Agenda and draft minutes

Link to further information in the Council’s Constitution

Councillor Upton declared an interest in Item 13b) Motion, and advised that he would be presenting a report to Cabinet on 10 March, and therefore any comments that he made on this motion this evening would be general, made with an open mind and not predetermined.

To receive as a correct record the minutes of the Meetings of the Council held on 20 and 27 November 2025.

The minutes of the meetings held on Thursday, 20 and 27 November 2025 were approved as a true record and signed by the Mayor.

The Mayor referred to the afternoon tea that he and the Deputy Mayor had hosted for 12 volunteers from the East Leake Community Association, to celebrate the Group wining the King’s Award for Voluntary Service. It was a very enjoyable afternoon talking with the volunteers, and hearing about the valuable work they did. He had also recently attended a fundraising concert in support of the Ukrainian School Band, celebrating talent, culture, and community.

On behalf of Councillors, the Leader welcomed back the Monitoring Officer and wished her well as she continued her recovery. The Leader was sad to announce that former Councillor Jean Smith had recently passed away, and she would be greatly missed. The Leader referred to Mr Keith Sayers, who had worked for the Council for over 40 years and thanked him for his hard work and excellent service during that time. The Leader mentioned the recent Lunar New Year celebrations, which had been very well received.   

The Chief Executive echoed the Leader’s comments in welcoming the Monitoring Officer back and thanked the Deputy Monitoring officer for her hard work and support during the Monitoring Officer’s absence.  

To answer questions submitted by Citizens on the Council or its services.

No citizens’ questions were received for this meeting.

No petitions were presented at this meeting.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

The Mayor advised that it was proposed that the speaking times be extended to permit the mover of the report 15 minutes to speak on the matter, and to allow 7 ½ minutes for the seconder and other Group Leaders and this was agreed by the meeting. 

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke MBE presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services outlining the Council’s Budget and Financial Strategy for 2026/27.

In presenting the budget, the Leader thanked the Director – Finance and Corporate Services, the Finance Team and Councillor Virdi for their hard work producing the budget, during very challenging times. He referred to the substantial changes to Government funding, and late changes to the financial settlement, which he felt had led to unfair rather than Fair Funding. The Leader expressed disappointment that financially well managed councils were being punished, and that the Government had forgotten the great work councils such as Rushcliffe did.

The Leader confirmed that due to the Council’s continued prudent financial management, freezing Council Tax for 2026/27 was proposed, he referred to the modest increase to the Special Expenses budget, and that West Bridgford had excellent facilities and events, thanking the Community Facilities Team for organising those for everyone. The Leader confirmed that Rushcliffe’s Council Tax would remain in the lowest 25% in England and the lowest in Nottinghamshire, which everyone should be proud of. The Leader referred to the proposals to introduce a Council Tax Discount for the terminally ill and advised that the effectiveness of the Second Homes Premium and revocation of the Policy was being reviewed, with both items intended to go to Scrutiny. It was noted that Rushcliffe had been hit with a significant Business Rates reduction, and there was no longer any New Homes Bonus (NHB); however, the budget remained committed to further economic growth. Risks remained, including Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and international conflict; however, the budget mitigated such risks. The Leader referred to changes linked to Government policy, as detailed in paragraph 4.2 of the report, including Simpler Recycling and changes in funding formula, which had led to more Revenue Support Grant, to help offset reductions in Government funding.

The Leader referred to the Transformation and Efficiency Programme, and to Council’s earmarked reserves, used to manage risks and opportunities. The Council was committed to funding economic growth masterplanning across the Borough, Radcliffe on Trent was advanced, with a wish to look at other main settlements. Council was reminded that Rushcliffe remained debt free, whilst retaining an ambitious Capital Programme, demonstrating the Council’s commitment to providing excellent services, supporting the vulnerable and improving the environment.

In conclusion, the Leader stated that Rushcliffe remained under financial pressure; however, it was continuing to improve services and grow the Borough, having a virtually balanced budget over five years. Despite the poor outcome of the Fair Funding review, the Council was well set to continue providing excellent services and maintain stable finances, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke MBE presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services outlining the Council’s position on Council Tax for the year 2026/27.

