Agenda for Cabinet (pre 2012) on Thursday, 9th February, 2012, 4.00pm
navigation and tools
Find it
You are here - Home : Council and Democracy : Councillors and Committees : Agenda, decisions and minutes
Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 220 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall
Contact: Mark Wall Head of Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Procedural Business
(b) Exclusion of Press and Public - To consider whether, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, or the nature of the proceedings, the press and public should be excluded from the meeting when any of the following items are under consideration.
NOTE: Any item appearing in Part 2 of the Agenda states in its heading either that it is confidential or the category under which the information disclosed in the report is exempt from disclosure and therefore not available to the public.
A list and description of the categories of exempt information is available for public inspection at Brighton and Hove Town Halls. Additional documents: Minutes: (a) Declarations of Interest
178.1 Councillor Randall declared a personal and non prejudicial interest in Items 188 to 191 as he was a member of the Brighton & Hove Seaside Homes Ltd Board and matters may arise during the discussions on the items that affected the company.
(b) Exclusion of Press and Public
178.2 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’), it was considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press or public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I(1) of the Act).
178.3 RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the items listed under Part 2 of the agenda. |
|
|
Minutes of the previous meeting Minutes of the Meeting held on the 19th January 2012 (copy attached). Additional documents: Minutes: 179.1 RESOLVED - That the minutes of the meeting held on the 19th January 2012 be approved as a correct record. |
|
|
Chair's Communications Additional documents: Minutes: 180.1 The Chair noted that the meeting would be webcast.
180.2 The Chair informed the Cabinet that the council had recently submitted an expression of interest to the Department for Business Innovation & Skills to be the host city for the Green Investment Bank, which was designed to accelerate private sector investment in the UK’s transition to a green economy.
180.3 The Chair noted that the council had submitted a bid for up to £3m of ‘Growing Placed Fund’ to the ‘Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership’ to support funding of the i360 scheme at the West Pier.
180.4 The Chair congratulated Planning Officers and in particular the Head of Planning & Public Protection for their work in regard to the consideration of the planning application for the Royal Sussex Hospital.
180.5 The Chair noted that the budget consultation process had been well received and a number of agencies, organisations and residents had taken part and provided positive feedback. |
|
|
Items reserved for discussion (a) Items reserved by the Cabinet Members
(b) Items reserved by the Opposition Spokespeople
(c) Items reserved by Members, with the agreement of the Chair.
NOTE: Public Questions, Written Questions from Councillors, Petitions, Deputations, Letters from Councillors and Notices of Motion will be reserved automatically. Additional documents: Minutes: 181.1 RESOLVED – That all the items be reserved for discussion. |
|
|
To Receive Petitions (a) Petitions will be presented to the Chair at the meeting.
(b) Music Service Cuts. Extract from the proceedings of the Council meeting held on the 26th January 2012 (copy attached). Additional documents: Minutes: (a) Receipt of Petitions
182.1 The Chair noted that there were a number of petitions to be presented and invited Ms. Fazackerly to present her petition.
182.2 Ms. Fazackerly thanked the Chair and stated that her petition had been signed by 80 people and requested that consideration be given to reinstating the subscription paid to the RNIB Talking Books for private individuals, which was currently due to be removed as part of the 2012/13 budget savings proposals. She stated that she was completely blind and relied on the service to enable her to read books as the RNIB software ‘daisy’ was the best option for her. She was concerned that letters informing people of the proposal had been sent which for someone like her were useless as they were only in print and therefore meant people were unaware of the possible changes to the service. She was aware that the council libraries offered an alternative software programme for reading books but it was not as good as the RNIB and she urged the Cabinet to reconsider its proposals.
182.3 The Chair thanked Ms. Fazackerly for attending the meeting and presenting the petition and invited Councillor Bowden as the Cabinet Member for Culture, Tourism & Recreation to respond.
182.4 Councillor Bowden stated that the views of the petition and other users had been taken on board and it was now intended to maintain the RNIB subscription for 2012/13 and to investigate ways of enabling it to continue in future years. The council was in discussion with RNIB and he was hopeful that a solution could be found. He also noted the comments about the letters which had been sent and apologised for the delay in sending out the information in alternative formats.
182.5 RESOLVED: That the petition be noted.
182.6 The Chair noted that there were a number of petitions relating to the proposed closure of the mobile library and therefore stated that he would invite each petitioner to present their petition before asking Councillor Bowden to reply. He then invited Ms. Moore to present her petition.
