Agenda item

Councillor Deliberations and Recommendations

Each councillor will be allowed a five minute statement followed by voting on the Melksham Community Area Campus proposal

 

Draft Recommendation – subject to amendments to be approved by the Area Board

 

That based on an assessment of the overall service improvement possibilities and to ensure long term security of service delivery for the wider Melksham Community Area, the Melksham Area Board ask cabinet to:-

 

A. Support a single site solution for the Campus that will service the Melksham Community Area and ensure that this includes, as a minimum, all services outlined to the meeting.

 

B. Develop this proposal so it is delivered as near as possible to Melksham Oak School, with the proviso that if officers, after conducting a final appraisals of all sites in the locality, are able to identify an alternative site closer to Melksham town centre that can deliver a single site solution in the same timescale and at the same cost, this is given equal consideration by Cabinet

 

(Any amendments must be submitted through a member of the Area Board)

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that each councillor would be given the opportunity to sum up and give their views, the councillors would then vote on the Melksham Community Area Campus proposal.

 

Cllr Jonathon Seed felt that councillors had to listen to the views of the residents of Melksham, it was important however to realise just what an opportunity Melksham was being given, being the first town to have a state of the art Campus facility.

 

 

Cllr Rod Eaton felt that the lack of a library in the town centre would not stop shoppers from using the town centre.

That Melksham at present had outdated and poor leisure facilities.

 

 

Cllr Mark Griffiths felt that single site proposal was the way forward for Melksham.

 

Cllr Steve Petty felt that the library should stay in the town centre where it was an accessible meeting place. He agreed that the swimming facilities were not good.

 

 

Cllr Jon Hubbard felt that the Campus should enhance current facilities rather than replacing them.

 

That he welcomed the prospect of the town getting better leisure facilities but not at the cost of the library and youth centre moving out of the town.

 

He felt that councillors should be doing what the people of Melksham wanted them to do.

 

 

Cllr Roy While felt that this was a great opportunity for Melksham to be first to have modern facilities, but that transport, parking and regeneration were important topics if the Campus was to prosper.

 

That he hoped to keep a library presence in the town centre as well as in the Campus.

 

 

Councillors then discussed the draft recommendation which was:

 

 

That based on an assessment of the overall service

improvement possibilities and to ensure long term security of

service delivery for the wider Melksham Community Area, the

Melksham Area Board ask cabinet to:-

 

A. Support a single site solution for the Campus that will

service the Melksham Community Area and ensure that this

includes, as a minimum, all services outlined to the meeting.

 

B. Develop this proposal so it is delivered as near as possible

to Melksham Oak School, with the proviso that if officers,

after conducting a final appraisals of all sites in the locality,

are able to identify an alternative site closer to Melksham

town centre that can deliver a single site solution in the same

timescale and at the same cost, this is given equal

consideration by Cabinet.

 

 

Cllr Roy While tabled a motion which was seconded by Cllr Rod Eaton that if agreed would appear as Para B. The existing Para B would then be renumbered Para C.

 

This amendment  was as follows:

 

Notwithstanding the establishment of a new purpose built library in the proposed Campus in accordance with Para A, the offer negotiated with the Wiltshire Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Library Services is recommended to the Cabinet by the Area Board.    

This would provide for a limited, additional and residual volunteer based library service in Melksham Town Centre until at least 2014 when the service will be reviewed.

 

 

Councillors then voted on this amendment.

 

The amendment was carried unanimously.

 

 

Cllr Jon Hubbard then tabled a motion which was seconded by Cllr S.Petty requesting a split site, with the Library and Youth Centre remaining in the town centre.

 

Cllr Jon Hubbard requested that a recorded vote was carried out.

 

 

Cllr Seed – Against

 

Cllr Eaton – Against

 

Cllr Griffiths – Against

 

Cllr Hubbard – For

 

Cllr S.Petty – For

 

Cllr Roy While – Against

 

The amended motion was lost 4 votes to 2.

 

 

Councillors then voted on the substantive motion, which was tabled by Cllr Roy While and seconded by Cllr Rod Eaton, this was as follows:

 

 

That based on an assessment of the overall service improvement possibilities and to ensure long term security of service delivery for the wider Melksham Community Area, the Melksham Area Board ask cabinet to:-

 

  • A. Support a single site solution for the Campus that will

service the Melksham Community Area and ensure that this

includes, as a minimum, all services outlined to the meeting.

 

 

  • B. Notwithstanding the establishment of a new purpose built library in the proposed Campus in accordance with Para A, the offer negotiated with the Wiltshire Council Cabinet Member with responsibility for Library Services is recommended to the Cabinet by the Area Board.     This would provide for a limited, additional and residual volunteer based library service in Melksham Town Centre until at least 2014 when the service will be reviewed.

 

 

  • C. Develop this proposal so it is delivered as near as possible

to Melksham Oak School, with the proviso that if officers,

after conducting a final appraisals of all sites in the locality,

are able to identify an alternative site closer to Melksham

town centre that can deliver a single site solution in the same

timescale and at the same cost, this is given equal consideration by Cabinet.

 

 

 

The substantive motion was carried 4 votes to 2.