Agenda and minutes

The Lord Mayor welcomed all attendees to the meeting, and made a safety announcement in relation to the fire/emergency evacuation procedure.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Abraham, Brain, Campion-Smith, Clarke, Eddy, Goggin, Kent, Langley, Massey, and Windows.

To agree the minutes of the previous Full Council meeting held on 19 July 2016 as a correct record.

On the motion of the Lord Mayor, seconded by Councillor Weston, it was

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Full Council held on 19 July 2016 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Lord Mayor.

To note any declarations of interest from the Mayor and councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declaration of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

Councillor Smith declared an interest in relation to agenda item 10 (Appointment of Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer).  It was noted that he would not participate in or vote on this item of business.

To receive and note any announcements from the Lord Mayor.

None.

Please note:

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Public forum items should be e-mailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk

Public forum items can be about any matter the Council is responsible for or which affects the city.

Please note that the following deadlines apply to this meeting:

a. Public petitions and statements: Petitions and written statements must be received by 12 noon on Monday 12 September 2016 at latest.  One written statement per member of the public is permitted.

b. Public questions: Public questions must be received by 5.00 pm on Wednesday 7 September 2016 at latest.  A maximum of 2 questions per member of the public is permitted.

Public petitions:

None received.

Public statements:

The Full Council received and noted the following statements (which were also referred to the Mayor for his consideration/information):

Statement PS 01 - Review of parking around Gloucestershire County Cricket ground - submitted by Dr SionHannuna

Statement PS 02 - West of England devolution and transport issues - submitted by David Redgewell, Martin Cinamond, Nigel Bray, Jenny Raggett  and John Hassell

Statement PS 03 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Claire Liddell

Statement PS 04 - Bedminster Green - submitted by Sarah Watkins

Statement PS 05 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Jane Hewer

Statement PS 06 - Residents parking zones - submitted by Brian Inglis

Statement PS 07 - Southville residents parking scheme – parking bays in Coronation Road  - submitted by Mark and Pearl Reed

Statement PS 08 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Rita Youseph

Statement PS 09 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by David and Helena Branfield

Statement PS 10 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by C J Evans

Statement PS 11 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Stephen Hall

Statement PS 12 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Jim Plumley

Statement PS 13 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Michael Warren

Statement PS 14 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by John Button

Statement PS 15 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Norman Jennings 

Statement PS 16 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Mr and Mrs P Prytherch

Statement PS 17 - no. 51 bus service - submitted by Josephine Fisher

Statement PS 18 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Sue Rosewarne

Statement PS 19 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Mr and Mrs J Carnell

Statement PS 20 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Tracey Martin

Statement PS 21 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Naomi Jones

Statement PS 22 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Margaret Brown

Statement PS 23 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Shirley Webster

Statement PS 24 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Dani Lott

Statement PS 25 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Katrina Coulton

Statement PS 26 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by John Condon

Statement PS 27 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Ross Whittard

Statement PS 28 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Beth Tarleton

Statement PS 29 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Joanne Mullins

Statement PS 30 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Jan and Antony Willson

Statement PS 31 - Hengrove Park development - Submitted by Alana Wilson and Martin Ford

Statement PS 32 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Linda Sparks

Statement PS 33 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Richard Davies

Statement PS 34 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Kenneth Pitchers

Statement PS 35 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Phil Tonkin

Statement PS 36 - Hengrove Park development - submitted by Terence  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Please note:

Up to 10 minutes is allowed for this item.

Petitions notified by councillors can be about any matter the Council is

responsible for or which directly affects the city.

The deadline for the notification of petitions to this meeting is 12.00

noon on Monday 12 September 2016 at latest.

The Full Council received and noted the following petition:

Petition CP 01 – “Petition requesting highways department to address safety issues on Church Road and Julian Road in Sneyd Park”

Petition presented by Councillor Goulandris

Petition organiser: Alderman Brenda Hugill

To debate a petition that has reached the 3,500 signature threshold to

qualify for a Full Council debate.

