Public decision list September 8, 2020

Present:
Hans Gaillard, Mayor
John Frenken, Alderman
Jan Boersma, Alderman
Jos de Bruin, Alderman
Rien Schalkx, Secretary
Absent:
Paul van Liempd, Alderman

1. Adoption of the list of non-public and public decisions of the Municipal Executive meeting dated September 1, 2020 / Hans Gaillard

The college adopts the decision lists.

2. Recommendations from the Civil Affairs Committee, September 1, 2020 / Hans Gaillard

The Civil Affairs Committee met on September 1. The council is informed of the recommendations made by this committee.

The council takes note of the recommendations and commitments made by the Civil Affairs Committee on September 1, 2020.

3. Extending the action plan for license holders / Paul van Liempd

The current action plan for permit holders expires at the end of this year.
The municipal tasks do not. The plan was for the new Integration Act to come into force on
January 1, 2021. This has now been postponed until July 1, 2021. This new act also expands the tasks of the municipality. It is now proposed to extend the current action plan until the new act comes into force. A new decision with additional financial consequences will be submitted for the implementation of the new act.

The municipal executive:

  • decides to extend the Action Plan for permit holders until the new Integration Act comes into force. The target date is July 1, 2021;
  • approves the text for the council information letter and has the text included in the next council information letter.

4. Audiovisual equipment phase 2 Town hall / Hans Gaillard

The question we asked ourselves was: "How can we make our council chamber as future-proof as possible?" In doing so, we looked at the ongoing digitization of society, but also took the current situation (COVID-19) into account. Can the council function if we consider therijksoverheid and recommendations and the requirements in the emergency law?
By choosing option b), we comply with the rules and are prepared for the future.
The options were discussed in the Presidium on July 9, 2020.

The council takes note of the final draft and decides:

  • submit the council proposal to the council;
  • to ask the council:
    a. to approve the realization/installation of the proposed audio/visual equipment
    b. to approve a credit for the realization/installation of the proposed audio/visual equipment”
        c. to cover the capital costs of the credit from the provisional item 'growth path center development'
    d. to incorporate the financial consequences of the above into the 8th budget amendment for 2020.

5. Recommendations from the Land Affairs Committee August 31, 2020 / Hans Gaillard

The Land Affairs Committee met on August 31. The council is informed of the recommendations made by this committee.

The council takes note of the recommendations made by the Land Affairs Committee on August 31, 2020.

6. Recommendations from the General Affairs Committee September 2, 2020 / Hans Gaillard

The General Affairs Committee met on September 2. The Board is informed of the recommendations made by this committee.

The Board takes note of the recommendations made by the General Affairs Committee on September 2, 2020.

7. Supervisory assessment Environmental Law 2020 / Hans Gaillard

The province uses Intergovernmental Supervision (IBT) to ensure that local authorities perform their social tasks properly. The municipality of Son en Breugel was assessed on March 12, 2020, and has taken significant steps since the previous assessment and now partially complies.

The council decides:

  • to take note of the memo and documents;
  • to take note of the report on structural safety of buildings;
  • to bring the memo with documents and the report to the attention of the General Affairs Committee.

8. Rejection of enforcement request / Hans Gaillard

The board received an enforcement request on July 5, 2017. A mediation process was initiated in response to this request. This did not entirely produce the desired outcome for the person who submitted the enforcement request. However, in our view, the Requirements the request have been met, which means that the enforcement request must be rejected.

The council decides to reject the enforcement request.