Sandgate Parking Decision Needs Scrutiny

Following the publication of Shepway District Council's decision to proceed with the Sandgate East CPZ, the remaining Council process open to us is to see the decision "called-in" to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. That committee can look at the decision in detail, the reasons it was taken, the evidence on which the decsion was based and make recommendations on either upholding, amending or changing the decision. Although the view of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee is advisory and not compulsory, it gives the Cabinet Member for Transport as opportunity to change his mind.

This morning I've emailed to all members of Shepway Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee as below. Ward Councillor Jan Holben has also asked members of the committee to call-in the decision. To date, both Peter Gane and Clive Goddard have contacted me to confirm they have now requested the Decsion "called-in" (Thank You Councillors! - one more call-in from a member of Overview and Scrutiny needed. The current membership of Shepway Council's Overview and Scrutiny Committee is Ann Berry, Peter Gane (Chairman), Clive Goddard, Claire Jeffrey (Vice-Chair), Michael Lyons, Frank McKenna, Ian Meyers, David Owen, Peter Simmons & Rodica Wheeler.

[Update 5/10/16 14.56pm - Claire Jeffrey has also added her call-in, and I've spoken to Shepway Democratic Services who confirm all three have been received. The Head of Paid Service (Alisitair Stewart) is now considering if it is a valid request under the constitution..]

****

Dear Member of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee,

I'm emailing to request that you and other colleagues on Overview and Scrutiny Committee) call-in the decision on the Sandgate East CPZ published on Monday this week (although dated 30 September) which is subject to call-in if requested validly by at least three members of Overview and Scrutiny Committee by 5pm on Friday 7th October.

I'm sure you've already read the decision notice and supporting report (http://www.shepway.gov.uk/moderngov/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1472), but the key reason for call in is that the decision to proceed has been taken despite 96% of the 342 respondents to the statutory consultation on the scheme being against it (329 out of 342). The Sandgate residents, staff of businesses and visitors who took part in the consultation are clearly distraught that despite such a clear view by respondents, that can be ignored in the decision. There are a number of other issues to be explored as well, including a number of factual inaccuracies in the report on which the decision itself was based.

Clearly as call-in to Overview and Scrutiny would give Councillors the ability to look at those issues and the process is some detail in public, and would be greatly welcomed by local residents. I know that ward Councillor Jan Holben also supports a call-in, and will hopefully contact you directly herself. However, if you could make a call-in request yourself directly, and encourage other members of O&S to do so as well, it would be greatly appreciated in Sandgate.

I know you'll be more up to date on the process than me, but I've read through the most recent version of the constitution on Call-in procedure Part 7-12 of the Council Constitution (http://www.shepway.gov.uk/moderngov/documents/s19916/Part%207%20-%20Overview%20and%20Scrutiny%20Rules%20and%20Procedures%20updated%209%20June%202016.pdf) and researched the required form and areas that the call-in request must cover (as described in section 3.1 of Part 7-12). Of course the request is yours to make as you see fit, but I believe the request as written below would meet criteria b-g, i & j of the requirements, and as long as three or more members of the Committee submit the request, criteria a is also met.

Your call in request needs to be emailed to alistair.stewart@shepway.gov.uk (copying in jeremy.chambers@shepway.gov.uk and committee@shepway.gov.uk) before Friday requesting the call-in, and covering the following points:

_____

That the call-in request is on the decision of the Cabinet Member for Transport on "THE KENT COUNTY COUNCIL (THE DISTRICT OF SHEPWAY) (SANDGATE EAST PARKING ZONE) ORDER 2016".

That the call-in request is being made in time (before 5pm on 7th October).

That the call-in objects to the decision made to not to uphold the objections to the TRO but to proceed with implementing the scheme. The objection is on the basis that the consultation received 343 responses, of which 96% (330) objected to the scheme, and also the unanimous objection of Sandgate Parish Council, and yet despite this clear demonstration of the opinion of the local community and key stakeholders the decision was still made to proceed.

The objection is also on the basis that a number of the points made in report C/16/51 on which the decision was based have been questioned since its publication and their accuracy should be explored, and that despite the recently published Shepway District Parish Charter, the view of the Parish Council was not even mentioned within the report, and that the consultation period did not meet the minimum set out in that Charter.

This item is subject to call-in as it is not on a decision made under emergency powers (as shown at http://www.shepway.gov.uk/moderngov/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1472).

In calling-in this decision, Councillors would wish speak to the Officers that wrote the report on which the decision was based (Fred Miller), the Cabinet member that made the decision (Malcolm Dearden), The Council Solicitor Beverley Dempster who has previously given advice on the legality of parking restrictions on areas named in the report, Ward Councillor Jan Holben who has a clear understanding of the issues and externally Sandgate Parish Council Chairman Robert Bliss. Other witnesses may be valuable.

Councillors would want to ask questions on the consultation responses, why such as overwhelming majority of respondees are being overruled, questions on the factual detail of the report (on which the decision was based) as explained above, the reasons for proceeding with this scheme given such a overwhelming clear response to the consultation, whether the scheme will achieve the objectives of the report, on what grounds the scheme was being pursued in the first place and the consultation process with Sandgate Parish Council and how that meets the requirements of the Shepway District Parish Charter.

The reasons for the call-in given above also clearly give grounds for call-in under 31. i & j of part 7-12 of the constitution, namely that i) It specifies inadequate consultation with stakeholders prior to the decision (the consultation gave absolutely clear feedback the scheme should not be progressed) and j) it specifies inadequate evidence on which to base the decision (as above, some factual elements of the report have been challenged, the view of the Parish Council was not considered, the view of the vast majority of respondees was ignored).
_____

If you have any question on any of the above, I'd be delighted to help - please do email or call. If you could also let me know when you submit your call-in request, I'd really appreciate it so we can track progress.

I know many of you personally - and you'll know I haven't requested you call lots of items into Scrutiny, but when a decision is made against such an absolutely clear majority of people and local views, then at the very least the decision, the report on which it was based, and the motives for pursuing the scheme should be openly questioned by members.

Regards,

Tim Prater