MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL PARISH MEETING HELD ON

MONDAY 9th MAY 2016 AT LEGBOURNE COMMUNITY CENTRE

PRESENT D R Harrison (Chairman), M Chapman (Vice Chairman), A Hallifax, P Maw, S Cole - members of the Parish Council; District Councillor A Grist; There were 5 residents present.

A Claydon (Clerk - Minutes)

1.  CHAIRMAN’S WELCOME & APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting. Apologies were received from Cllr K York, Mr J Green and Mr and Mrs H Maw.

2.  MINUTES

The notes of the Annual Parish Meeting held on Thursday 14th May 2015 had been placed on the web site. The chairman signed the record as correct and complete.

3.  CHAIRMAN’S REPORT – Cllr D R Harrison

Cllr Harrison outlined that 2015/16 had been a relatively quiet year for Legbourne PC but 2016/17 was likely to see more activity. In particular, having co-opted Cllr Cole on to the Council in the autumn of 2015, the Council was now keen to fill the one remaining vacancy; work on the entrance gates, noticeboard and village pump were all scheduled and undergoing procurement; and key decisions were faced on the finalisation of the Neighbourhood Plan and the acceptance (or not) of the transfer of responsibility for Footway Lighting from the District Council. Additionally, the advent of a new East Lindsey Local Plan would impact upon development in the Parish. All of these matters would feature in tonight’s meeting

4.  FINANCIAL REPORT – Mr A Claydon, Clerk

The Clerk gave a brief summary of major expenditure for the year (All rounded to the nearest £ and excluding VAT):

-  Clerks salary and expenses £1,755

-  Insurances £ 344

-  Contribution to Yellow Pages £ 250

-  Subscriptions (LALC and Information Commissioner) £ 195

Total spend for the year was £2,727 of which £32 was recoverable VAT. This compared to an original budget of £8,445. The underspend was attributable to lower clerking costs, reduced spending on printing and stationery (through electronic communication), contracts not being placed for specified works (e.g. Gates maintenance), the decision to delay completion of the Neighbourhood Plan until the Local Plan is published and its impact assessed; and no election being required in 2015/16 and thus no charges arising.

The balance carried forward at the end of the year was £6,972. During 2016/17 expenditure is estimated at £8,509 and after taking account of the precept raised of £5,030, £3,495 is forecast as being carried forward at the end of the year, which comprises an election contingency of £650 and a general balance of £2,845.

5.  NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN – Cllr M Chapman

During the year the Council had reviewed and revised the policies within the Plan. Prior to finalisation, further consultation on these will be necessary.

The key issues faced are whether the Plan will be a meaningful reflection of the village’s ambitions and priorities; and whether any compromises required to enable convergence with District and national policies negate this to such an extent that there is reluctance to take the Plan further.

East Lindsey DC’s new draft Local Plan has now been published and observations are being sought during the summer. This document will set parameters within which the Neighbourhood Plan will have to operate and it may be key in determining if the adoption process should continue or cease.

6.  FOOTWAY LIGHTING.

East Lindsey DC have amended their approach to the transfer of footway lighting since it was first announced just before Christmas 2015. The current proposals are for the administration of energy procurement, maintenance and replacement to remain with the District Council and the costs to be recharged to Parish councils in arrears (e.g. Costs for the period November 2016 to October 2017 would be deducted from the precept payment made to Legbourne PC in April 2018).

The Clerk outlined where the lights concerned were situated (by street name), the estimated cost and the effect on Council Tax levels (about £7 a year for a band D taxpayer based on the information that East Lindsey have supplied). A deadline for responses of 27th May had been set and thus the views of residents were important in helping the Council determine its response.

One resident indicated that the switching off of the lights in Mill Lane (the road where he lived), where there were twelve units, would not concern him and he wondered whether they served any real purpose. He also asked about the lights in the Community Centre car park, which the clerk informed him were included on the list supplied by East Lindsey. This elicited surprise from the resident as, having been a former chairman of the Community Centre Association, he recollected that they were paying for the lights concerned. The clerk agreed to raise this with ELDC.

7.  COMMUNITY EMERGENCY PLAN

Cllr Maw introduced this item. The existing plan was due for review and refresh and hence the Parish Council had combined the agenda for this meeting with a form designed to collect data about residents’ potential needs and the skills / facilities they could offer in the event of an emergency, which could be returned to any Councillor or the Village Shop. The response rate to date was unknown pending collection of completed forms from the shop. The aim was to have a new plan in place by the end of the summer. It was re-iterated that the data collected would not be published and would only be shared with “First Responders” in the event of an incident which triggered the plan.

8.  DISTRICT COUNCILLOR – Cllr A Grist

Cllr Grist referred to the Local Plan publication / consultation exercise with particular reference to policies and settlement proposals. He felt that there may be lots of applications to develop sites around the Districts and that Legbourne was likely to be a desirable location for a number of developers. Decisions on applications had to be based upon material considerations and in this context, an adopted Neighbourhood Plan had legal standing i.e. it was a document that a planning authority had to take into account when approving or rejecting an application.

In respect of Footway Lighting he stated that ELDC were looking at other ways of assisting / encouraging Parishes in taking on the financial responsibility such as potential purchase of LED lighting units which might reduce the running costs significantly. He also reminded everyone that Lincolnshire County Council were responsible for Highway / Street Lighting (as opposed to Footways) and that they were also intending to switch off some lights and reduce the operating hours of others.

Cllr Grist recognized that ELDC were facing unprecedented budget savings requirements and that other areas of service provision which overlapped with Parish Councils (e.g. Public Conveniences) may be the subject of transfer proposals, although the latter would not have a direct impact in Legbourne.

9.  OTHER BUSINESS

Cllr Maw displayed some statistics gathered from the speed monitoring equipment installed by the Parish Council in 2015. These showed that the majority of drivers in the areas monitored (principally the A157) did not exceed the limit materially (ie less than 5mph). He also had undertaken an audit of road-signs and markings and felt that the level of these was adequate and in some locations was potentially confusing or ineffective due a high number of signs and lines in close proximity. He doubted whether there was any merit in adding further signage in the village.

The Chairman asked residents for any questions or comments they may have; however it was felt that the main items had been covered elsewhere in the agenda.

The Chairman thanked everybody for attending & the discussions held and closed the meeting at 8.31 pm.

3