182.7 Ms. Moore thanked the Chair and stated that her e-petition had been signed by 21 people who wanted the mobile library to be retained. She stated that it enabled people to use the service who would not otherwise get to a library and provided them with a sense of community and an ability to interact and learn. It was an important part of their lives and should be kept as a service for the residents of the city.
182.8 The Chair thanked Ms. Moore and invited Mr. Spillman to present his petition.
182.9 Mr. Spillman thanked the Chair and stated that in the short time he had been collecting signatures across the city, the petition had reached a total of 1,136 as of today and more were being sent in to him. The mobile library had been serving the public for generations and would be missed by vulnerable residents, the elderly and young people alike and should not be taken away from them. He noted that the consultation document on the proposal actually concluded on the 10th February, the day after the current meeting would be recommending the closure. He therefore asked that a full consultation exercise be undertaken with the current service kept for the next year and if need be it would cease on 2013.
182.10 The Chair thanked Mr. Spillman and invited Ms. Rull-Usano to present her petition.
182.11 Ms. Rull-Usano thanked the Chair and stated that she had a petition signed by 160 residents calling for the retention of the mobile library. She believed that the proposal was in effect short-changing the community and denying people the opportunity to benefit from a library service. She was aware of various vulnerable groups who used it and would be unlikely to get to a normal library. She therefore asked that the Cabinet reconsider the proposal.
182.12 The Chair thanked Ms. Rull-Usano for attending and invited Councillor Bowden as the Cabinet Member for Culture, Tourism and Recreation to respond.
182.13 Councillor Bowden thanked the petitioners and stated that he fully agreed with them in regard to the value of libraries to the community and noted that the Council was ‘bucking’ the trend in regard to keeping its library service open and supported. However, that meant there was a need to look at services and the cost of maintaining the mobile library service was increasing, especially as the actual vehicle was reaching the end of its lifespan and would need replacing at a significant capital cost. He noted that the recommendations from the Budget Scrutiny meeting had been taken on board and discussions were being held with the voluntary sector organisations to see if they could support a mobile library and further consideration was being given to whether the service could be maintained.
182.14 Councillor Mitchell suggested that as other partner organisations tended to use similar vehicles for community engagement activities it might be worth approaching them as well as the voluntary sector to see if a mobile library could be supported.
182.15 Councillor Bowden welcomed the suggestion and stated that he was happy to explore any possibilities that would enable the mobile library to continue.
182.16 RESOLVED – That the petitions be noted.
182.17 The Chair then invited Councillor Summers to come forward and present a petition.
182.18 Councillor Summers thanked the Chair and stated that she had been asked to present a petition signed by 22 residents calling on the council “not to close any more public toilets in Brighton & Hove and to ensure adequate funding continues to keep them open, clean and safe.”
182.19 The Chair thanked Councillor Summers for attending the meeting and presenting the petition and invited Councillor West, Cabinet Member for Environment & Sustainability to respond.
182.20 Councillor West stated that the council had been looking at the provision of public toilets and their usage, accessibility and whether alternative provision could be made. The council was seeking to maintain provision across the city and it was regrettable that some public toilets had to be closed. However, he noted that new facilities were becoming available as part of new developments e.g. at the Open Market and it was hoped that more establishments would join the campaign and enable their facilities to be used.
182.21 The Chair thanked Councillor West and proposed that the petition be noted.
182.22 RESOLVED: That the petition be noted.
182.23 The Chair then invited Mr. Powell to come forward and present his petition.
182.24 Mr. Powell thanked the Chair and stated that he had a petition signed by 161 residents asking for the proposed increase in rental charges for allotments to be reduced and a full consultation exercise held as part of a review of allotment costs, services and subsidies.
182.25 The Chair thanked Mr. Powell for attending the meeting and presenting the petition and invited Councillor West, Cabinet Member for Environment & Sustainability to respond.
182.26 Councillor West stated that it was felt that there had been a need to review the level of subsidy provided for allotment holders and for an increase to be applied. However, he was happy to work with the allotment holders to look at the situation and find ways to make efficiencies which might then help to reduce the overall increase to rentals.
182.27 The Chair thanked Councillor West and proposed that the petition be noted.
182.28 RESOLVED: That the petition be noted.
(b) Music & Arts Service Cuts Petition
182.29 The Chair noted that the deputation and the petition on the issue of proposed cuts to the music and arts service had been debated at the Council meeting on the 26th January and referred to the Cabinet for consideration as detailed in the report. He also noted from a representative of the deputation who was present that the service was a popular one enjoyed by people across the city who wanted it to continue and for its funding to be fully reinstated.
