Issue - meetings

To consider whether to accept the County Council’s proposals for agency agreements with respect to on-street parking enforcement and traffic management.

RESOLVED:

That the Executive Head of Operations write formally to the County Council to reject the current proposed terms for the agency agreements for On-Street Parking Enforcement and Traffic Management on the grounds that the District Council is not prepared to take the financial risks identified on a function that it does not have a statutory duty to provide.

Cllrs E J Heron and White disclosed interests on the grounds that they were both County Councillors, and the agency agreements were with the County Council.  They each had a dispensation to speak and, in the case of Cllr E J Heron, to vote.  Cllr White did not have a vote.

The Cabinet was advised that the County Council had reviewed the operation of their on-street parking arrangements as part of their programme to achieve savings and, following discussions with officers in the Borough and District Councils in Hampshire, were proposing revised terms for the operation of the on-street parking enforcement agency with effect from 31 March 2020.  In addition, in future, the Council would only be able to operate a traffic management agency if they also undertook the on-street parking function.

Members were advised of the current arrangements and also the proposed terms of the new agency agreements, as set out in Section 2 of Report Item 4 to the Cabinet.   Members considered that the proposed terms would place an undue level of risk on this Council arising from factors that would be outside this Council’s control.  Members were also concerned about the effect of the County Council’s proposals on the cost and viability of small scale residents’ parking schemes, such as those operating in this District.  The proposed arrangements were disappointing in the light of the success of the current arrangements, which had operated since 2002.

Members were advised that the 1.6 FTE staff allocated to the traffic management function would be entitled to TUPE transfer to the County Council should this Council cease to operate the agency.  It was however anticipated that the 5.3 FTE reduction in the number of staff needed for parking enforcement would not be covered by TUPE and this Council would have to pay any costs associated with redundancy.

RESOLVED:

That the Executive Head of Operations write formally to the County Council to reject the current proposed terms for the agency agreements for On-Street Parking Enforcement and Traffic Management on the grounds that the District Council is not prepared to take the financial risks identified on a function that it does not have a statutory duty to provide.