Agenda item

To consider a covering report on the Call-In and the procedure to be followed by the Committee.

The Committee considered a Call-In on a decision made by the Executive, at its meeting on 29 September 2022, relating to Off Street Car Park Charges. The Call-In covering report stated that the Executive decision was:

“That the Executive agree to increase the parking charges, as detailed in the amended report (which included a schedule of revisions on Page 11) circulated and published as a supplementary paper”.

Andrew Mickleburgh (in the Chair) explained the procedure to be followed at the meeting and the issues for Members to focus on. The Committee was tasked to review the Executive decision against the decision making principles set out in the Council’s Constitution, viz:

a)     proportionality (i.e. the action must be proportionate to the desired outcome);

b)     due consultation and the taking of professional advice from Officers;

c)     human rights will be respected and considered at an early stage in the decision making process;

d)     a presumption in favour of openness;

e)     clarity of aims and desired outcomes; and

f)      when decisions are taken by the Executive, details of the options which were taken into account and the reasons for the decision will be recorded.

Bill Soane, one of the five Call-In signatories, presented the Call-In. Councillor Soane addressed the Committee and made the following points:

The proposed increase in off-street car park charges would have a significant impact on residents and businesses. The scale of the changes should have triggered a consultation with residents, businesses and affected organisations. There was a precedent for consultation – a consultation exercise was carried out in 2016, the previous occasion when evening and Sunday charges were considered. At that time a month long consultation was carried out with the outcome reported to the Executive on 31 March 2016. Relying on the TRO process was unsatisfactory as residents would find it hard to understand the process and respond effectively.

There was also concern about the failure to provide all Members with a copy of the Executive Forward Programme in line with the Council’s Constitution. At least 25 Members have confirmed that they did not receive a copy of the Executive Forward programme between 29 July and 23 September. This was a clear breach of the Council’s Constitution.

The decision to dramatically increase the car park charges was rushed and ill thought out. If implemented it would have a devastating impact on the businesses in Woodley town centre. It would also create uncertainty in relation to the current arrangements with Waitrose. The decision should be given further thought.

Councillor Soane informed the Committee that four witnesses would give evidence in support of the Call-in, as follows:

Councillor Keith Baker – Leader of Woodley Town Council:

Councillor Baker stated that he had not seen the TRO process used as a consultation mechanism. The TRO process was a legal process and it was not suitable for effective consultation. There was a precedent for public consultation on proposed changes to car park charges, dating back to 2016. Councillor Baker also confirmed that several shops in Woodley were still unaware of the proposed changes – this demonstrated a lack of openness. Also, the decision making principles referred to the requirement to record other options that were considered during the decision making process. On behalf of Woodley Town Council, Councillor Baker felt that the decision should be referred back to the Executive for further consideration.

Brian Fennilly – Woodley Town Centre Manager:

Mr Fennilly stated that his main concern was the lack of consultation about the proposed changes. He had specific concerns about the introduction of Sunday evening charges and the impact on businesses in Woodley. Local businesses were still struggling post-Covid and the proposed changes would have a negative impact on the local economy. There was a specific concern about volunteer staff who worked in local charity shops.

Alex Shatonowski – Wargrave resident:

Mr Shatonowski stated that there were serious concerns about parking in Wargrave. Issues included parked vehicles blocking private driveways. The buildings and streets were not designed to cope with the current volume of traffic. The extension of chargeable hours would also impact on local businesses and organisations such as the boat club which held meetings in the evening. The proposals were not in the best interest of local residents.

Michaela Dalton – Woodley Pets:

Ms Dalton expressed concern about the lack of consultation. Some of the larger retailers in the Woodley precinct were still unaware of the proposed changes. There would also be an impact on employees who parked in the public car parks, e.g. on Sundays. Trade amongst the local shops was still well down on pre-Covid levels and these proposals would not help businesses to recover, especially on Sundays. Customers were unhappy about the loss of free parking and may go elsewhere.

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points and questions:

Andy Croy queried the wording of the Call-In which referred to the “Lib Dem/Labour coalition Executive”. Councillor Croy confirmed that there were no Labour Members on the Executive.

Whilst it was accepted that some Members did not receive a copy of the relevant Executive Forward Programme directly, it was suggested that there were other means of checking the upcoming business items, for example by checking the Council website.

In relation to the potential impact of the changes on Woodley town centre, was there any data about footfall compared to the situation pre-Covid? It was confirmed that, anecdotally, footfall was down by around 30%. If consultation had taken place the traders would have provided information about the local situation and concerns about the impact of increased charges. Similar feedback would have been submitted in relation to Wargrave.

What were the specific issues around using the TRO process for consultation? Keith Baker stated that the TRO process was typically used for technical issues such as changes to speed limits, etc. It was not used for this type of consultation. Examples of proper local consultation were given, such as waste collection and the Woodlands Avenue proposals.

In relation to the options available to the Council, it was felt that the context was the significant financial challenges facing the Council. As such, the fundamental options were to increase charges or not to increase charges. Bill Soane commented that the potential reduction in footfall following the proposed changes would not help to fill the gap in the Council’s Budget.