182.30 Councillor Shanks noted that the budget for 2012/13 had been reinstated following the response to the budget consultation and further consideration was to be given to the funding for the following years. She also noted that a bid had been to central government and once the outcome of that exercise was known it would influence the funding process for the following year. She stated that the importance and value of the service was recognised and officers were looking at ways in which the service could be protected.
182.31 RESOLVED: That the report and the petition be noted. |
|
|
A list of publication questions received by the due date of 12 noon on the 2nd February 2012 will be circulated separately as part of an addendum to the agenda for the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: 183.1 The Chair noted that one public question had been received by the due date and invited Ms. Paynter to come forward and put her question to the meeting.
183.2 Ms. Paynter thanked the Chair and asked, "Thinking of the recent Tweetarama between Lord Bassam and Cllr Jason Kitcat concerning the upcoming Council Budget and rumblings around press releases centring around Council business from MP's, I wonder if BHCC would be interested or consider it appropriate to give local Lords and MP's co-opted seats at Budget Council and Full Council meetings?"
183.3 The Chair stated that he did not believe the Leaders of the Opposition Groups needed the support of other people such as Lord Bassam to put forward their views on the budget proposals. He did not think it was appropriate for them to take part in the council’s deliberations but they were welcome to attend the meetings.
183.4 Ms. Paynter asked the following supplementary question, “I feel that I ought to be able to see two separate realms as between the role of a councillor and that of an MP in the two separated arenas of government. These days, however, where Brighton & Hove are concerned, the difference seems blurred. Does criteria exist by which a member of the public can judge that an MP or a Member of the House of Lords is exceeding their elected or appointed remit and is straying inappropriately into local government territory?”
183.5 The Chair stated that he was not aware of any demarcation as such and that as members of the public, they were able to say what they felt in a public arena. |
|
|
Deputations A list of any deputations received by the due date of 12 noon on the 2nd February 2012 will be circulated as part of an addendum to the agenda for the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: 184. The Chair noted that no deputations had been submitted. |
|
|
Letters from Councillors The closing date for receipt of letters from Councillors was 10.00am on the 30th January 2012. No letters have been received. Additional documents: Minutes: 185.1 The Chair noted that there were no letters from councillors. |
|
|
Written Questions from Councillors The closing date for receipt of written questions from Councillors was 10.00am on the 30th January 2012. No written questions have been received. Additional documents: Minutes: 186.1 The Chair noted that no written questions had been submitted by councillors. |
|
|
(a) Accept the Council Tax Freeze Grant. Extract from the proceedings of the Council meeting held on the 26th January 2012 (copy attached). Additional documents: Minutes: 187.1 The Chair noted that a notice of motion calling on the Cabinet to accept the council tax freeze grant had been referred from the Council meeting on the 26th January for consideration and suggested that it be noted and its theme be taken in to account during consideration of the budget under Item 188 on the agenda.
187.2 RESOLVED: That the notice of motion be noted. |
|
|
General Fund Revenue Budget & Council Tax 2012/13
Report of the Director of Finance (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the Council be recommended to approve, subject to recommendation 2.3 below, the 2012/13 General Fund Revenue Budget proposals contained in the body of the report including:
(i) A 3.5% increase in the Brighton & Hove element of the council tax. (ii) The 2012/13 budget allocations to services as set out in appendix 1. (iii) The council’s net General Fund budget requirement for 2012/13 of £227.1m. (iv) The reinvestments as set out in paragraph 3.35. (v) The budget savings package as set out in appendix 10. (vi) The contingency budget of £4.9m as set out in table 5. (vii) The reserves allocations as set out in appendix 5 and table 3. (viii) The borrowing limit for the year commencing 1 April 2012 of £383m (to include long term liabilities relating to PFI schemes of £62m). (ix) The annual Minimum Revenue Provision statement as set out in appendix 8. (x) The prudential indicators as set out in appendix 9 to this report.
