NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNCIL
QUARTERLY MEETING
Wednesday, 15 July 2026
Summons, Agenda, Minutes
and Reports
NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNCIL
You are summoned to attend the Meeting of the Council. This meeting is being held in the Council Chamber, County Hall, Northallerton on Wednesday, 15 July 2026 at 10.30 am, at which the following business will be transacted.
The meeting will be available to view once the meeting commences, via the following link -
www.northyorks.gov.uk/livemeetings
BUSINESS
|
1. |
Minutes of the meeting held on 20 May 2026
To move that the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 May 2026, having been printed and circulated, be taken as read and be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record. |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 11 - 22) |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Apologies for absence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Declarations of Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Chair's Announcements
Any correspondence, communication or other business brought forward by the direction of the Chair of the Council. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Statement by the Leader of the Council |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 23 - 24) |
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
Public Questions or Statements
Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice and provided the text to Barry Khan, Assistant Chief Executive Legal and Democratic Services – email: barry.khan@northyorks.gov.uk or in writing to Barry Khan, Assistant Chief Executive Legal and Democratic Services, County Hall, Northallerton DL7 8AD by midday on Friday, 10 July 2026. Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item.
If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chair who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. |
Notices of Motion
1. Consideration of No Council Tax Payment for the Terminally Ill
Proposer – Councillor Chris Aldred Seconder – Councillor Andrew Murday
This Council: Believes everyone should be able to spend the final days, weeks and months of their life focusing on what really matters: making memories with their loved ones. But life is often more expensive when you live with a terminal diagnosis, and with the rising cost of living, more and more terminally ill people are being pushed into poverty across the UK every year.
Agrees with calls from the Marie Curie Chairty for Councils across England to review the financial support they offer people with a terminal illness, and their loved ones, meaning that people with less than 12 months to live should be exempt from paying Council Tax - 16 other Councils across the country have already adopted similar proposals in their 2026/27 Budgets, so evidence as to the uptake and practicalities are available.
Understands that suspending Council Tax for terminally ill people means they will face one less financial burden during an already unimaginably difficult time. It's not just a thoughtful act - it could be the difference between security and poverty at the end of life, when comfort and dignity should be non-negotiable.
This Council resolves to: 1. Support the Marie Curie Campaign calling for Council Tax relief for terminally ill residents. 2. Instructs officers to set out a plan to change its policies, to explicitly include a commitment to support people who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness within it’s 2027/28 Budget proposal. 3. Base any entitlement on SR1 forms completed by a clinician which confirms a person has a progressive disease, and consequently their patient is expected to pass away within 12 months.
Implications assessment: · Financial – a very limited decrease in Council Tax collection from the small number where the designation applies (persons with a progressive disease, certified by a clinician via an SR1 form) · Legal – may require a change to the Constitution to be able to do · Equality and Diversity – no direct implications · Climate Change – no direct implications.
2. Home to School Transport Policy
Proposer – Councillor Felicity Cunliffe-Lister Seconder – Councillor Matt Walker
This Council notes that: · It is now two years since the Home to School Transport Policy was adopted in July 2024. · The first full admissions cycle (the Class of ‘25) has now been completed, providing substantial evidence through appeals, Ombudsman findings, public consultation and feedback from schools and parish councils to indicate serious issues inherent in the policy and the impact it is having on families, schools and rural communities. · Children starting new schools this year (the Class of ‘26) are already facing a summer of appeals and uncertainty over access to both free home-to-school transport and paid-for bus passes. · It has been made clear that the scope of the Post Implementation Review is limited to assessing how the policy is being applied, not to changing the policy parameters. That can only be done by a Full Council vote. · Any changes required to protect next year’s new starters (Class of ’27) must be agreed today if they are to be included in time to be published in the September 2026 admissions arrangements. · This Full Council meeting is therefore the last chance to alter the policy in time to protect next year’s new starters and avoid another year of harm to rural families and schools.
