Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Ilford, Essex, IG1 1DD
\n\t\t\nItems\n\t\t\nNo.\n\t\t\tItem\n\t\t\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tApologies for Absence (COU/01/270510)
\nMinutes:
\nApologies for absence were received from\nCouncillor Nijjar and apologies for lateness from Councillor\nWalker.
\nAdditional documents:
\n- \n
- \n\t\t\t\t\t\t180310, item2. \n\t\t\t\t\t\t PDF 184 KB \n\n
Minutes:
\nResolved: That we agree the Minutes of\n(i) the Budget meeting of the Council held on 4th March\nand (ii) the ordinary meeting of the Council held on\n18th March 2010 and authorize their signature when\navailable in the official Minute Book.
\nDeclarations of Interest (COU/03/270510)
\nMembers are reminded of the requirement to\nconsider whether they have an interest in any matter on the agenda\nthat needs to be disclosed and, if so, to declare the interest when\nCouncil reaches that item on the agenda.
\nMinutes:
\nMembers were reminded of the requirement to\nconsider whether they had an interest in any matter on the agenda\nthat needed to be disclosed and, if so, to declare the interest\nwhen Council reached that item on the agenda.
\nCorrespondence (COU/04/270510)
\nMinutes:
\nThe Chief\nExecutive advised that Councillor Gittens had resigned from the\nCouncil. A by-election for Chadwell Ward would be\ncalled.
\nTo receive the Mayor's announcements (COU/05/270510)
\nMinutes:
\nThe Mayor\nannounced as follows:-
\n\u00a0
\n(a) \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Local Government\nChronicle Award.
\n\n
Minutes:
\nThe Leader, Councillor Prince, moved and\nCouncillor Littlewood seconded a Motion in respect of a vote of\nthanks to former Members.
\n\u00a0
\nResolved: That the following Motion be\nagreed:-
\n\u00a0
\n\u201cThis Council records its grateful\nthanks to the former Members for the valuable service rendered by\nthem to the London Borough of Redbridge and who completed their\nservice on the Council on the 10th May 2010.\u201d
\nAny Urgent Business (COU/13/270510)
\nMinutes:
\n- \n\n\t\t
- Attendance details \n\t\t\t
- Agenda Frontsheet\n\t\t\t
![\"pdf](\"mgimages/logo-pdf-1.gif\")
PDF 383 KB \n\t\t\t \n\n\t\t\t\t - Agenda reports pack\n PDF 1 MB \n\n\t\t\t\t
- Printed minutes\n PDF 306 KB \n\n
Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Ilford, Essex, IG1 1DD
\n\t\t| No. | \n\t\t\tItem | \n\t\t
|---|---|
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Apologies for Absence (COU/01/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nApologies for absence were received from\nCouncillor Nijjar and apologies for lateness from Councillor\nWalker. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n Additional documents: \n
Minutes: \n \nResolved: That we agree the Minutes of\n(i) the Budget meeting of the Council held on 4th March\nand (ii) the ordinary meeting of the Council held on\n18th March 2010 and authorize their signature when\navailable in the official Minute Book. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Declarations of Interest (COU/03/270510) \n\n \nMembers are reminded of the requirement to\nconsider whether they have an interest in any matter on the agenda\nthat needs to be disclosed and, if so, to declare the interest when\nCouncil reaches that item on the agenda. \nMinutes: \n \nMembers were reminded of the requirement to\nconsider whether they had an interest in any matter on the agenda\nthat needed to be disclosed and, if so, to declare the interest\nwhen Council reached that item on the agenda. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Correspondence (COU/04/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nThe Chief\nExecutive advised that Councillor Gittens had resigned from the\nCouncil. A by-election for Chadwell Ward would be\ncalled. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To receive the Mayor's announcements (COU/05/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nThe Mayor\nannounced as follows:- \n\n (a) Local Government\nChronicle Award. \n\n Redbridge Council had won the\nprestigious 2010 Local Government Chronicle Award for Finance Team\nof the Year. In winning the award, Redbridge fought off competition\nfrom a record number of entries from Councils across the United\nKingdom. The judges stated that Redbridge’s Finance Service\nhas “delivered excellence over a number of years not just in\nthe strong, robust financial stewardship it provides, but also in\nthe way in which it underpins the Council’s ability to\npositively react to the continual change that local government\nfaces.” \n\n The Mayor presented Geoff Pearce, Mark\nGreen and Dave Fonseca with Finance Team of the Year\naward. \n\n (b) Mayor’s\nCivic Service. \n\n The Mayor’s\nCivic Service will be held on Sunday 11th July at\n11.30am at St. Thomas of Canterbury Church, High Road, Woodford\nGreen. \n\n \n(c) Charity\nAppeal. \n\n There would be a lunch in support of the\nMayor’s Appeal at the White Swan Chinese Restaurant on Sunday\n18th July at 12 noon. All proceeds raised would go to\nthe Mayor’s Appeal. