Venue: Civic Hall, Leeds, LS1 1UR. View directions
Contact: Guy Close (0113) 39 50878 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Appeals Against Refusal of Inspection of Documents
To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 25* of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded).
(* In accordance with Procedure Rule 25, notice of an appeal must be received in writing by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting).
There were no appeals against the refusal of inspection of documents.
Exempt Information - Possible Exclusion of the Press and Public
1 To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.
2 To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.
3 If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-
RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:
No exempt items have been identified on this agenda.
There were no resolutions to exclude the public.
To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.
(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes.)
There were no late items submitted to the agenda. However three pieces of supplementary information had been circulated in relation to Agenda Item 8 ‘Call In – Kirkgate Market Strategy’. The Supplementary Information was as follows:
(a) Evidence submitted to Sustainable Economy and Culture Scrutiny Board regarding the Kirkgate Market Call In. 3rd April 2013;
(b) Kirkgate Market Investment Case; and
(c) Kirkgate Market Management Options Appraisal.
(Minute No. 128 refers).
Declaration of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests
To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.
There were no Disclosable Pecuniary Interests declared to the meeting, however:-
In relation to the item entitled, ‘Call In – Kirkgate Market Strategy’, Councillor Lamb drew the Board’s attention the fact that his business purchases produce from Kirkgate Market.
Apologies for Absence and Notification of Substitutes
To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutes.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M Lyons, R Harington and J Marjoram.
Also, in attendance was: Councillor C McNiven (as substitute for Councillor M Lyons); Councillor N Walshaw (as substitute for Councillor R Harington); and Councillor A Lamb (as substitute for Councillor J Marjoram).
To consider the report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development advising the Scrutiny Board on the procedural aspects of Calling In the decision.
The Principal Scrutiny Officer informed Members of the Call In arrangements in accordance with the Council’s Constitution and the options of action available to the Board. It was reported that the following options were available to the Board:
To consider the report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development presenting the background papers to a decision which has been Called In in accordance with the Council’s Constitution regarding Kirkgate Market Strategy.
The report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development presented the background papers to a decision which had been Called In in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. The decision was an Executive Board decision regarding the Kirkgate Market Strategy.
The Chair welcomed the following to the meeting:
Councillors J Procter and B Anderson presented their arguments for calling in the decision. These included the following:
· The lack of stakeholder engagement in the planned changes to the market, specifically that consultation with market traders had not been sufficient and decisions on traders futures had been taken without their input;
· The lack of detail presented in the Executive Board report, particularly with regards to rents, compensation decanting and future numbers of traders;
· The lack of trader involvement in the evaluation process of the management options;
· Whether the Executive Board minute adequately reflected Members’ wishes;
· Lack of detail in the Market Investment Case to underpin assumptions made;
· The failure of proposals to address the need for closer working between traders and management; and
· Concern over the effects of the changes to the market traders livelihoods.
Russell Stacher and Sarah Gonzalez outlined the importance of Kirkgate Market to Leeds and highlighted the value that can be achieved when shopping in the market. They questioned the viability of the market in terms of rents currently charged. They also considered that the loan of £12.3 million to fund changes to the market and the targets for its repayment were overly ambitious and suggested that this would require substantial rent increases which could cause hardship to traders. They questioned the methodology used in the Investment Case, and whether wider social and economic impacts had been properly considered.
Councillor R Lewis, Councillor G Harper and officers were invited to respond to the issues raised by Councillors Procter and Anderson and also to respond to questions raised by Members of the Scrutiny Board.
Specific discussion took place around the nature of the Executive Board report. It was stressed by Councillor Lewis and officers that the report presented to Executive Board set out a series of principles and that worked up options would need to go back to Executive Board at the appropriate time. This was the main reason for the lack of specific operational detail in a number of the areas raised by Councillors Procter and Anderson.
Other areas of discussion included:
Outcome of Call In
In accordance with Scrutiny Board Procedure Rules, to consider the Board’s formal conclusions and recommendation(s) arising from the consideration of the called-in decision.
Following a vote by Members present, it was:
(a) to release the decision for implementation; and
(b) To make the following recommendations:
(i) That the right to assign leases be maintained for all new lease holders;
(ii) That under whatever alternative Leeds City Council management model is adopted the urgent need to address the perceived negative and sometimes confrontational nature of the relationship between management and traders; and
(iii) The need to reassess consultation methods and opportunities as the principles identified in the Executive Board report are progressed with the objective of ensuring greater ‘buy in’ and involvement of traders.
Date and Time of Next Meeting
Tuesday, 9th April 2013 at 10.00am (Pre-meeting for all Board Members at 9.30am)
10.00am Tuesday 9th April 2013. (A pre-meeting for Members will take place at 09:30am).