycle route.  

 

 

 

 

CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL AND THE UK MEMBERSHIP OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

 

Cambridge is an international city, with two EU twin cities.  It residents include individuals from all parts of the European Union.

Cambridge’s economy, in particular its universities together with its educational, science, medical and technology sectors benefits enormously from EU funding.  For example Cambridge University receives approximately £65m in EU funding per year and gains from participating in key European Union research projects.  This economic activity benefits everyone in Cambridge generating jobs, income from taxation, a lively retail offer and entertainment scene.

 

In addition the Cambridge area benefits from European companies such as Siemens that have chosen to be located in the greater Cambridge area and from the large number of EU tourists.

 

Workers in Cambridge are better off as a result of the EU employment directives on equal opportunities, holidays, pensions, working hours, health and safety, and protection from discrimination.

 

The EU has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on the environment.  This is particularly important for Cambridge, with its range of fragile environmental resources as it faces the impact of expansion. The range of policies and targets that this involves demonstrate how properly-targeted EU regulation is a force for good.

 

This Council believes that EU reform should make the EU better for the UK and that means remaining a member to lead that reform, not being a spectator on the side lines.

 

Cambridge City Council believes that it is in the best interests of residents, businesses and the whole of the city of Cambridge for the UK to remain a member of the European Union. It urges those electors eligible to vote to back the 'REMAIN' vote at the forthcoming EU referendum and asks the leader of the council to write to the city's MPs and MEPs setting out the council's views.

 

Councillor Cantrill proposed and Councillor Bick seconded the following motion:

 

Cambridge is an international city, with two EU twin cities. Its residents include individuals from all parts of the European Union.

Cambridge’s economy, in particular its universities together with its educational, science, medical and technology sectors benefit enormously from EU funding. For example Cambridge University receives approximately £65m in EU funding per year and gains from participating in key European Union research projects. This economic activity benefits everyone in Cambridge generating jobs, income from taxation, a lively retail offer and entertainment scene.

 

In addition the Cambridge area benefits from European companies such as Siemens that have chosen to be located in the greater Cambridge area and from the large number of EU tourists.

 

Workers in Cambridge are better off as a result of the EU employment directives on equal opportunities, holidays, pensions, working hours, health and safety, and protection from discrimination.

 

The EU has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on the environment. This is particularly important for Cambridge, with its range of fragile environmental resources as it faces the impact of expansion. The range of policies and targets that this involves demonstrate how properly-targeted EU regulation is a force for good.

 

This Council believes that EU reform should make the EU better for the UK and that means remaining a member to lead that reform, not being a spectator on the side lines.

 

Cambridge City Council believes that it is in the best interests of residents, businesses and the whole of the city of Cambridge for the UK to remain a member of the European Union. It urges those electors eligible to vote to back the 'REMAIN' vote at the forthcoming EU referendum and asks the leader of the council to write to the city's MPs and MEPs setting out the council's views.

 

Resolved (By 29 votes to 11 votes):

 

Cambridge is an international city, with two EU twin cities. Its residents include individuals from all parts of the European Union.

Cambridge’s economy, in particular its universities together with its educational, science, medical and technology sectors benefit enormously from EU funding. For example Cambridge University receives approximately £65m in EU funding per year and gains from participating in key European Union research projects. This economic activity benefits everyone in Cambridge generating jobs, income from taxation, a lively retail offer and entertainment scene.

 

In addition the Cambridge area benefits from European companies such as Siemens that have chosen to be located in the greater Cambridge area and from the large number of EU tourists.

 

Workers in Cambridge are better off as a result of the EU employment directives on equal opportunities, holidays, pensions, working hours, health and safety, and protection from discrimination.

 

The EU has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on the environment. This is particularly important for Cambridge, with its range of fragile environmental resources as it faces the impact of expansion. The range of policies and targets that this involves demonstrate how properly-targeted EU regulation is a force for good.

 

This Council believes that EU reform should make the EU better for the UK and that means remaining a member to lead that reform, not being a spectator on the side lines.