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To hear questions from members of the public and replies thereto, in accordance with Standing Order 17 (COU/06/270510) \n\n \n- list of questions to\nbe tabled at Council meeting. \nMinutes: \n \nThere were no questions from members of the\npublic. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Proposed Amendments to Council’s Committee Structure (COU/07a/270510) Additional documents: \n
Minutes: \n \nThe report before us advised that\nRedbridge’s Constitution set out the Council’s\nexecutive decision-making arrangements, how the scrutiny function\nis to operate and the process for exercising quasi-judicial\nresponsibilities. The Constitution also made provision for the\nCouncil to appoint committees, panels and other bodies. \n\n The report identified changes that it was\nintended to make to the Constitution. The changes provided a more\nstreamlined and economic structure that would both enhance and make\nmore cost effective the Council’s committee structure and\ndecision-making arrangements. \n\n As a consequence of the proposed amendments to\nthe committee structure the report also proposed changes to the\nagreed Calendar of Meetings. \n\n Resolved: That (i) we agree the changes\nto the Council’s committee structure and decision-making\narrangements set out in the report, and in so doing:- \n\n \n(a) \nnote that the Leader of the Council will appoint a Cabinet\ncomprising nine members. \n\n \n(b) \nnote that when the Portfolios of the Cabinet Members have been\ndecided by the Leader of the Council they will be included in the\nConstitution. \n\n \n(c) \nendorse the scrutiny arrangements set out in paragraph 3 of this\nreport and note that the appointment of the Overview Committee and\nfour Scrutiny Committees forms part of the report at agenda item 7b\nof the agenda. \n\n \n(d) \nnote the arrangements for the establishment of Area Committees,\nquasi-judicial bodies, and committees and other bodies that carry\nout non-executive functions as set out in paragraphs 4 – 6 of\nthis report and that the full list of the committees and other\nbodies to be appointed by the Council will be considered at agenda\nitem 7b. \n\n (ii)\nthe existing terms of reference for scrutiny committees, set out in\nPart 2, Section 6.1-6.3 of the Constitution, be replaced by the\nterms of reference attached at Appendix 1 to these\nMinutes. \n\n (iii) the dates contained in the Calendar of\nMeetings for Scrutiny Committees be deleted and replaced by the\nschedule of dates set out in Appendix 2 to these Minutes; and \n\n (iv) the meetings of the Cabinet diaried for\n8th June and 6th July now be held on\n21st June and 19th July respectively and the\nmeeting of the Civic Panel scheduled for 19th July be\ncancelled. \n\n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Appointment of Committees and other Bodies (COU/07b/270510) Minutes: \n \nThe report before us advised that\nRedbridge’s Constitution made provision for the Council to\nappoint Committees, Panels and other Bodies. \n\n \nAccordingly, we were asked to consider the\nproposals set out in the report for appointing Members and, where\nappropriate, co-opted members and independent persons, to those\nbodies. \n\n \nResolved: \n\n \n(i) \nAppointment of Ordinary Committees \n\n \n(a) \nThat ordinary committees be\nappointed as set out in paragraph 3.2 (a) of the report, with the\nterms of reference/functions of these Committees being as set out\nin the Constitution, except for those of Scrutiny Committees which\nwill be as set out in Appendix 1 to these Minutes. \n\n \n\n(b) That seats on these\ncommittees be allocated as set out in paragraph 3.2 (a) of the\nreport. \n\n \n(c) That the Members, co-opted\nmembers and substitutes to be appointed to serve on these\ncommittees be as shown on Appendix 3 to these Minutes. \n\n \n\n(ii) \nAppointment