Home > Your Council > Agenda and minutes





Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Rooms A, B and C, Civic Offices, Elstree Way, Borehamwood

Contact: Jenny Smith 

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

63.

Communications and Apologies

(a)       Communications (if any) relating to business on the agenda.

 

(b)          Apologies for absence.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed Members and Officers to the meeting and advised that, in accordance with normal procedure, the meeting was being webcast.

 

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Choudhury and Graham.

 

 

64.

Declarations of Interest (If any)

Members are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests they or their spouse/partner have in any matter which is to be considered at this meeting.  Members must also declare any other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests they have in any matter to be considered at this meeting. The responsibility for declaring an interest rests solely with the member concerned.

 

Members must clearly state to the meeting the existence and nature of any disclosable pecuniary interest, other pecuniary interest or non‑pecuniary interest and the agenda item(s) to which it/they apply.

 

Disclosable Pecuniary Interests are prescribed by the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 as follows;

 

Employment, office, trade, profession or vocation

Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

 

 

 

Sponsorship

Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the relevant authority) made or provided within the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by a member in carrying out duties as a member, or towards your election expenses. This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

 

 

Contracts

Any contract which is made between the relevant person (or a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest) and the relevant authority— (a) under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and (b) which has not been fully discharged.

 

 

Land

Any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the relevant authority.

 

 

Licences

Any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the relevant authority for a month or longer.

 

Corporate tenancies

Any tenancy where (to the member’s knowledge) - (a) the landlord is the relevant authority; and (b) the tenant is a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest.

 

 

Securities

Any beneficial interest in securities of a body where - (a) that body (to the member’s knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of the relevant authority; and (b) either (i) the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or
(ii) if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class.

 

In cases of disclosable pecuniary interest, Members must withdraw from the meeting room while the matter is being considered.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

No Members had an interest to declare in any of the items of business on the agenda.

 

65.

Speeches by Non-Executive Members

Non-executive members attending the meeting are reminded that a non-executive member may speak for a maximum of three minutes on any item on the agenda, with a maximum of five members per item (no more than two from any one Group).

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair advised that the usual arrangements for speeches by non‑Executive Members applied at this meeting.

 

66.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 140 KB

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 19 December 2018.

 

No discussion shall take place upon the minutes, except upon their accuracy.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 19 December 2018 were approved and signed as a true record.

 

 

67.

Key Decisions

Additional documents:

67.1

Local Development Scheme and Statement of Community Involvement pdf icon PDF 169 KB

The Executive is asked to approve for adoption the revised Local Development Scheme, at Appendix A to the report, and also to agree the revised Statement of Community Involvement, at Appendix B, to be issued for targeted consultation, prior to its referral to the Executive and final adoption by the Council.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Decision that:

 

1.     the revised Local Development Scheme (LDS), at Appendix A to the report, be adopted;

 

2.     the revised Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), at Appendix B, be approved for targeted consultation, following which any necessary changes will be made and the document referred to the Executive for recommendation to the full Council for adoption; and

 

3.     consideration be given to the provision of electronic site notices in respect of the consultation in (2) above.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

Maintaining an up-to-date LDS was a statutory requirement of the Council.  The revised LDS presented to Members took account of the Government’s delay in releasing a new household need figure for the Council to plan for as the basis of its new Local Plan.  

 

Executive approval was also needed for the updated SCI to be issued for targeted consultation, prior to it being referred to the full Council for formal adoption.

 

The report explained that the LDS informed the public of the current development plans for the Borough and the likely timetable for preparing the new Local Plan.  The SCI set out how the Council would consult the public in connection with the new Local Plan and in discharging planning applications.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

To not update the LDS

 

Not updating the LDS would potentially expose the Council to legal challenge when it submitted its new Local Plan to the Planning Inspectorate for examination, particularly if the date for submitting the Local Plan for examination differed materially from the timetable set out in the LDS.

 

To not update the SCI

 

An inaccurate SCI could potentially expose the Council to judicial review for not complying with its stated intentions for engaging with the public.  Moreover, the revised SCI identified ways in which the Council could make savings by avoiding unnecessary duplication of site notices.

 

    These options were not supported for the reasons given above.

 

Key Points Arising from the Discussion

 

Local Development Scheme (LDS)

 

·       With reference to the likely changed timetable for the emerging draft Local Plan (report paragraph 5.2 and Appendix B para 8.14 refer), the non‑Executive Member present commented on the uncertainty experienced by local people and asked whether it was known why the Government had not yet published a figure. 