(2) That the revised Medium Term Financial Strategy budget and resource projections for 2012/13 to 2014/15 as set out in appendix 6 to the report be noted; and
(3) That it be noted that supplementary information needed to set the overall council tax would be provided for the budget setting Council as listed in paragraph 4.5 of the report. Minutes: 188.1 The Chair introduced the report which set out the final proposals for the General Fund Revenue Budget and Council Tax for 2012/13. He noted that the proposals took into account feedback and evidence received from the consultation and scrutiny process and that changes had been made as a result of the feedback. At the heart of the proposals was an increase to the council tax of 3.5% which the Administration believed was appropriate and provided a more viable budget position for future years than the short-term fix offered by the Government and accepted by the opposition groups.
188.2 Councillor J. Kitcat stated that the budget proposals should be taken in context with the national government’s austerity policy that had been imposed on local authorities across the country. This policy had seen significant reductions in formula grant funding and further restrictions of local authorities which threatened public services and put pressure on local authorities to be able to minimise the impact of the cuts on those who were most vulnerable. The proposed tax freeze grant was a one-off provision that would see increased savings for 2012/13 and future years being required with no proposals from the opposition groups on how they would achieve them for 2012/13. He noted that the budget proposals had been amended to take account of the feedback that had been received and both one-off and recurring funding had been identified to offset the changes to Housing Benefit so as to minimise the impact it would have on people in the city. He hoped that the proposals would be supported and recommended the budget to the Cabinet.
188.3 Councillor G. Theobald noted the comments and stated that the matter would be fully debated at the Budget Council meeting on the 23rd February. He was pleased to see that there had been changes made to the original proposals and felt that further savings could be made in some areas. With regard to the level of council tax, he referred to the on-line poll run by the Argus and noted that an under spend of £3.2m was currently being projected and therefore questioned the need to increase council tax by 3.5% rather than keeping it at 2.5% and accepting the council tax freeze grant. He also questioned whether the LTP would be used to cover the reduction in road maintenance funding and whether the £22,000 subscription for the RNIB would be met.
188.4 Councillor Davey stated that it was intended to protect the transport budget and road maintenance would be supported through the LTP, in order to invest in the quality of the roads in the city.
188.5 Councillor Bowden stated that one-off funding had been identified to meet the £22k subscription fee for the RNIB in the coming year and that discussion were ongoing in respect of how the service could be maintained in the future years.
188.6 Councillor J. Kitcat stated that there was a need to show how services would be retained if a council tax freeze was applied and whilst he acknowledged the Argus poll, he stated that the majority of people would vote yes for more if it was to cost less.
188.7 Councillor Mitchell stated that she had to disagree with the proposed increase and that she believed there should be a council tax freeze at 2.5% and the available grant of £3m accepted. There were additional resources from within the council that could be utilised and radical review of senior management could offset the required level of additional savings that would have to be found. She agreed that the Government were cutting resources to local authorities too far and putting an unacceptable burden on councils which was likely to have a societal impact. She queried whether it was intended to fully fund the music and arts service for the next two years as she believed the Cabinet Member had indicated that this was the intention at the council meeting, but noted only one-year’s funding had been identified. She also felt that greater clarity was required in respect of the proposed increase to allotment rentals. She felt that the proposed management and admin savings of £215k was not sufficient and should be revisited.
188.8 Councillor J. Kitcat noted the comments and stated that there had been a 19% reduction in senior management levels. He could not understand why the Labour & Co-operative Group were supporting the council tax freeze, funding for the music & arts service in 2012/13 had been found and future years funding would be reviewed once the outcome of the bid for hub status was known and £31k had been identified for the allotments rentals.
188.9 RESOLVED:
(1) That the Council be recommended to approve, subject to recommendation 2.3 below, the 2012/13 General Fund Revenue Budget proposals contained in the body of the report including:
(i) A 3.5% increase in the Brighton & Hove element of the council tax. (ii) The 2012/13 budget allocations to services as set out in appendix 1. (iii) The council’s net General Fund budget requirement for 2012/13 of £227.1m. (iv) The reinvestments as set out in paragraph 3.35. (v) The budget savings package as set out in appendix 10. (vi) The contingency budget of £4.9m as set out in table 5. (vii) The reserves allocations as set out in appendix 5 and table 3. (viii) The borrowing limit for the year commencing 1 April 2012 of £383m (to include long term liabilities relating to PFI schemes of £62m). (ix) The annual Minimum Revenue Provision statement as set out in appendix 8. (x) The prudential indicators as set out in appendix 9 to this report.