of Standards Committee and Licensing Committee\n2003 \n\n \n(a) That the Standards\nCommittee and Licensing Committee 2003 be appointed as set out in\nparagraph 3.2 (b) of the report, with their terms of\nreference/functions being as set out in the\nConstitution. \n\n \n(b) That seats on these\nCommittees be allocated as set out in paragraph 3.2 (b) of the\nreport. \n\n \n(c) That\nthe Members and independent persons to be appointed to serve on\nthese Committees be as shown on Appendix 4 to these\nMinutes. \n\n \n(iii) \nAppointment of Panels and other Bodies \n\n \n(a) That\npanels and other bodies be appointed as set out in paragraph 3.2\n(c) of the report, with their terms of reference/functions being as\nset out in the Constitution. \n\n \n(b) That\nseats on these panels and other bodies be allocated as set out in\nparagraph 3.2 (c) of the report. \n\n \n\n(c) That the\nMembers, co-opted members, Independent persons and substitutes to\nbe appointed to serve on these bodies be as shown on Appendix 5 to\nthese Minutes. \n\n \n\n(iv) \nAppointment of Area Committees \n\n \n(a) That\nArea Committees be appointed as set out in section 5 of the report,\nwith their terms of reference/functions being as set out in the\nConstitution. \n\n\n \n(b) That\nthe membership of these committees be the Members representing the\nWards forming the committees as set out in section 5 of the\nreport. \n\n (v) \nRegional Planning Committees \n\n (a) \nThat Regional Planning Committees be appointed as set out in\nsection 6 of the report, with their terms of reference/functions\nbeing as set out in the Constitution. \n\n (b) \nThat the membership of these committees be as set out in Appendix 6\nto these Minutes. \n\n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Members Allowances Scheme (COU/07c/270510) Minutes: \n \nThe report before us asked that we consider\nchanges to the Members Allowances Scheme which took into\naccount:- \n\n (i) \nthe Independent Remuneration Panel to London Councils recently\npublished report on the remuneration of Councillors in London; \n\n(ii) \nthe new composition of the Council; and \n\n \n(iii) \nthe implications of decisions taken earlier on the agenda in\nrespect of changes to the Scrutiny Structure of the Council. \n\n The report advised that implementation, in\nconjunction with the amendments to the Committee structure agreed\nearlier, would lead to a full year saving including employer\nnational Insurance of approximately £30,000 (2010/11 saving\nof approximately £25,000). This saving excluded the impact on\nemployer pension contributions as any saving depended on whether\nMembers belonged to the local government pension scheme. The saving\nalso assumed that up to 15 Chairmen of Scrutiny working groups\nreceived an allowance of £1,000. Under the Members Allowances\nScheme Members who carried out more than one special responsibility\nreceive only one SRA (the higher one). The actual saving between\nthe proposed and previous schemes would depend on the extent of the\ndoubling up of roles. The saving would be reflected in the\nforthcoming annual budget setting process. \n\n Resolved: That we (i) adopt the revised\nMembers Allowances Scheme and Schedule of Payments as set out in\nAppendix 7 to these Minutes; and \n\n (ii) agree that payment of the allowances set\nout in the Schedule to the Members Allowances Scheme be effective\nfrom the dates of appointment to the respective special\nresponsibility roles. \n\n (Councillor Goody recorded his vote against\nthe above decision) \n\n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n Additional documents: \n
Minutes: \n \n\nIn accordance with the revised requirements of the Chartered\nInstitute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of\nPractice on Treasury Management in the Public Services, the report\nbefore us asked Council to formally adopt revised treasury\nmanagement clauses as part of the Council’s Financial\nStanding Orders. The report also sought Council’s agreement\nto a change to the terms of Reference of the Audit Committee\nnominating that body with responsibility for ensuring effective\nindependent scrutiny of the Treasury Management Strategy and\npolicies. \n\nAs part of the consultation process, the amendments proposed had\nbeen considered by the Audit Committee at their meeting of the 13th\nApril 2010 and by the General Purposes Committee at their meeting\nof the 19th April 2010. Both Committees recommend