Agenda and minutes

The Mayor was deeply saddened to report on the recent death of Allan Jackson, former Mayor and Councillor for Brinsworth and Catcliffe Ward.

As a mark of respect the meeting stood and observed a minute’s silence.

To consider any announcements by the Mayor in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 3(2)(ii).

The Mayor formally opened the meeting pointing out that the Civic Mace was currently under repair and permission had been kindly granted by the Feoffees of the Common Lands of Rotherham for their mace to be used in its place.

The Mayor was also pleased to announce that the Council had been awarded the highest honour by the Government for supporting the Armed Forces Community.  The Armed Forces Covenant Employer Recognition Scheme 2024 Gold Award. The Scheme encompassed bronze, silver and gold awards for employer organisations that pledged, demonstrated or advocated support to the armed forces community and aligned their values with the Armed Forces Covenant.

A full list of Mayoral engagements and activity since the last meeting were also appended to the Mayor’s letter.

To receive the apologies of any Member who is unable to attend the meeting.

Resolved:- That apologies for absence be received from Councillors Ball, C. Carter, Foster, Jackson, Knight, Pitchley and Stables.

To receive the record of proceedings of the ordinary meeting of the Council held on 17^th July, 2024, and to approve the accuracy thereof.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the previous Council Meeting held on 17^th July, 2024.

Resolved:- That the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 17th July, 2024, be approved for signature by the Mayor.

Mover:- Councillor Read                         Seconder:- Councillor Sheppard

To report on any petitions received by the Council received by the Council and receive statements in support of petitions in accordance with Petitions Scheme and Council Procedure Rule 13.

There were no petitions presented for consideration at this meeting.

To invite Councillors to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or personal interests they may have in any matter which is to be considered at this meeting, to confirm the nature of those interests and whether they intend to leave the meeting for the consideration of the item.

There were no declarations of interest made at this meeting.

To receive questions from members of the public who may wish to ask a general question of the Mayor, Cabinet Member or the Chairman of a Committee in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12.

Two public questions had been submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12:-

(1)  Mr. Ashraf claimed the minutes and documentation of Council meetings was not fully accurate with information missing. For example, Councillor Alam was also referred to as Councillor Allen repeatedly in the information of the 28^th February Council meeting. He asked how could the Council improve the accuracy of its minutes and official documentation without the need for help from the public?

Councillor Sheppard, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Social Inclusion and Neighbourhood Working, thanked the member of the public for highlighting his concerns and confirmed that the particular instance he referred to had been corrected.

Staff in Democratic Services strived for high standards in the production of minutes, however, they were a summary of discussions to record the decisions taken in the meeting, along with a sense of the discussion around that decision.  They were not a verbatim record or transcript of the meeting itself.  Meetings that were webcast, like Council, were available for a year before being archived so were available for anyone to listen and hear verbatim what was discussed at a meeting.

Naturally human error did occur and were corrected where this arose. The minutes were always submitted to the next meeting for consideration and approval as a true and correct record of the proceedings, and provided the opportunity for any queries or inaccuracies to be addressed. 

The minutes of other meetings, such as the Cabinet, Audit Committee, Planning Board and Licensing Board and Committee were amongst some which were submitted to Council again allowing for any discrepancies to be addressed.

In a supplementary question Mr. Ashraf thanked the named Councillors for their forbearance and liked to ask if officers of the Council could not tell the difference between Councillors Saghir Alam and Sarah Allen how would the public know the difference. For one person to make an error it was being human, but to make what he believed multiple errors in the same official document was a cause for concern.  All attending Councillors then signed off the minutes without noticing calling into question their inability or unwillingness to put their heads above the parapet and challenge some simple mistakes which he believed were indicative of a wider more systemic noble nodding problem and very promiscuous for democratic accountability.  Just as the Council’s Solicitor’s personal opinion was sometimes conflicted with the legal opinion and no one here seemed to be able to challenge it by asking for its legal basis or outside independent legal advice.

For example, the local Council had been able to successfully challenge the official interpretation of Section 17 of the Local Government Act 1988 in the courts, previously cited as the Leicester City Council ruling and the more recent Waltham Forest Council and Islington Council court judgments were, in reality, a flagrant contradiction of the legal opinion of the Council's solicitor.