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director - Legal and Democratic Services setting out details of a petition entitled “Save the 51 bus.”  The petition had reached the threshold (3,500 signatures from people who live, work or study in Bristol) for a Full Council debate.

Councillor Clough, one of the petition organisers, was invited by the Lord Mayor to present the objectives of the petition.

The Full Council then debated the petition.

Following the debate, it was:

RESOLVED:

That the petition be noted and referred to the Mayor for consideration and response.

ADJOURNMENT – At this point the Lord Mayor advised that the Full Council meeting would adjourn for a 20 minute refreshment break.

To consider the appointment of the authority’s Head of Paid Service and Statutory Scrutiny Officer.

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director – Legal and Democratic Services recommending the appointment of the authority’s Head of Paid Service and Statutory Scrutiny Officer.

The Lord Mayor moved the report and the recommendations set out therein.

Councillor Davies, Deputy Lord Mayor, seconded the report.

Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED:

1. That Stephen Hughes, Interim Chief Executive be appointed as the authority’s Head of Paid Service, as an interim appointment to ensure legislative requirements are met.

2. That Anna Klonowski, Interim Strategic Director - Business Change be appointed as the authority’s Statutory Scrutiny Officer, as an interim appointment to ensure legislative requirements are met.

To consider the appointment of the authority’s Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director – Legal and Democratic Services recommending the appointment of the authority’s Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

Note: having declared an interest in relation to this item of business (see item 4 above), Councillor Smith did not participate in or vote on this item of business.

The Lord Mayor moved the report and the recommendations set out therein.

Councillor Davies, Deputy Lord Mayor, seconded the report.

Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED:

1. That Stephen Hughes, Interim Chief Executive be appointed as the Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer for Bristol City Council, as an interim appointment to ensure legislative requirements are met.

2. That Yvonne Dawes be re-confirmed as Deputy Electoral Registration Officer.

3. That other deputy appointments are revoked and the appointments reviewed by the Returning Officer once confirmed in post.

To note and approve changes to the membership of the authority’s Licensing Committee.

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director – Legal and Democratic Services recommending that Council note the resignation of Councillor Hance from the Licensing Committee and approve the appointment of Councillor Combley to the committee.

The Lord Mayor moved the report and the recommendations set out therein.

Councillor Davies, Deputy Lord Mayor, seconded the report.

Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED:

That the resignation of Councillor Hance from the Licensing Committee be noted and that the appointment of Councillor Combley to the Licensing Committee be approved.

To report, for Full Council’s information, an exception to the call-in procedure (decision taken at Cabinet on 29 June 2016 in relation to the Combined Authority and Devolution proposals).

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director – Legal and Democratic Services advising Council (as required under the Council’s constitution) that an exception to the call-in procedure had been made in respect of the following decision taken by the Mayor at Cabinet:

- Cabinet decision – 29 June 2016 – Combined authority and devolution proposals

The Lord Mayor moved the report.

Councillor Davies, Deputy Lord Mayor, seconded the report.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To note the Council’s endorsement of ACORN’s ethical lettings charter.

The Full Council considered a report of the Service Director – Housing Solutions and Crime Reduction recommending that Council note that in line with arrangements made at the Cabinet meeting of 6 October 2015, ACORNS’s Ethical Lettings Charter has been formally endorsed by the Service Director – Housing Solutions and Crime Reduction on behalf of the Council.

Councillor Smith moved the report.

Councillor Shah seconded the report.

Following debate, it was

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To consider motions as follows:

1. Bristol Arena traffic plan

“This Council confirms its continuing support for the Bristol Arena and looks forward to it being delivered on time and within budget.  Nevertheless, there is still considerable concern over the potential impact of this 12,000 capacity entertainment venue.  Without appropriate mitigation measures in place, the opening of this site could have a devastating effect on the quality of life of local people.

Therefore, Council calls on the Mayor to instigate a review of the Traffic Management and Transport Plans, making particular reference to parking provision for those who will still choose to travel there by car. In addition, attention needs to be given to ensure there will be adequate Bus and Taxi services for the anticipated large audiences, many of whom are likely to be young - and excitable.  The safety of such vulnerable patrons must be made a priority consideration.