that Council\napprove the proposals. \n\nResolved: That (i) Standing Order 138 be amended as set out\nin Appendix 8 to these Minutes; and \n\n(ii) the Audit Committee be\nresponsible for ensuring effective scrutiny of the Council’s\nTreasury Management Strategy and policies and, accordingly, amend\nthe Audit Committee’s Terms of Reference as follows:\n- \n\nUnder\n“Responsibilities” - section 4 add: - \n“Scrutiny\nof the Council’s Treasury Management Strategy and\npolicies.” \n\n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Amendment to Standing Orders - Designation of Statutory Scrutiny Officer (COU/07e/270510) Minutes: \n \nThe\nreport before us advised that the Cabinet, at its meeting on\n23rd March 2010, had considered a report advising that\nby the terms of\nthe The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act\n2009 (Commencement No. 2) Order 2009, section 31 of the the Local\nDemocracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 would\ncommence from the 1st of April 2010. Section 31 inserts a new\nsection 21ZA into the Local Government Act 2000. The new provision\nrequired the Council to designate one of its officers as its\nstatutory Scrutiny Officer, to discharge certain specified\nfunctions.The officer is, by section 21ZA(3), to be known as the\nScrutiny Officer. By section 21ZA (4) a local authority may not designate\nany of the following officers as the Scrutiny Officer:\n- \n\n (a) \nthe head of the authority’s paid service (Chief\nExecutive); \n\n(b) \nthe authority’s monitoring officer designated under section 5\nof that Act (Borough Solicitor & Secretary); or \n(c) \nthe authority’s s.151 finance officer (Director of Finance\nand Resources) \n\n Otherwise an authority has a wide discretion\nto designate an appropriate officer to fill the role. \n\n The specified functions which must be discharged by\nthe Scrutiny Officer were set out in section 21ZA (2) as\nfollows:- \n\n \n(a) \nto promote the role\nof the authority’s overview and scrutiny committee or\ncommittees; \n\n(b) \nto provide support\nto the authority’s overview and scrutiny committee or\ncommittees and the members of that committee or those\ncommittees; \n(c) \nto provide support and\nguidance to:- \n\n (i) members of the\nauthority, \n(ii) members of the executive of the\nauthority, and \n(iii)\nofficers of the\nauthority, \n\n in relation to the\nfunctions of the authority’s overview and scrutiny committee\nor committees. \n\n The report advised\nthat given the importance of the Scrutiny Officer post that any\nappointment to it on a substantive, rather than acting up, basis\nshould be a Member level appointment. The appointment to the post\nof Scrutiny Secretary was within the Member domain under Standing\nOrder 70A, and the reference to that post survived in Standing\nOrder 70A.2. Council was therefore asked to approve the\nsubstitution of “Scrutiny Officer” for “Scrutiny\nSecretary” in Standing Order 70.A.2. \n\n Resolved: That Standing Order 70A.2 be\namended by the inclusion of the post “Scrutiny Officer”\nin place of the post “Scrutiny Secretary”. \n\n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To hear urgent statements, if any, by the Leader of the Council, members of the Cabinet or Chairmen of Committees in accordance with Standing Order 18 (COU/08/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nThere were no urgent statements. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To hear questions from Members and replies thereto, in accordance with Standing Order 17 (COU/09/270510) \n\n \n- list of questions to\nbe tabled at Council meeting. \nMinutes: \n \n(i) Councillor Cleaver asked the Cabinet\nMember for Highways, Councillor Mrs Dunn, whether, bearing in\nmind that many people did not have mobile phones, she would please\nassure Council that the new RINGO system would not be used as a\nsubstitute for working ticket machines in the Council’s car\nparks? \n\n Councillor Mrs Dunn replied that the\nCouncil had introduced, initially on a trial basis, a cashless\npayment system called RINGO to supplement and provide a convenient\nalternative to traditional pay & display machines in all of its\npublic car parks. This was not intended to be a replacement for the\npay and display machines, all of which remained in place and\ncontinued to enjoy regular inspection and maintenance. There had been a few problems\nwithin the Grove Car Park with the machine there and, after recent\ndiscussions with