This Council believes that: · Independent modelling indicates that the Council’s projected cost savings of £3m based on 70% of impacted families opting out of their school transport rights, will be eradicated once the additional costs incurred to deliver the policy are factored in. · That the fragmentation of routes and higher admin costs result in “nearest only” costing 8-10% more to deliver than “nearest or catchment” in the medium to long term. This equates to a £4-5m additional budget required annually. · The public have made their views clear by sharing evidence of the negative impact associated with removing catchment over the last two years through two formal consultations and constant feedback shared via statements, letters and appeal evidence.
Therefore, this Council resolves to: 1. Exercise its discretionary powers granted under the Department for Education's Home to School Travel and Transport Guidance to revise the Home to School Transport Policy adopted in July 2024 so that free home-to-school transport for eligible pupils once again applies to a child's designated catchment school, as well as their nearest suitable school. 2. The revised policy be implemented in time for the September 2027 admissions round. 3. Appropriate transitional arrangements be introduced for families affected by the current policy, including those already engaged in the appeals process.
Implications assessment Financial - the Council's projected savings are based on an incomplete financial model. Once the additional costs of delivering the policy are considered, the projected savings disappear. Independent modelling reveals that once fragmentation of routes and additional admin costs are factored in, even after the seven-year transition period “nearest only” policy costs 8-10% more to run than "nearest or catchment". Legal - reinstating catchment school eligibility is a lawful policy choice. The current policy continues to expose the Council to avoidable legal, financial and reputational risk. Policy change requires a Full Council vote. Given the legal requirement to publish school transport policy by mid-September each year ahead of the admissions window, 15 July 2026 is the last scheduled Full Council meeting where change can be implemented in time to impact September 2027 new starters. Equality and Diversity - the equality impacts identified before implementation, most notably the disadvantage caused to rural families, have now been evidenced in practice. Restoring catchment school eligibility would directly address those impacts whilst preserving all existing transport entitlements. Climate - the anticipated environmental benefits have not been demonstrated. The available evidence suggests the policy may reduce, rather than improve, the efficiency of North Yorkshire's rural transport network. Social - the policy has wider consequences for families, schools and rural communities that extend beyond transport eligibility and are likely to increase over time if the current policy remains unchanged. These were not considered in July 2024 when the policy was first proposed.
3. Proposed Use of Former RAF Site at Linton-On-Ouse for Asylum Accommodation
Proposer – Councillor Carl Les Seconder – Councillor Malcolm Taylor
This Council notes that: 1. The Government has announced again proposals to accommodate a significant number of asylum seekers at the former RAF site located within North Yorkshire. North Yorkshire County Council previously in May 2022 resolved its stance of being against this proposal. 2. Local residents, parish councils, community organisations and elected representatives continue to have concerns regarding the suitability of the site and the potential impact on local communities and services. 3. Any proposal of this scale has implications for local infrastructure, healthcare, education, community safety, transport networks and wider public services. 4. The motion does not seek to diminish the national obligations to those seeking asylum but concentrates on the proposition that this is the wrong proposal for the wrong location.
This Council believes that: 1. The former RAF site is not an appropriate location for the large-scale accommodation of single male asylum seekers for the local population nor the asylum seekers themselves, not least because of the lack of amenities, services and support. 2. The concentration of a large number of asylum seekers in a single rural location is unlikely to support community integration and places disproportionate pressure on local services and infrastructure.
Therefore, this Council resolves to: 1. Authorise the Leader to write to the Minister for the Border Security and Asylum at the Home Office setting out the Council's opposition to the proposal and the reasons for that opposition. 2. Authorise the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader to carry out the necessary action to lobby and challenge the proposal.