The Leader advised that this was a technical process to set the Council Tax and moved the recommendation as detailed in the report.

Councillor Virdi seconded the recommendation.

It was RESOLVED that the Council Tax Resolution for 2026/27 as detailed in Appendix A to the report be approved (link attached).

Councillor Grocock left the meeting at 9.15pm.

The report of the Chief Executive is To Follow.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke MBE presented the report of the Chief Executive providing an update on the political composition of the Council and committee membership.

The Leader advised that this was a technical item to reflect recent changes to some political groups and moved the recommendations set out in the report.

Councillor Brennan seconded the recommendation.

Councillor Chaplain referred to the make-up of the West Bridgford Special Expenses and Community Infrastructure Levy Advisory Group and stated that the Labour Group continued to believe that membership should be based on proportionality of West Bridgford and Edwalton Councillors rather than the entire Council and requested that the Constitution be reviewed to reflect that.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)              the revised allocation of committee seats as set out in Appendix 1 to the report be confirmed;

b)              the change to the appointment of the Vice-Chair of Growth and Development Scrutiny Group as set out at paragraph 4.8 of the report be confirmed; and

c)              the changes in membership of committees as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, in line with Group Leaders’ wishes be confirmed.

The report of the Chief Executive is attached.

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Business and Growth, Councillor A Brennan presented the report of the Chief Executive detailing the Barton in Fabis Community Governance Review.

Councillor Brennan stated that with the growth of a significant new community in Fairham, currently in the parish of Barton in Fabis, a petition was brought forward to trigger a Community Governance Review, to ensure that local governance arrangements better reflected these communities. She advised that a Task and Finish Group had undertaken the review, with its findings detailed in the report. The Group had met three times, an initial consultation had taken place, with details of that process set out in paragraph 4.5 of the report. Councillor Brennan confirmed that the majority of respondents were in favour of establishing a new parish for Fairham. Following on from that, a further consultation had taken place, with the final meeting of the Group considering responses to that consultation, together with discussions on boundaries, and the name and makeup of the new council. Councillor Brennan thanked fellow members of the Task and Finish Group and officers for their support and confirmed that the Group was recommending that a separate parish council be established, named Fairham Parish Council, comprising of nine Councillors. If agreed, then a Reorganisation Order would be sent to the Secretary of State, with a view to the first elections being in May 2027.

Councillor R Walker seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Plant stated that as a member of the Task and Finish Group she had found the legislation and processes very interesting and hoped one day that a review would take place for West Bridgford. She agreed that Barton in Fabis and the new development at Fairham would be two completely different communities, with differing needs and priorities, which would be best served by having two separate parish councils.   

As a member of the Task and Finish Group, Councillor Thomas agreed that this had been a very constructive process and stated that Fairham Parish Council would initially need to be supported, particularly by local Ward Councillors.

Councillor S Mallender was pleased to see this sensible approach being taken, with two very different communities having their own representatives, and agreed that this was needed in West Bridgford, especially with LGR coming forward.

Councillor Chewings supported the report and its findings, he stated that there was a clear process to trigger a Community Governance Review, which the residents of Barton in Fabis had followed and he suggested that residents in West Bridgford did the same and started a petition.

Councillor Brown stated that as a Ward Councillor and a member of the Task and Finish Group he fully supported the recommendation, and that he looked forward to working with the new Parish Council.

Councillor Barney agreed that the two communities were very different, he fully supported the recommendation and thanked members of the Task and Finish Group for putting forward this proposal.

Councillor R Walker was pleased that there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

To receive Notices of Motion

a)              Councillor Birch

“Council notes that: 

1.               Physical cash remains essential for residents who cannot, or choose not to, use digital payment systems. 

2.               Cash protects personal liberty by providing: 

·         autonomy?over personal finances without reliance on banks or devices; 

·         privacy?without mandatory data trails; 

·         resilience?when digital systems fail or networks go down; and 

·         equality?for residents excluded by digital-only services. 

3.               Removing cash acceptance risks making access to council services conditional on technology, wealth, or digital proficiency, which undermines fairness and public confidence. 

