Wrthi'n llwytho
Does dim crynodeb o'r cyfarfod hwn eto. Caiff un ei ysgrifennu pan fydd y cyngor yn cyhoeddi'r cofnodion. Mae'r agenda a'r papurau isod.
Councillor Sterry asked: Cabinet Member, Residents of Milner Street were consulted on the installation of an electric vehicle charging point. During that process, residents and ward members were given a clear written assurance that the charger would be installed without white marked parking bays, and the correspondence further stated that this approach had been agreed with you as the Cabinet Member. Despite those assurances, white marked bays have now been installed. Officers have subsequently admitted that this represents an internal error, that the scheme delivered differs from what was originally agreed, and that no further consultation with residents or ward members took place before the change was implemented. They have also sought to explain the situation by referring to internal communication failures and advice from Highways that the marked bays were required for safety. This raises serious concerns about public confidence in the council's consultation process. Residents are entitled to expect that commitments made during consultation will either be honoured or, if circumstances change, that they will be informed and consulted before a materially different scheme is implemented. Can the Cabinet Member therefore confirm: Did you approve the original proposal that the EV charging point would be installed without white marked bays, as stated in the correspondence issued to ward members? If so, who authorised the subsequent departure from that agreed position? Why were residents and ward members not informed or re-consulted once it became apparent that the scheme being implemented differed from what had been agreed? In light of the council's admission that an error occurred, will you now instruct officers to honour the original commitment by removing the white bay markings, or explain why the council believes it is acceptable to depart from assurances previously given to residents? Does the Cabinet Member agree that maintaining public trust requires the council to honour commitments made during consultation, or, where that is no longer possible, to return to residents before implementing a materially different scheme? Councillor Howells responded: The original information provided to you was incorrect, due to a communication error and we have responded to you on this issue, for which we apologise. I understand that there was also significant productive early consultation and discussions between officers and ward members on other matters relating to this proposed charging point, for example leading to an amended bay location on Milner Street. The TRO process was undertaken subsequently, indicating the correct intention to include markings, and publicly consulted on between 8 July and 5 August 2025. Ward Members were notified by Legal Services, and the approved order was shared with Members. The council accepts that the final scheme differed from what had originally been advised, and that this should have been communicated more clearly, but the final safety advice is that the marked bays need to stay.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Dyw'r cyngor ddim wedi cofnodi presenoldeb ar gyfer y cyfarfod hwn.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.