In addition, while checking his spelling for the legal cases he wanted to cite this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Should it be necessary, in the opinion of the Mayor, to consider excluding the press and public from the meeting in relation to any items of urgent business on the grounds that private information is likely to be divulged.

There were no such items that required the exclusion of the press and public from this meeting.

To receive a statement from the Leader of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.

The Leader was invited to present his statement and in doing so was pleased to report since the last Council Meeting  Rotherham had seen the new Travelodge open which was the town’s first branded hotel and last week was the official opening of Arc Cinema! 

It was lovely to be joined by some of Rotherham’s fabulous foster carers and their children (including Ricky who may steal the show in this week’s press coverage).  At the end of the day this was what this work was all about; building a better borough for the next generation and creating a more family-friendly environment for Rotherham’s young people to grow up in.  Some members were also present to attend a special film screening last week and everyone enjoyed that well-earned opportunity.

Last week, it was also great to see the Tour of Britain cycle race go through Rotherham via Wentworth, Wath, Swinton and Maltby, and the Rotherham Show returned at the weekend and the sun was shining (on Saturday at least).

For those who came down after the rain had passed on Sunday it turned out to be a lovely afternoon.  The Leader thanked the team and all involved in making it possible.

Reference will be made later about the terrible violence that occurred in Manvers last month so this would not be dwelled upon at this point in the agenda, except to say that it was a matter of deep horror and regret that some of Rotherham’s residents (including a Swinton resident) perpetrated such inhumane acts, that their barbarity shamed them and their families.  The Leader hoped the tough action that the Government had taken subsequently served as a wakeup call to anyone tempted to get involved in such actions again in the future.

At the weekend people from all parts of the borough and all backgrounds came together at Rotherham Show and had a great day out.  This was who we were and that said more  about Rotherham than the mindless actions of a very small minority.

The Leader also wanted to note a couple of awards received recently.  The Council had been awarded the Armed Forces Covenant Employer Recognition Scheme 2024 Gold Award which recognised the Council’s support for the armed forces community and for its alignment with the values of the Armed Forces Covenant. He also paid tribute to Councillor Keenan for her steadfast resolution that this was an award Rotherham needed to achieve and the steps required for better support for veterans and their families.  The Council owed her a debt of gratitude for that.

Also, Rotherham Food Network had won an award for tackling food challenges that were faced by communities.  The network was a partnership made up of twenty-six organisations including the Council, VAR and Rotherfed.

The Leader wanted to close his speech by saying something about the Government’s proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework.

As Members may be aware the Government was out to consultation and Rotherham would be making a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

To note the minutes of the Cabinet Meeting held on 29 July 2024.

Consideration was given to the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 29^th July, 2024.

Resolved:- That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 29^th July, 2024, be received.

Mover:- Councillor Read                         Seconder:- Councillor Sheppard

To consider the recommendation from Cabinet regarding the Local Development Scheme.

Further to Minute No. 30 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 29^th July, 2024, consideration was given to the report which set out the project plan for the preparation, adoption and review of Rotherham Local Plan documents. The report, therefore, outlined a revised Local Development Scheme to amend the timetable for the partial update of the Local Plan Core Strategy and included the preparation of a South Yorkshire Joint Waste Plan.

A full scale review of the Local Plan was not recommended as it was a huge commitment and very time consuming.  The day after the Cabinet meeting the Government announced its revised housing delivery expectations.  At this stage until the consultation was complete it was only possible to speculate about the impact on Rotherham’s policy.

It was, therefore, recommended to support the proposals presented at the meeting.

Councillor Bennett-Sylvester made reference to upcoming consultation on the National Planning Policy Framework and asked how many questions were explored as to whether there was an imbalance at the moment between where builders wanted to build and available sites.

In terms of policies there was some uncertainty around the process and it was hoped Members would still be able to debate about relevant sites, the town centre and the supply of greenfield sites.

The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy confirmed his door was always open and was always willing to answer queries from other Members.

Resolved:-  That the revised Local Development Scheme be approved and adopted.

Moved by: Councillor Taylor                          Seconded by: Councillor Williams

To receive the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board Annual Report 2023-24.  

Consideration was given to the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2023/24 and tribute made by the current Chair to former Councillors Clark and Wyatt in the role they played in the scrutiny process, alongside the officers involved.