Council believes that: 

a.       Access to cash is a matter of civic freedom and informed choice, not nostalgia. 

b.       Councils should lead by example in preserving the right to use cash for on-site payments. 

c.       Residents should not be compelled into digital systems to participate in everyday civic life. 

Council therefore resolves to: 

1.               Guarantee that physical cash will continue to be accepted as a payment option at all council-owned premises where on-site payments are taken. 

2.               Require an Equality Impact Assessment and committee approval before any move to cashless operation is considered for a Council service or venue. 

3.               Instruct the Chief Executive to review current payment arrangements and report within three months?on: 

·         where cash is currently accepted; 

·         where it has been removed in the last five years; 

·         options to reinstate cash access where appropriate. 

Write to relevant partners and contractors to encourage the continued acceptance of cash in Council-affiliated services.”

b)              Councillor Thomas

“The Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the Gamston/Tollerton Sustainable Urban Extension has been subject to full public consultation and revision and was unanimously supported at the cross-party Local Development Forum on 7 January 2026.  It was considered by Cabinet on 13 January 2026. Cabinet supported the principle of the SPD but paused the approval process in order to write to various parties – this action has now been taken, and replies have been received showing that considerable progress has been made since this action was taken. 

Council recognises both the importance of the SPD to delivery of housing in Rushcliffe and the concerns expressed by residents about potential contamination, flooding and highways matters. 

Council supports adoption of the East of Gamston/North of Tollerton Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document at the earliest opportunity.

Council notes that the process going forward requires planning applications for development on any part of the site, necessitating public consultation, and in particular that:

(a)            para 3.23 of the SPD has been amended to expand on safeguards re contamination during the individual application stages; 

(b)            highways and access proposals will be published for full public consultation before approval of any planning applications on the site;

(c)            a flood risk assessment will be required to accompany any planning application on the site where this is relevant, to be subject to review by the relevant consultees.”

The following notice of motion was proposed by Councillor Birch and seconded by Councillor Chewings.

Prior to presenting the motion, Councillor Birch informed the Mayor that he wished to make an amendment to the motion to refer to Council-owned and operated premises, and to clarify the referral process to scrutiny. After outlining this alteration, consent was given by the meeting and Councillor Birch proceeded to move the following motion.   

Council therefore resolves to:

·                 Guarantee that physical cash will continue to be accepted as a payment option at all Council-owned and operated premises where on-site payments are taken.

·                 Require an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) and referral to the relevant scrutiny committee for consideration before any move to cashless operation is considered for a Council service or venue.

·                 Instruct the Chief Executive to review current payment arrangements and report within three months on:

o       Where cash is currently accepted;

o       where it has been removed in the last five years;

o       options to reinstate cash access where appropriate.

·                 Write to relevant partners and contractors to encourage the continued acceptance of cash in council-affiliated services.

In moving the motion, Councillor Birch stated that he had brought this motion for two reasons, an element referring to Rushcliffe itself, and a wider, ideological debate. He stated that cash was vital for a liberal democracy and it was inclusive, given that some communities disproportionately used cash more than others, particularly the elderly. It was also important to mitigate against systems failures by having the option to take cash payments. Councillor Birch referred to the issue of fairness and confidence, with people on low income relying on cash more and the motion was asking for good housekeeping, as detailed above. Turning to the wider debate, he felt that losing cash gave inordinate power to faceless corporations and the state, and it was important to keep cash, to retain privacy, as digital transactions could be monitored, and to ensure resilience. He stated that cash was a technology currency, allowing people to physically see their outgoings and it helped trades people and small businesses. Councillor Birch stated that voting for the motion was the kind and humane thing to do, helping elderly and disadvantaged residents and as a democratic institution, the Council had a duty to act against the ‘creep’ of digital currency.   

Councillor Chewings seconded the motion and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Virdi thanked Councillor Birch for bringing forward the motion, recognising his genuine concerns; however, he felt that the motion failed to reflect the current position, with it suggesting that residents risked being excluded from Council services, which was not the case. He confirmed that cash was accepted across a number of Council services and locations, with cash payments for bills still accepted. The Council had adapted specific services, which supported digital payments, including leisure centres, with this model adopted during Covid, together with around 99% of Council Tax payments made digitally. Councillor Virdi stated that this was not a policy choice, it was customer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.