 

Cambridge City Council believes that it is in the best interests of residents, businesses and the whole of the city of Cambridge for the UK to remain a member of the European Union. It urges those electors eligible to vote to back the 'REMAIN' vote at the forthcoming EU referendum and asks the leader of the council to write to the city's MPs and MEPs setting out the council's views.

 

 

Council requests its officers to work with county council officers to define options for co-investment in the conversion of Cambridge's street lamps to energy-saving LED, with a view to eliminating the city council's current open-ended subsidy and to take a lead in mitigating climate change; bringing a report to the October meeting of the Strategy & Resources Scrutiny Committee. 

 

Councillor Nethsingha proposed and Councillor Bick seconded the following motion:

 

Council requests its officers to work with county council officers to define options for co-investment in the conversion of Cambridge's street lamps to energy-saving LED, with a view to eliminating the city council's current open-ended subsidy and to take a lead in mitigating climate change; bringing a report to the October meeting of the Strategy & Resources Scrutiny Committee.

 

Councillor Herbert proposed and Councillor Robertson seconded the following amendment to the motion (deleted text struck through and additional wording underlined).

 

Council requests its officers to work with county council officers to define options for co-investment in the conversion of Cambridge's street lamps to energy-saving LED, with a view to eliminating the city council's current open-ended subsidy and to take a lead in mitigating climate change; bringing a report to the October meeting of the Strategy & Resources Scrutiny Committee to continue to support the County Council in their investigation of the viability of energy-saving LED lighting for street lights the City Council is contributing to, and the city’s potential contribution, as well as making further LED investments on our own property and land, and considering wider renewable energy investment.

 

Council notes that

 

a) the County Council PFI contract agreed several years ago was based on installing conventional non-LED low energy lighting,  

 

b) in a written response to the City Council from the County Council ahead of 2016 budget decisions, the County Council advised that the current replacement of lights part-funded by the city with LED had been assessed as non-viable given the terms of the PFI contract and pre-agreed installation programme, and the County Council ten year payback criteria,

 

c) the City Council will continue to review this, including ahead of our three year agreement to part fund overnight street lighting being reviewed before 2019.

 

Council asks the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources, who leads also on climate change and energy-saving investments, to

 

a) meet with the relevant County Council Chair and county officers, and then circulate an update to all Councillors and, should (b) above have changed, consider appropriate action,

 

b) review this issue and wider opportunities from increased City Council use of LED as part of 2017 budget preparation.

 

Council also asks its members who are also Cambridge County Councillors to take the direct route and raise LED issues at Shire Hall, as key decisions and County Council proposals for new LED lighting including active plans for main highways are decided there.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 29 votes to 12.

 

It was resolved (unanimously) that:

 

Council requests its officers to continue to support the County Council in their investigation of the viability of energy-saving LED lighting for street lights the City Council is contributing to, and the city’s potential contribution, as well as making further LED investments on our own property and land, and considering wider renewable energy investment.

 

Council notes that

 

a) the County Council PFI contract agreed several years ago was based on installing conventional non-LED low energy lighting,  

 

b) in a written response to the City Council from the County Council ahead of 2016 budget decisions, the County Council advised that the current replacement of lights part-funded by the city with LED had been assessed as non-viable given the terms of the PFI contract and pre-agreed installation programme, and the County Council ten year payback criteria,

 

c) the City Council will continue to review this, including ahead of our three year agreement to part fund overnight street lighting being reviewed before 2019.

 

Council asks the Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources, who leads also on climate change and energy-saving investments, to

 

a) meet with the relevant County Council Chair and county officers, and then circulate an update to all Councillors and, should (b) above have changed, consider appropriate action,

 

b) review this issue and wider opportunities from increased City Council use of LED as part of 2017 budget preparation.

 

Council also asks its members who are also Cambridge County Councillors to take the direct route and raise LED issues at Shire Hall, as key decisions and County Council proposals for new LED lighting including active plans for main highways are decided there.

 

 

Members noted the written questions and answers that had been included within the Information Pack.

 

Part 4C section 6.1 of the Councils Constitution provides that individual members of the Executive ‘may take a decision which is contrary or not wholly in accordance with the budget approved by the full Council if the decision is a matter of urgency’.  The decision is reported to Council for information purposes only.

 

The urgent decision was noted.