 

Responding, the Planning and Localism Portfolio Holder advised that there was more than one methodology for calculating the figures and that the Council had been out to consultation to ascertain the preferred one before learning about the delay.  He pointed out, however, that the delay would most likely work in the Council’s favour due to the substantial amount of work and time needed to be spent by Officers in considering all the potential sites.  He said that, if a standard methodology were to be established for use by all the relevant local authorities, this would be helpful in undertaking the task.

 

Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)

 

·       Referring to the proposed revised arrangements for site notices (paragraph 5.6 refers), the non‑Executive Member suggested that consideration  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.1

67.2

Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF) Bids (Larger) pdf icon PDF 186 KB

The Executive is asked to consider the recommendations of the Community Infrastructure Levy Investment Panel (CILIP) on the bids received relating to the larger scale projects reviewed by the Panel at its October meeting.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Decision that:

 

1.     the report be noted, including the content of Appendix A which summarises all of the larger scale bids received through the recent Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF) bid process;

 

2.      funding be approved for three larger scale CIF bids as follows:

      EB6 – Elstree University and Technical College; EB14 – Community       Hertsmere (Aycliffe Road); and EB15 – Community Hertsmere (Leeming       Road), totalling £623,875, as detailed in Report EX/19/06 and as       recommended by the Community Infrastructure Levy Investment Panel       (CILIP);

 

3.     larger scale CIF bid EB17 – Hertswood Academy, Cowley Hill,   Borehamwood, be deferred;

 

4.     funding for larger scale bids AL4 – Red House Surgery, Watling Street, Radlett and EB19 – Hertfordshire County Council, Pegs Lane, Hertford be not approved for the reasons given in report Appendix A;

 

5.     larger scale bids BU2, BU3, PB1, PB7, PB8, EB10, EB11 and EB18, relating to Hertsmere Leisure, be considered at a separate meeting of the Executive; and

 

6.     further detail be provided in future reports on CIF bids to include the names of the organisations in the report’s recommendations.

       

Reasons for the Decision

 

National legislation stipulated that CIL monies should be spent on improvements to infrastructure, including its replacement, operation and maintenance to support development which had taken place within the local area. 

 

The Council’s CIL Panel was tasked with considering the bids received and ascertaining which projects should receive funding in the light of national and local level legislation as well as the Council’s own guidelines, officer recommendations and input from external and internal consultees.  The recommendations of the Panel were now presented to the Executive, in accordance with the agreed processes, for a final decision on funding pledges to be made. 

 

The reason for not approving the bids listed in (4) above was that they failed to meet the criteria outlined in the assessment process.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

          An alternative option was to spend no CIL monies at the current time.  However, this option was not supported due to the recent relaunch of the bidding process and the fact that a number of strong applications had been received from local groups and organisations. 

 

Another option was to endorse a higher number of bids than recommended.  However, this was not supported as the Council needed to ensure that monies were allocated fairly and in accordance with the process previously agreed by the Executive, having regard to the agreed assessment criteria.

 

Key Points Arising from the Discussion

 

·       The non-Executive Member reiterated his point made at the previous Executive meeting regarding the targeting funding for infrastructure needs which he felt was magnified in the larger bids.  He commended the conscientious work of the Panel which had considered the bids within the prescribed criteria but suggested that the process and criteria be reconsidered for future bids.

 

Responding, the Portfolio Holder agreed that CIL should primarily be used to address the infrastructure deficit.  He advised that the intention was to earmark a top slice of the funding for small organisations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.2

67.3

Setting the Revenue Budget for 2019/20 pdf icon PDF 504 KB

The Executive is asked to recommend the draft Revenue Budget 2019/20 for consideration at a joint meeting of the overview and scrutiny committees and to all Members and stakeholders for consultation.

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Decision that:

 

1.     the draft budget for 2019/20, as set out in section 10 and Appendix B of the report, which shows a net budget requirement of £11,545k (a reduction of £315k from 2018/19 at £11,860k), be recommended to the joint meeting of the Policy Review and Operations Review Committees and to all Members, stakeholders and the public for consultation; and

 

2.     the revised Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP), as set out in report section 9 and Appendix C, which shows a total future budgetary gap over the three-year financial period from 2020/21 to 2022/23 of £1,078k unless an appropriate course of action is taken to eradicate this gap, be recommended to the joint meeting of the Policy Review and Operations Review Committees and to all Members, stakeholders and the public for consultation.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

The Council’s Constitution and best working practice required that the Operations Review and Policy Review committees, all Members of the Council and stakeholders be consulted on the budget prior to its adoption by the Council.  Any feedback arising from the consultations would be included in the final budget reports to be presented to the Council on 27 February 2019.