The 2023/24 Annual Report provided an overview of activity undertaken by Scrutiny over the last year through key lines of inquiry, evidence gathering, and findings leading to recommendations. In addition, it also provided a selection of the year’s achievement of Scrutiny as a supplement to full agendas and minutes of Cabinet, Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and the three Select Commission meetings throughout the year.

As the new Chair, Councillor Steele, would like to ensure the meeting remained non-political and would listen fairly to the debates and discussions.

The Annual Report as presented detailed the review of scrutiny processes. This included reviewing work programming, the role of the Link Officer for each commission, the scrutiny review process and the scrutiny review tracker. 

Some of the work carried out over the last twelve months by the Select Commissions was highlighted which included maternity services making sure that services were fit for purpose for all the people of Rotherham.  In addition, work had taken place on equality and diversity ensuring the Council met its 2025 target, Early Years and preparation for school, private provision, health practices and how better services could be delivered across Rotherham for our young people.

Improving Places had looked specifically at the flooding in Catcliffe and how improvements could continue.  Further work was planned and the Chair of Improving Places would look to invite additional attendance by other Members for certain aspects.

The Chair applauded the work on all sub-committees and commissions and also work by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board looking at the Budget and Council Tax.

In seconding the report Councillor Bacon, Vice-Chair, placed on record his own thanks to the officers who worked in Scrutiny and to the current Chair for his joint working approach.

Councillor A. Carter on receiving the report asked, if scrutiny was non-political, why there was not a mix politically for Chairs and Vice-Chairs.  Until this was equally shared out he would be unable to support the recommendation.

Councillor Currie had noted vacancies that existed on some of the Select Commissions and whilst they were politically balanced and seats allocated accordingly, asked if some of these vacancies could be offered to other Councillors who wished to be involved and attend.

Councillor Steele, Chair, was unable to change the political membership arrangements for scrutiny, but he maintained his impartiality and would not take sides.  He would continue to adopt frank and open discussions as part of the meetings and would ensure Chairs were equipped to undertake their roles effectively.

Scrutiny did a good and effective job in Rotherham and was all about holding the executive and officers to account whilst improving Council policy.

Resolved:- That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board Annual Report 2023/24 be received and the contents noted.

Mover:-  Councillor Steele  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To receive the Audit Committee Annual Report 2023-24.

Consideration was given to the Audit Committee Annual Report 2023/24 which brought together in one document a summary of the work undertaken. The production of the report complied with current best practice for Audit Committees allowing it to demonstrate how it had fulfilled its terms of reference and shared its achievements with the Council and served as a useful reminder to the organisation of the role of the Committee in providing assurance about the Council’s governance, risk management and financial and business controls.

The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) had previously issued guidance to local authorities to help ensure that Audit Committees operated effectively. The guidance recommended that Audit Committees should report annually on how they have discharged their responsibilities.

The CIPFA guidance was revised and re-issued in 2022 and as a result, the Audit Committee’s Terms of Reference were updated and agreed by the Audit Committee in March 2023 and subsequently approved by full Council on 19^th July 2023.

Resolved:- That the Audit Committee Annual Report 2023/24 be approved.

Mover:-  Councillor Marshall                   Seconder:-  Councillor Baggaley

To be moved by Councillor Steele and seconded by Councillor Hughes.

An amendment to the original motion was accepted by the mover and seconder of the original Motion and, therefore, further to Procedure Rule 18(14) the amendment was incorporated into the Motion for debate (inclusions highlighted in bold italics). 

Original moved by Councillor Steele and seconded by Councillor Hughes and the amendment was moved by Councillor Tarmey and seconded by Councillor A. Carter.

Summary/Background:-

Rotherham Council is committed to promoting a safe, inclusive, and diverse community for all residents.

Recent actions by far-right groups in Manvers, Rotherham, have sought to undermine these values by inciting hatred, fear, and division within our community.

Such actions are diametrically opposed to the principles of equality, respect and harmony that Rotherham stands for.

Further, far-right actions have caused distress and fear among residents and has threatened the peace and stability of our community.

Terrorism is defined by the Terrorism Act (2000) as: the use or threat of serious violence against a person or serious damage to a property where that action is:-

i.             Designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public; and

ii.            for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause.