Implications assessment Legal - the accommodation of asylum seekers is a decision for central government, principally the Home Office. In passing this motion, the Council would be exercising its general powers as a local authority to make representations to Government and to advocate on behalf of local communities. If the motion is passed, further legal advice may be sought on how best to challenge any ultimate decision to proceed with the proposal. Climate Change - there will be climate change implications if Government choose to proceed with the proposal to develop the largely dormant site to accommodate asylum seekers. As stated above, the decision will be made by central government and they will need to undertake their own feasibility studies. There are no direct climate change implications arising from the Council’s decision to pass the motion. The Home Office will still have to determine how to proceed and consider the relevant implications. Financial - as stated above the decision is for the Home Office to take and there will be financial implications across the public sector if the decision is made to proceed. With regard to the Council’s specific motion to write to Government, there are no direct financial implications. However, there may be a cost if the Council determine to follow a legal route towards challenging a future decision and such decisions would be delegated to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader and the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal and Democratic Services). Equalities, Diversity and Inclusion - the Council is committed to treating all individuals with dignity and respect and to comply with its Public Sector Equality Duty in exercising its functions. The motion is directed towards the suitability of the proposed site, the adequacy of local infrastructure and services, and the process by which decisions are made, rather than the characteristics of those who may be accommodated at the site. The Council recognises that asylum seekers are a potentially vulnerable group and that they are entitled to fair and lawful treatment under the relevant legislative framework. It is considered that the Home Office proposals do not represent the best interests of local residents and not the asylum seekers themselves. The passing of this motion would not, in itself, have a direct adverse impact on any person sharing a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. As the proposal is being developed and assessed by the Home Office, responsibility for considering the equality and human rights implications of the proposed accommodation, including any Equality Impact Assessment or equivalent assessment required by law or Government policy, rests with the relevant Government departments as decision-makers. They have a duty to give full and proper consideration to its equality and human rights obligations when determining whether the proposal would proceed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. |
Report of the Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the Motion Referred on Supporting and Strengthening Community Transport
Proposer: Cllr. Hannah Gostlow Seconder: Cllr. Peter Lacey
Council notes that Community Transport provides essential, flexible, and locally responsive services across North Yorkshire, supporting independence, wellbeing, and social inclusion - particularly for older residents, disabled people and those experiencing isolation. It enables access to healthcare, education, employment, and social opportunities, and contributes to safer travel for all.
Provision varies across the county, with some communities experiencing limited or inconsistent access. Community Transport is most effective when community led, place based and supported through strong partnership working, with the Council acting in an enabling role. There is an opportunity to improve the consistency, visibility, and coordination of support across North Yorkshire, alongside wider regional transport work.
Council therefore resolves to:
1. Request a report setting out the current Community Transport landscape across North Yorkshire, including: · existing schemes and coverage · current forms of Council support · links with health, social care, and other partners · alignment with the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority · gaps, inconsistencies, or barriers to sustainability. 2. Ask officers to outline options for a strengthened Community Transport support framework, including: · improved coordination and information sharing · enhanced visibility of existing schemes · volunteer recruitment and retention · access to funding and external opportunities. · the potential role of commissioning or procurement, where appropriate 3. Work with partners, including the Combined Authority, Integrated Care Board, and community organisations, to ensure Community Transport is appropriately reflected in emerging transport plans and pilots. 4. Establish a cross sector Working Group comprising elected Members, relevant Council officers and representatives from the Community Transport sector and partner organisations, to support coordination, share best practice and shape proportionate, locally responsive recommendations. 5. Report back to the relevant committee within 6–12 months with findings and recommendations that build on existing work and avoid duplication.
Impact considerations This motion is not expected to create significant new cost pressures, but rather to strengthen understanding, coordination, and the effectiveness of existing activity. It also recognises North Yorkshire Council’s previous investment in Community Transport, ensuring that this valuable foundation is not lost but brought back into the current conversation - linking past initiatives with emerging approaches to shared and demand responsive transport, and maximising social value through collaboration and community benefit.
As mentioned, this motion has been viewed and discussed by officers prior to submission, ensuring alignment with current workstreams and that proposals complement existing commitments.
In aligning with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, it reinforces the Council’s commitment to fair, inclusive, and sustainable transport - contributing locally to global objectives for climate action, equality, wellbeing, and partnership working.