 

The Council was required by law to set a balanced budget i.e. the anticipated ongoing costs of providing services should be equal to anticipated funding resources.  It was also vital that the budget was sustainable over the long term while achieving the Council’s corporate goals.

 

It was critical that the revenue budget was set in such a way as to ensure that the Council allocated its limited available resources effectively and efficiently, in order to continue providing value for money services and meet both its statutory obligations and its aims and objectives of the Community Strategy and Corporate Plan.

 

As resolved by the Council, the MTFP is required to be reviewed and updated annually and approved as part of the annual revenue budget setting process.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

None as the Local Government Act 1992, Section 32 required that all known and anticipated revenue budgetary requirements of the Authority for the forthcoming year be calculated prior to setting the Council Tax and that this should be done no later than 11 March in the preceding financial year.  

Furthermore, the Council’s Constitution required that the Operations Review and Policy Review Committees and all Members of the Council be consulted on the budget at least four weeks prior to the Executive recommending its adoption by the Council.  Accordingly, there were no alternatives to proceeding with the initial stage of the budget setting process by consulting the overview and scrutiny committees.

 

Key Points Arising from the Discussion

 

·       The Chair clarified the process for approval of the forthcoming budget whereby the draft budget would be presented to the Executive to recommend consultation; to the scrutiny committees for consideration; to the Executive post consultation and, finally, to the full Council for approval. 

 

·       The Corporate Director presented the report, drawing Members’ particular attention to the Medium Term Financial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.3

68.

Setting the Capital Budget 2019/20 to 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 585 KB

The Executive is asked to recommend the draft Capital Budget 2019/20 for consideration at a joint meeting of the overview and scrutiny committees and to all Members and stakeholders for consultation.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Decision that:

 

1.     the revised Capital Budget for 2018/19 of £14,840k, as set out in section 7 to the report, be noted;

 

2.     the forecast capital spend for 2018/19 of £10,496k, as set out in section 9 to the report, be noted;

 

3.     the draft capital programme 2019/20 to 2021/22, amounting to £6,140k over the three-year period, be considered and the following agreed:

 

·     the additions to the capital programme amounting to £880k, as set out      in section 10 and detailed in Appendix B to the report;

 

·     the removal of the £2m Emergency Funding from the Capital      Programme and the setting up of a specific reserve, as set out in    section 8; and

 

·     the profiled budget over the next three years as £3,529k in 2019/20;     £1,922k in 2020/21; and £689k in 2021/22, as set out in section 11,     table 6 to the report;

 

4.     the draft three-year capital programme 2019/20 to 2021/22 be recommended to the joint meeting of the Policy Review and Operations Review Committees and to all Members, stakeholders and the public for consultation; and

 

5.     that it be noted that the Capital Strategy (paragraph 5.3 refers) is currently being reviewed in light of changes to the Prudential Code and that this strategy will be presented to a future meeting of the Executive for recommendation to the Council for approval.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

The Executive was asked to approve the three-year capital programme for the period 2019/20 to 2021/22 for consultation prior to adoption by the Council on 27 February 2019.

 

The Council had a statutory obligation, as specified in the CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) prudential code, to make estimates of the total capital expenditure it planned to incur during the forthcoming year and the following two financial years to facilitate prudent, affordable and sustainable capital investment decisions.

 

The procedure agreed by the Council for setting the capital budget was that capital bids were firstly critically appraised by the Asset Management Panel in conjunction with officers prior to recommendation for inclusion in the capital programme (Appendix B to the report refers).

         

In order to comply with these requirements, the adoption of the 2019/20 to 2021/22 Capital Budget would follow the timetable set out below:

 

Asset Management Panel for consultation

11 December 2018

Draft budget to Executive to recommend consultation

16 January 2019

Draft budget to joint meeting of Policy Review and Operations Review Committees for consultation

28 January 2019

Final budget to Executive for recommendation to Council

13 February 2019

Approval by the full Council

27 February 2019

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

Since it was a requirement of the Council’s Constitution to consult its scrutiny committees, all Members of the Council and stakeholders on the draft budget, there was no alternative than to undertake consultation for the required length of time.

The Executive could have chosen to recommend the adoption of an alternative capital budget to that presented or that any of the individual bids presented for funding be not approved.  However, it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

69.

Non-Key Decisions

None.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

None.

 

70.

Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Executive is scheduled to take place at 6pm on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at the Civic Offices, Elstree Way, Borehamwood.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Noted that the next meeting of the Executive was scheduled to be held on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 at 6.00pm.