(a) Scrutiny Committee – 12 June 2008
At its meeting the Scrutiny Committee considered report number 12/08, Corporate Governance Report which had been presented to the Executive on 6 June 2008. The Scrutiny Committee made the following recommendation to the Executive, (minute SC.9 refers):
Recommendation
that BVPI 8 [invoices paid on time] be retained as a Local Performance Indicator for financial services.
(b) Council - 16 July 2008
At the meeting of the Council the following motion was referred to the Executive for consideration and determination:
“This Council recognises the work of local residents and councillors to find solutions to issues surrounding a footpath running through The Westfield and Willows Park and agrees to refer this matter to the Vale's Executive to consider what action this Council can take to address the concerns raised.”
Councillors James McGee and Bill Melotti have been invited to the meeting as proposer and seconder of the motion respectively.
Minutes:
(a) Scrutiny Committee – 12 June 2008
(Time: 2.34pm to 2.35pm)
At its meeting on 12 June 2008, the Scrutiny Committee considered the Corporate Governance Report for the fourth quarter of 2007/08. This had been presented to the Executive on 6 June 2008. The Scrutiny Committee had recommended to the Executive that BVPI 8, relating to invoices paid on time, should be retained as a Local Performance Indicator for financial services.
The Executive concurred with the Scrutiny Committee, believing that it was important to continue to monitor this.
RESOLVED
that BVPI 8, relating to invoices paid on time, be retained as a Local Performance Indicator for financial services.
(b) Council - 16 July 2008
(Time: 2.35pm to 2.47pm)
At the meeting of the Council held on 16 July 2008, the following motion was referred to the Executive for consideration and determination:
“This Council recognises the work of local residents and councillors to find solutions to issues surrounding a footpath running through The Westfield and Willows Park and agrees to refer this matter to the Vale's Executive to consider what action this Council can take to address the concerns raised.”
Councillors James McGee and Bill Melotti had been invited to the meeting as proposer and seconder of the motion respectively.
Councillor McGee had apologised for his absence but had submitted a written statement to the Executive; this was read out at the meeting. Grove accommodated a retirement mobile home park called Westfield and Willows. A petition and several letters had been submitted by the owners regarding anti-social behaviour and to ask for help. It was stated the problem was with a public footpath which ran through the park, providing a short cut. However, people returning from the pubs at night and other anti-social behaviour had resulted in a number of problems for local residents, including vandalism, theft and intimidation.
Problems persisted and were increasing in both the number and severity of crimes. Councillor McGee had attended the local Neighbourhood Action Group, run by selected persons and the police as a liason group to discuss options on how the issues could be dealt with. It was concluded that the site was in need of change and diverting the pathway would be the only logical answer. The pathway could be diverted less than 50 yards to the right to connect to the playing fields. The Parish Council was content with this suggestion and was itself looking to fund a surfaced pathway to complete the work on its recreation Park. Councillor McGee had met on site with two officers from the County Council. The County’s Officers believed that the diversion would work, yet due to the legal implications of such a task, it could take around five years to complete.
As far as funding was concerned, the Trust for the Oxfordshire Environment could fund up to £10,000 towards the project and the park owners would pay up to £8,000 to seal the park off. This would leave the County Council with only legal fees of £2000 to £3000 to contend with. The biggest issue was the waiting list. However, with the Vale's support, this could be considerably reduced. There were no other reasonable options. The park owners could only do so much before its residents were ‘imprisoned’ between fences and CCTV. Councillor McGee was trying to speed up the process to help achieve peace for these elderly people. He sought the Executive’s support.
Councillor Melotti also apologised for being unable to attend the Executive’s meeting but submitted a written statement to the Executive. This was read out at the meeting. He understood that Councillor McGee had been working on the problems of anti-social behaviour now for some time at the Willows Park in Grove. As part of those discussions the idea was put forward that the footpath, currently going through the estate, should be diverted around the estate. This would not create inconvenience for footpath users but would relieve the park of the pedestrian traffic which brought a small element of criminal and anti-social behaviour which was intimidating for local residents. He believed that the end of the path exiting onto Cane Lane had steps and was inaccessible for wheelchair and pushchair users.
Councillor Melotti recognised that the proposal to move the path could take years to implement but the Council’s support for it could reduce that time. He understood that the proposal was also supported by the Parish Council. As well as negotiating with the various bodies for agreement, Councillor McGee had also identified some sources of funding, thus reducing the burden on local taxpayers of this change.
Essentially Councillor Melotti:
· supported Councillor McGee in proposing this measure.
· was sure the Executive would have its own ideas about how to deal with this, and for this reason he was happy to allow the motion related to this proposal to come to Executive for consideration
· he urged the Executive to support this proposal in addition to any ideas it might have of its own. He believed that multiple tracks of activity on this were needed. Trying one thing and then another before looking at pathway diversion as the last option, could leave residents living with this problem for years.
Local Member Councillor Zoë Patrick attended the meeting to speak to this motion. She believed that access should be retained by a new footpath to help wheelchair and pushchair users and that the nuisance caused to local residents should be removed. She understood that a ‘no cycling’ sign was to be installed as an immediate measure. The ownership of the footpath was complicated but with this Council’s help she believed that a solution could be found sooner than the County Officers’ estimated timescale. She urged the Council to write to the County Council to ask for quick action in this case.
The Executive considered that the proposals worked up by local Members were sensible but believed that the process should start with an approach by the Leader of this Council to Oxfordshire County Council’s Leader and a similar approach should be made by Chief Executive to his County Council counterpart. Moving the footpath appeared to be the sensible solution, at the same time as improving its accessibility.
However, the Executive urged Members in future to first pursue anti-social behaviour issues through the Council’s Community Safety Officers. These officers would also be consulted for advice on this case.
RESOLVED
that approaches be made by the Council’s Leader and Chief Executive to their County Council counterparts to ask for urgent action to move the footpath near Westfield and The Willows in Grove to alleviate anti-social behaviour problems experienced by local residents.