That this Council:-

1.           Believes that the violence seen in Rotherham this August fits the definition of terrorism.

2.           Condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the far-right actions in Manvers, Rotherham and any similar activities that promote hate and division.

3.           Reaffirm its commitment to fostering an inclusive community where diversity is celebrated, and all residents feel safe and valued.

4.           Call upon local law enforcement agencies to take all necessary actions to address and prevent further far-right activities in our community.

5.           Encourage community leaders, organisations, and residents to stand united against hatred and work together to promote mutual understanding and respect.

6.           Support initiatives and programmes aimed at educating the public about the dangers of far-right ideologies and the importance of diversity and inclusion.

7.           Pledges to work with local, regional and national authorities to ensure that all measures are taken to prevent the spread of far-right extremism in Rotherham.

Therefore, this Council resolves to:-

1.           Commit to providing support and resources to those affected by far-right actions, ensuring they have access to the necessary help and guidance.

2.           Call for a united front among all political parties, community groups and citizens to unequivocally reject far-right extremism and to work towards a more inclusive and harmonious society.

The amended motion was put and carried unanimously.

To be moved by Councillor Yasseen and seconded by Councillor Currie.

Moved by Councillor Yasseen and seconded by Councillor Currie

That this Council:

1.           Notes with concern that:-

a.           around a third of children in Rotherham live in poverty and the number has increased by 27 per cent since 2014/15 to reach 18,550 in 2021/22, and there has been four-fold increase in the number of food parcels;

b.           12,650 Rotherham children were eligible for free school meals in 2023/24, a rise of 84 per cent since 2015/16 despite the fact that working families earning above £7,400 per annum are not eligible, meaning that around a third of all school-aged children living in poverty are prevented from having free school meals;

c.           a large and growing number of families in Rotherham receive no support from Universal Credit for one or more children due to the two-child benefit cap, with the average family losing out on £4,300 per year on average, and a corresponding serious impact on children’s material wellbeing, nutrition, mental health and opportunities;

d.           notes the compounding impact of welfare reforms since 2012, including the two child benefit cap since 2017, which have increased the risk to our poorest children from poverty, destitution, food insecurity, homelessness and denial of basic needs, resulting in the heightened vulnerability of children to sexual and economic exploitation, as well as greater inequality; and

2.           Confirms its commitment to making Rotherham a Child-Centred Borough where the resources of the Council and partner agencies are harnessed to support every child to be the best they can;

3.           Welcomes Council measures to alleviate poverty, including local welfare provision, local council tax support and funding for advice services but understands that only Government action can reduce child poverty substantially, such as removing the two-child benefit cap (cost of £2.5bn), and providing universal free school meals in all primary schools (cost of £1bn);

4.           Notes that, disappointingly, the leadership of the two largest Westminster parties have refused to adopt either of these two policies; and

5.           Therefore, the Council writes to the Government to convey the importance and urgency of alleviating child poverty and the harm it causes including the vulnerability of children to exploitation.

The Council resolves to request that the Government commits to:

(i) abolishing the two-child cap on benefits;

(ii) expanding free school meals to every child in primary school, and every secondary school child whose family receives Universal Credit;

(iii) raising the income threshold for free school meals in line with inflation, backdated to match the real terms level in 2018 to reflect the rising cost of living; and

6.           Requests Cabinet to co-ordinate the development of a new strategy to reduce the impact of child poverty in Rotherham.

The motion was put and carried.

In accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, and the Council’s Constitution, a recorded vote was taken for this motion as follows:-

For: The Mayor (Councillor Cowen), Councillors Adair, Ahmed, Alam, Allen, Baggaley, Baker-Rogers, Beck, Bennett-Sylvester, Beresford, Bower, Brent, A. Carter, Clarke, Currie, Cusworth, Duncan, Elliott, Garnett,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

To be moved by Councillor Thorp and seconded by Councillor Blackham.

Moved by Councillor Thorp and seconded by Councillor Blackham

Summary/Background:

With the increase in housing developments, there is a significant strain on existing infrastructure in Rotherham, particularly education, healthcare and communityfacilities.

Prioritised use of the Strategic element of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is one of the ways the Council can fund essential infrastructure improvements, supporting and enhancing the wellbeing of residents affected by development and ensuring their basic needs are met.