officers, this machine would be replaced within\nthe coming weeks. It was vital that the pay and display machines\nwere working and customers had the choice of using the RINGO\nservice plus the pay and display machines. The trial period would be\ncomplete in September and officers would review the performance of\nthe system and whether or not it should be continued. \n\n By way of a supplementary question\nCouncillor Cleaver asked the Cabinet Member to give an\nassurance that the Council would no longer put signs up in its car\nparks to those people\nwho find the machine out of order telling them to use the RINGO\nsystem and if they did not then they would be subject to a penalty\nnotice; such notices had gone up in the Derby Road car park so\ncould the Cabinet Member give us the assurance that they would not\nbe put back and hopefully that would also mean that the parking\nmachines in our car parks would actually be better maintained in\nthe future? \n\n Councillor Mrs Dunn replied that, as\nshe had said before, we needed to make sure these machines were\nreliable. There were notices within the car park and officers had\nstated that they would stay there but the Cabinet Member would have\nanother meeting with officers to discuss this further and get back\nto Councillor Cleaver. \n\n By way of a second supplementary question\nCouncillor Stark asked the Cabinet Member if she could tell him\nwhat days the parking meter in Charteris Road would be working,\nbecause the days it had not been working far outweighed the days it\ndid work and he had been bringing to the attention of various\nCabinet Members of Highways for years that this machine did not\nwork and also the machines in Woodford Green often told different\ntimes, which did not help either and he would urge the Cabinet\nMember and whoever maintained them to make sure that they did\nactually work and could she in fact do this so that members of the\npublic were not confused in the public car parks. \n\n Councillor Mrs Dunn replied that she\nhad received two emails from Councillor Stark and both had been\nresponded to and officers had been down to where the machines had not been working and they had been\nworking the following day. If Councillor Stark had any further\nproblems then obviously, if he contacted her or the Officer, the\nmatter would be looked at. \n\n (ii)\nCouncillor Bellwood asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor\nPrince when we\nwould receive a Redbridge election report of the 2010 General and\nLocal Elections about our polling places/stations? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that\nlegislation required the Council to conduct a\nreview of all polling districts and polling places by the end of\n2007. This was carried\nout and reported to Council on 15 November 2007. Legislation also required further\nreviews to take place by the end of 2011. In the interim ad-hoc reviews had\ntaken place where we were looking at changing the location of\npolling stations and those reviews had been reported to the General\nPurposes Committee. The most recent was on 5 January\n2010. The Council\nwould comply with its statutory obligations. In addition all polling stations\nwere visited by inspectors during the recent elections and any\nrelevant findings would be reported. It was likely that the\nElectoral Commission would be issuing further guidance as regards\nthe review of polling districts and polling places as a result of\nevents elsewhere in the country, and this would be taken into\nconsideration. \n\n By way of a supplementary question,\nCouncillor Bellwood asked that in the fulsome report, which he\npresumed would be carrying the recommendations of those inspectors,\nwould there be references to the lack of privacy in the small\npolling booths and secondly would there be references to blind eyes\nhaving been turned to family consultations and explanations which\nhappened in polling stations on the ballot papers and would there\nbe a report on queues spilling out of the polling stations onto the\npavement? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that he had\nno idea what would be in the report that had not yet been written,\nbut having said that, if Councillor Bellwood had specific views or\nspecific issues or concerns then the Leader would suggest either\nbringing them to his attention or the attention of the Chief\nExecutive and then they would happily look into them and have the\nmatter investigated. \n\n By way of a second supplementary question,\nCouncillor Littlewood asked which Committee this report would\ngo to? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that he\nbelieved those reports went to General Purposes Committee. That had\ncertainly been the case in the past. If that was not the case then\nhe would check with officers and I would notify Councillor\nLittlewood. \n\n (iii) Councillor Bellwood asked the Leader\nof the Council, Councillor Prince, how long had London Borough of Redbridge\nand its predecessors been employing Councillors to represent the\ninterests of their residents and Wards? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that the\nshort answer was that we have not and we do not. The slightly\nlonger version was that the London Borough of Redbridge was created\nin 1965, which was formed as an amalgamation between the Boroughs\nof Ilford, which was established in 1926, and Wanstead and Woodford\nwhich was established in 1937. Part of the Borough of Dagenham and\nChigwell also came in to form the Borough. As far as we can detect\nwe had no Councillors who were employees or who had been employees,\nwith one possible exception which had now been resolved. \n\n By way of a supplementary question\nCouncillor Bellwood asked that in all the previous years how\nhad the different authorities carried out the responsibilities both\nmorally, and as an employer, to show Councillors the job of what\nwas referred to earlier as giving a service to the public in, for\nexample, doing casework and public speaking and showing them the\nkeyboard skills on this new fangled technology? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that the Act\nwhich disqualified a member from being an employee of the authority\nwas the 1972 Act. In regards to training and Member development, as\nMembers were aware, we did set up the Panel that was chaired by\nElaine Norman and he was very grateful to her for the work she did\nlast year on that Panel. We were indeed looking at ways of training\nand Councillor Bellwood was also on that Panel so the Leader would\nwelcome his input on how we could help to develop and improve the\nservice that we as Members gave to the people of Redbridge. \n\n By way of a second supplementary question\nCouncillor Bond asked whether the Leader would agree that\ntraining for Members might be merited in asking purposeful\nquestions? \n\n Councillor Prince replied that the short answer was yes, the longer answer\nwas that that through training and development we could get a\nbetter quality of question. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To receive petitions, which will stand referred to the appropriate Chief Officer in accordance with Standing Order 19 (COU/10/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nCouncillor Bhamra presented a petition\nrequesting that planning enforcement action be taken in respect of\ncertain uses of parcels of land known as “Claybury Hill\nFarm”. \n\n (Referred to\nthe Chief Planning and Regeneration Officer) \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t To consider any matters that have been requisitioned by Members under Standing Order 55.3 (b) (COU/12/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nThere were\nno requisitioned decisions to this meeting. \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Notices of Motion (COU/12/270510) \n\n \nMotion to be moved by Councillor Prince and\nseconded by Councillor Littlewood:- \n\n “This Council records its grateful thanks to the\nformer Members for the valuable service rendered by them to the\nLondon Borough of Redbridge and who completed their service on the\nCouncil on the 10th May 2010\". \nMinutes: \n \nThe Leader, Councillor Prince, moved and\nCouncillor Littlewood seconded a Motion in respect of a vote of\nthanks to former Members. \n\n Resolved: That the following Motion be\nagreed:- \n\n “This Council records its grateful\nthanks to the former Members for the valuable service rendered by\nthem to the London Borough of Redbridge and who completed their\nservice on the Council on the 10th May 2010.” \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t Any Urgent Business (COU/13/270510) \nMinutes: \n \nNone. \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \nMayor \n | \n\t\t
| \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t | \t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t new arrangements.app1 Additional documents: \n
| \n\t\t