Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies.

To note any declarations of interest made by members in connection with an agenda item. The nature of the interest must also be specified.

Members are asked to discuss any possible interests with Democratic Services prior to the meeting.

Cllr M Wade declared, for transparency purposes, a non-pecuniary interest in Item 3, Call-In Request – Shared Prosperity Funding, Town Centre Improvements, as a member of Hythe and Dibden Parish Council who are a beneficiary of the fund in question, he concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

To receive any public participation in accordance with the Council’s public participation scheme.

There was no public participation.

Following the request from Cllrs B Dunning, J Davies and C McCarthy to call-in the Shared Prosperity Funding, Town Centre Improvements Portfolio Holder decision, which confirmed the process for allocating and progressing Shared Prosperity Fund funding which has been identified to support town centre improvements in the District, it is for the Panel to consider the issues being raised by Cllrs Dunning, Davies and McCarthy as set out in paragraph 2.2 of the report.

Please note: In accordance with the Council’s procedures, as more than two Members requested that the decision be called in, the decision has not been implemented and will not be implemented until the procedures in paragraphs 4.2 and 5.2 in the Council’s Call in Procedure for Executive Decisions have been completed. The matter has been referred to this Panel for consideration. Cllrs Dunning, Davies and McCarthy have been invited to attend.

The Chairman explained the Call-In procedure and the reasons for the special meeting of the Panel.

The Democratic Services Officer explained the three options, as per the Council’s Call in Procedure for Executive Decisions, to the Panel and displayed a presentation slide with these options throughout the meeting. The options available to the Panel were:

a)    Accept the decision (in which case it may be implemented immediately); or

b)    Request the decision-maker to reconsider the decision, giving reasons for the request. The decision-maker shall reconsider the decision as soon as reasonably practicable, (which in the case of a Cabinet decision shall normally be interpreted as at its next meeting). After reconsideration the decision, whether amended or not, may be implemented immediately, and may not be called in for a second time under the procedures in this Chapter; or

c)     Where the decision is of particular high local significance or public interest, refer the decision to full Council for debate at a Council meeting to be held within ten working days of the Panel meeting. If necessary to meet this timescale, a special Council meeting shall be held. The Monitoring Officer shall be responsible for arranging this. The decisionmaker shall reconsider the decision as soon as reasonably practicable after the Council meeting (which in the case of a Cabinet decision shall normally be interpreted as at its next meeting), in the light of the Council debate.

Cllrs Dunning, J Davies and McCarthy, who submitted the call-in requests, were invited to speak. The main points stated by the Cllrs were:

·       There were 27 empty shops and charity outlets in Lymington High Street.

·       The recently installed parking metres discouraged people from visiting the High Street.

·       Covid had negatively impacted the High Street and local businesses.

·       It was understandable that Totton should receive a share of the funding.

·       Lymington’s public toilets were in need of refurbishment and improvement.

·       Pennington square, like Lymington High Street, required funding to mitigate the negative impact of Covid.

·       It was understood that the criteria set for the funding meant that tourist destinations were ineligible.

·       Lymington hosts many public events which adds pressure to the town’s infrastructure.

·       Pennington sits within the lowest 30% of the most deprived areas in the country.

·       £8800 was marked as the administrative costs for the funding programme. It was suggested that this money should be used on projects in Lymington.

·       The pavements and roads across Lymington and Pennington needed repairing.

The Assistant Director of Place Development presented the covering report and provided a summary of how the Executive Decision on the Shared Prosperity Funding, Town Centre Improvements was reached. The main points were:

·       The decision itself related to the town centre improvement project, which was one part of the Council’s UK Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) submission. This was agreed by Cabinet at their meeting in July 2022.

·       NFDC had received an allocation of £1m and had submitted a Local Investment Plan to government by August  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.