The CIL bid assessment process agreed by Cabinet in July 2024 provides a framework, but decision-making in relation to approved schemes is ultimately  a political choice and this should be guided by clear priorities.

Firstly, in inviting bids for Strategic CIL funding, the Council should give preference to addressing the wider impact of development in the specific Wards or areas where significant development has taken place. While Section 106 agreements and the Neighbourhood element of CIL address this in part, the Council should aim to do more and deploy Strategic CIL funding to supplement these.

Secondly, the Council should give preference to helping facilitate the construction, expansion or other improvement of fundamental services and facilities such as:

1.           Healthcare Facilities: including doctors' surgeries, dental practices, and other  healthcare facilities that provide essential services to the community.

2.           Educational Institutions: including schools, colleges, and educational facilities to meet educational needs in growing communities.

3.           Community Amenities: including facilities that directly benefit local residents, such as community centres, libraries, and recreational areas, which contribute to the social and cultural development of the area and public wellbeing.

These are core elements of our local infrastructure and central concerns of our

residents, unlike bus and cycle lanes, which do not meet immediate community needs or provide general public amenity.

The current Infrastructure Development Study (IDS 2021) also identified that the improvement and expansion of these core services could be achieved far more cost effectively than active travel projects. Prioritising fundamental service improvement is also in line with common practice to first deliver schemes that can be comparatively quick, quoted and followed through. The Council can and should act as an enabler, by using Strategic CIL funding to help education, health and other partners to deliver their own planned improvements more quickly and sustainably.

Engagement with elected members is vital to forming an accurate understanding of neighbourhood concerns and securing community support for improvements. Future review by Scrutiny of the bid assessment process and implementation of chosen schemes is essential to ensure a proper and robust process for Strategic CIL expenditure.

Therefore, this Council resolves to:-

1.           Call on Cabinet to commit to prioritising bids for the creation, expansion or improvement of education, health and community facilities wherever possible, in preference to active travel schemes.

2.           Request that officers proactively contact education and health partners in Wards where development has recently taken place or is planned, including Dinnington, Wickersley, Aston, Sitwell and many non-parished areas, to explore pursuing infrastructure improvements identified in the IDS 2021.

3.           Request that the Strategic Director for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

To be moved by Councillor A. Carter and seconded by Councillor Tarmey.

Moved by Councillor A. Carter and seconded by Councillor Tarmey

Summary/Background:-

Council notes the recent announcement by the Labour Government to end universal winter fuel payments and restrict eligibility to only those in receipt of Pension Credits and other benefits.

Council also notes that the failure of successive Conservative governments has led to significant increases in heating costs in recent years.

Though many agree that universal Winter Fuel Payments are not necessary, Council is deeply concerned that many pensioners on lower and middle incomes will now not receive the payments. Across England and Wales the number of people eligible for winter fuel payments will fall by 10 million (from 11.4 million to only 1.5 million).

In Rotherham the number of pensioners affected by the change in eligibility criteria is 42,185. That means that nearly 87% of pensioners currently eligible for winter fuel payments will no longer be able to claim the payment from this winter onwards.

Council believes that the Labour Government has set the threshold at which pensioners do not qualify for Winter Fuel Payments far too low. Only those receiving a pension of less than £218.15 a week (or £332.95 a week for couples) are eligible for pension credits. This is significantly lower than the living wage rate.

Council is also concerned by the low take up of pension credit with only 63% of those eligible nationwide receiving them – and over 880,000 pensioners not doing so. Council recognises the role we have to play to increase awareness of benefits such as Pension Credit to ensure people are aware of the support they are entitled to.

Council further notes that the Energy Price Cap is due to rise by 10% in October, which combined by the removal of Winter Fuel Payments will push thousands of local pensioners into fuel poverty.

 
Therefore, this Council resolves to:-

1.           Write to all MP’s covering Rotherham asking them to give their formal support to halting the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment eligibility.

2.           Request the Council write a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer calling for the new Winter Fuel Payment policy to be suspended and reviewed.

3.           Urgently commence an awareness campaign to maximise the uptake of pension credit in Rotherham. This will include use of council noticeboards, social media, promotion in the local press and targeted letters posted to those who may be eligible.