This evaluation should also take into account the redevelopment at Ashton Gate. Council believes that the options surrounding rail and a new station servicing both the stadium and the Arena need to be fully explored to ensure this is in the public transport mix or offer.

These two welcome major leisure destinations are extremely important to our city.  However, such attractions must be carefully integrated so that they are a benefit to all and not a burden to those who happen to live or work in their immediate vicinity.”

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Mark Weston

2. Opposing forced academisation

“Bristol City Council notes that, despite significant opposition from professionals across the political spectrum to the proposals in the White Paper, Educational Excellence Everywhere, (March 2016), the Government has reiterated that it wants all schools to become academies within multi-academy trusts (MATs) by 2022. This Council further notes the Government plan to force schools to become academies if they are considered to be  ‘under-performing’ or even, in some cases, just ‘coasting.’ 

Bristol City Council notes with concern that if the Government deem that a local authority can ‘no longer viably support its remaining schools because a critical mass of schools in that area has converted’ this will trigger conversion of all its schools.

As a Council we note Cllr. Roy Perry, Conservative Chair of the LGA opposition to forced academisation and welcome his view that ‘schools should have the choice to stay with their own Council’.

As a Council we recognise forcedacademisation will not only take away the LA’s ability to plan strategically and carry on supporting our schools in their successful journey of improvement, but will also remove the power from those who have the best knowledge of the school (the Head, staff and parents/carers) to determine how they want to be governed.

We believe that these plans:

·           Are not a good use of scarce resources.  The NUT estimates the cost of forced academisation to the taxpayer as high as £1.3 billion, at a time when funding per pupil in real terms is  ...  view the full agenda text for item 44.

a. Motion 1 – Bristol Arena traffic plan

Councillor Weston moved the following motion:

“This Council confirms its continuing support for the Bristol Arena and looks forward to it being delivered on time and within budget.  Nevertheless, there is still considerable concern over the potential impact of this 12,000 capacity entertainment venue.  Without appropriate mitigation measures in place, the opening of this site could have a devastating effect on the quality of life of local people.

Therefore, Council calls on the Mayor to instigate a review of the Traffic Management and Transport Plans, making particular reference to parking provision for those who will still choose to travel there by car. In addition, attention needs to be given to ensure there will be adequate Bus and Taxi services for the anticipated large audiences, many of whom are likely to be young - and excitable.  The safety of such vulnerable patrons must be made a priority consideration.

This evaluation should also take into account the redevelopment at Ashton Gate. Council believes that the options surrounding rail and a new station servicing both the stadium and the Arena need to be fully explored to ensure this is in the public transport mix or offer.

These two welcome major leisure destinations are extremely important to our city.  However, such attractions must be carefully integrated so that they are a benefit to all and not a burden to those who happen to live or work in their immediate vicinity.”

Councillor Goulandris seconded the motion.

Following debate, upon being put to the vote, motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED:

This Council confirms its continuing support for the Bristol Arena and looks forward to it being delivered on time and within budget.  Nevertheless, there is still considerable concern over the potential impact of this 12,000 capacity entertainment venue.  Without appropriate mitigation measures in place, the opening of this site could have a devastating effect on the quality of life of local people.

Therefore, Council calls on the Mayor to instigate a review of the Traffic Management and Transport Plans, making particular reference to parking provision for those who will still choose to travel there by car. In addition, attention needs to be given to ensure there will be adequate Bus and Taxi services for the anticipated large audiences, many of whom are likely to be young - and excitable.  The safety of such vulnerable patrons must be made a priority consideration.

This evaluation should also take into account the redevelopment at Ashton Gate. Council believes that the options surrounding rail and a new station servicing both the stadium and the Arena need to be fully explored to ensure this is in the public transport mix or offer.

These two welcome major leisure destinations are extremely important to our city.  However, such attractions must be carefully integrated so that they are a benefit to all and not a burden to those who happen to live or work in their immediate vicinity.

b. Motion 2 – Opposing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.