I feel it supports: · Climate objectives (SDG 13 – Climate Action) by encouraging shared and demand responsive transport, reducing reliance on private car use · Equality and rural inclusion (SDG 10 – Reduced Inequalities; SDG 11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities) by addressing disparities in access to transport · Health and wellbeing (SDG 3 – Good Health and Well Being) through improved access to services and reduced isolation · Local economic participation (SDG 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth) by supporting access to employment and services · Social value and community transport (SDG 9 – Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure; SDG 17 – Partnerships for the Goals) by building on existing community led transport initiatives and ensuring investment delivers wider public benefit.
This motion was referred from the Council meeting on 20 May 2026 to Scrutiny Board and then to the meeting of the Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 6 July 2026. |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 25 - 30) |
|
|
|
|
|
9. |
To consider the report and recommendations of the Executive and make decisions on them |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 31 - 34) |
|
|
|
|
|
10. |
Annual Report of the Police, Fire and Crime Panel 2025/2026 |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 35 - 48) |
|
|
|
|
|
11. |
Annual Overview and Scrutiny Report 2025/2026 - A review of the work of overview and scrutiny committees and looking ahead to the work that will be undertaken in 2026/27 |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 49 - 72) |
|
|
|
|
|
12. |
Audit Committee Annual Report 2025/2026 |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 73 - 84) |
|
|
|
|
|
13. |
To Consider the Final Recommendations of the 2025/26 Community Governance Review |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 85 - 350) |
|
|
|
|
|
14. |
Proposed updates to the Member Code of Conduct |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 351 - 396) |
|
|
|
|
|
15. |
Appointments to Committees and Outside Bodies |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 397 - 398) |
|
|
|
|
|
16. |
Statements of Executive Members and Chairs of Overview and Scrutiny Committees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Members |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16(a) |
Executive Member for Managing our Environment - Councillor Richard Foster |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 399 - 400) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(b) |
Executive Member for Education, Learning and Skills - Councillor Annabel Wilkinson |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 401 - 402) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(c) |
Executive Member for Finance and Assets - Councillor Gareth Dadd |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 403 - 406) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(d) |
Executive Member for Open to Business - Councillor Mark Crane |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 407 - 410) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(e) |
Executive Member for Corporate Services - Councillor Heather Phillips |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 411 - 414) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(f) |
Executive Member for Highways and Transportation - Councillor Malcolm Taylor |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 415 - 418) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(g) |
Executive Member for Health and Adult Services - Councillor Michael Harrison |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 419 - 420) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(h) |
Executive Member for Culture, Arts and Housing - Councillor Simon Myers |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 421 - 426) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(i) |
Executive Member for Children and Families - Councillor Janet Sanderson |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 427 - 428) |
|
|
|
|
|
Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chairs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16(j) |
Scrutiny Board (Chair: Councillor Alyson Baker) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 429 - 430) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(k) |
Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Chair: Councillor David Staveley) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 431 - 432) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(l) |
Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Chair: Councillor Caroline Goodrick) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 433 - 434) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(m) |
Housing and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Chair: Councillor Steve Shaw-Wright) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 435 - 436) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(n) |
Care and Independence Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Chair: Councillor Barbara Brodigan) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 437 - 438) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(o) |
Corporate and Partnerships Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Chair: Councillor Andrew Williams) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 439 - 440) |
|
|
|
|
|
16(p) |
Scrutiny of Health (Chair: Councillor Andrew Lee) |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 441 - 442) |
|
|
|
|
|
17. |
Use of special urgency procedures since the last meeting of Council - Report of the Leader |
|
|
|
|
(Pages 443 - 446) |
|
|
|
|
|
18. |
Council Procedure Rule 10 Questions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RICHARD FLINTON Chief Executive Officer |
BARRY KHAN Assistant Chief Executive Legal and Democratic Services |
County Hall,
NORTHALLERTON