The motion was put and carried.

In accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, and the Council’s Constitution, a recorded vote was taken for this motion as follows:-

For: The Mayor (Councillor Cowen), Councillors Adair, Ahmed, Alam, Allen, Bacon, Baggaley, Baker-Rogers, Baum-Dixon, Beck, Bennett-Sylvester, Beresford, Blackham, Bower, Brent, A. Carter, Clarke, T. Collingham, Z. Collingham, Duncan, Elliott, Fisher, Garnett, Hall, Harper, Havard, Hughes, Ismail, Jones, Keenan, Marshall, Mault, McKiernan, Monk, Rashid, Read, Reynolds, Sheppard, Steele, Sutton, Tarmey, Taylor, Thorp, Tinsley and Williams

Against: None.

Abstentions: Councillor Currie.

To receive the Audit Committee minutes.

Resolved:- That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee be adopted.

Mover:- Councillor Marshall                         Seconder:- Councillor Baggaley

To receive the Licensing Board Sub-Committee and Licensing Sub-Committee minutes.

Resolved:- That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meetings of the Licensing Board Sub-Committee and the Licensing Sub-Committee be adopted.

Mover:- Councillor Hughes                           Seconder:- Councillor Beresford

To receive the Planning Board minutes.

Resolved:- That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of the Planning Board be adopted.

Mover:- Councillor Williams                        Seconder:- Councillor Mault

To put questions, if any, to the designated Members on the discharge of functions of the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Panel, South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority, South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority and South Yorkshire Pensions Authority, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11(5).

There were no questions for consideration by Spokespersons.

To put questions, if any, to Cabinet Members and Committee Chairpersons (or their representatives) under Council Procedure Rules 11(1) and 11(3).

(1) Councillor Currie asked please could the Cabinet Member explain the Council’s housing strategy when a tenant goes into care, in regard to the upkeep of the garden and hedges?

Councillor Allen, Cabinet Member for Housing, explained that when a tenant went into residential care, the gardens and hedges were generally maintained by relatives of the tenants. The service would organise for a garden to be cut back upon notification that the garden/hedges were overgrown, if they were aware that the tenant was in a care home and there were no relatives to undertake this work.

In a supplementary question Councillor Currie was aware of where this was an issue in three instances.

Councillor Allen agreed to pick this up with Councillor Currie outside of the meeting.

(2)  Councillor Tinsley asked with the consultation now live for improvements on Maltby High Street, would the Council actually take on board feedback from Councillors and residents?

Councillor Sheppard, Deputy Leaderof the Council and Cabinet Member for Social Inclusion and Neighbourhood Working, explained the collection of feedback on the proposals from Councillors and residents was critical to developing a successful scheme.  Therefore, the online survey and in-person event aimed to gather as many views as possible. Officers would review all comments and suggestions and endeavor to bring forward a scheme that was well supported locally.  

In a supplementary question Councillor Tinsley outlined his concerns following the first consultation and the feedback received where virtually everything that had been identified was not actioned.  He referred to the additional CCTV  and lighting to make streets safer, the capacity of litter bins, placement of seating in areas where they were not wanted and development areas of the High Street.

It appeared no-one was listening and he expressed his concern that although comments were welcomed online and in person, only one face-to-face consultation event had been arranged.  This scheme in Maltby was one of the biggest schemes of the Towns and Villages Fund so he suggested a meeting for a conversation take place.  There were concerns and rather than pushing something through that residents were unhappy with, it would be better for an initial discussion.

Councillor Sheppard was more than happy for further discussion and would take this forward.

(3)  Councillor Tinsley asked with the Tour of Britain coming through Rotherham on 5th September, could the Cabinet Member tell him of any financial contributions that may have come from RMBC or the SYCMA to host the event.

Councillor Taylor, Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, explained that to date the costs incurred by Rotherham Council, as a “best estimate”, at this stage were £3,000 for bunting, large flags and hand waving flags and £3,000 for traffic management.

In a supplementary question Councillor Tinsley welcomed events such as this for the Borough, but his main issue was with the date it was scheduled.  The event through the Borough took place on Thursday when many of the children had returned to school  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

Any other public items which the Mayor determines are urgent.

There were no urgent items to consider.