(2) That the revised Medium Term Financial Strategy budget and resource projections for 2012/13 to 2014/15 as set out in appendix 6 to the report be noted; and
(3) That it be noted that supplementary information needed to set the overall council tax would be provided for the budget setting Council as listed in paragraph 4.5 of the report. |
|
|
Capital Resources & Capital Investment Programme 2012/13
Report of the Director of Finance (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That the Council be recommended to approve the following:-
(i) The Capital Investment Programme for 2012/13 as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report;
(ii) To note the estimated capital resources in future years as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report;
(iii) The allocation of £0.25m resources in 2012/13 for the Strategic Investment Fund for the purposes set out in paragraph 3.25 of the report;
(iv) The allocation of £0.5m for the ICT fund;
(v) The allocation of £1.0m for the Asset Management Fund;
(vi) The proposed use of council borrowing as set out in table 5 at paragraph 3.28 of the report. Minutes: 189.1 Councillor J. Kitcat introduced the report which detailed the level of available capital resources amounting to £96.9m for a Capital Investment Programme in 2012/13. He noted that the proposed programme was set in the context of the Medium Term Financial Strategy principles approved by the Cabinet and Full Council in October 2011.
189.2 Councillor G. Theobald noted that the total of £96.9m was less than that approved at the last Budget Council and noted the proposal to sell-off the council number plate, CD1, which would generate a one-off saving and queried why this was regarded as beneficial and yet the £3m grant from the Government to freeze council tax was not.
189.3 The Chair stated that the revenue from the number plate would be used to support community groups, whereas the government grant required additional savings to be found in 2012/13 and future years.
189.4 Councillor Mitchell stated that the threadbare capital programme illustrated the position the council found itself in because of the Government’s own policies. She queried where the rest of the risk for the Brighton & Hove Seaside Homes Ltd was taken into account within the budget proposals and how the information was to be reported.
189.5 The Director of Finance stated that no provision had been made in the budget for the LDV risk as it was additional expenditure which was not expected to crystallise. She noted that information was shared between the council and the company and that if required officers could look at having a formal reporting process for Members.
189.6 The Chair noted that each of the groups had a Member on the Board and therefore they could report back to their own groups and formally moved the report’s recommendations.
189.7 RESOLVED: That the Council be recommended to approve the following:-
(i) The Capital Investment Programme for 2012/13 as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report;
(ii) To note the estimated capital resources in future years as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report;
(iii) The allocation of £0.25m resources in 2012/13 for the Strategic Investment Fund for the purposes set out in paragraph 3.25 of the report;
(iv) The allocation of £0.5m for the ICT fund;
(v) The allocation of £1.0m for the Asset Management Fund;
(vi) The proposed use of council borrowing as set out in table 5 at paragraph 3.28 of the report. |
|
|
Housing Revenue Account Budget 2012/13 Report of the Strategic Director: Place (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the budget for 2012/13 as shown in Appendix 1 to the report be approved;
(2) That individual rent increases and decreases in line with rent restructuring principles as determined by the Government be approved;
(3) That the changes to fees and charges as detailed in paragraph 3.18 to 3.26 of the report be approved;
(4) That the introduction of new service charges for communal digital aerials as detailed in paragraph 3.23 of the report be approved; and
(5) That the separation of general fund and housing debt into two separate pools from 1 April 2012 in accordance with CIPFA guidance be approved. Minutes: 190.1 Councillor Wakefield introduced the report which outlined the proposed budget for the Housing Revenue Account for 2012/13 as required by the Local Government & Housing Act 1989. She noted that a total of £933k of savings had been indentified and service pressures of £263k, with an average rent increase of £5.17 a week. She also noted that a special financial inclusion service had been introduced to assist council tenants and that the city was facing a housing crisis which needed to be tackled.
190.2 Councillor g. Theobald welcomed the report and noted that there had been a rise in insurance claims and insurance costs.
190.3 The Head of Housing & Social Inclusion stated that there had been a rise in insurance premiums and previous under-funding which attributed to the overall increase in costs.
190.4 RESOLVED:
(1) That the budget for 2012/13 as shown in Appendix 1 to the report be approved;
(2) That individual rent increases and decreases in line with rent restructuring principles as determined by the Government be approved;
(3) That the changes to fees and charges as detailed in paragraph 3.18 to 3.26 of the report be approved;
(4) That the introduction of new service charges for communal digital aerials as detailed in paragraph 3.23 of the report be approved; and
(5) That the separation of general fund and housing debt into two separate pools from 1 April 2012 in accordance with CIPFA guidance be approved. |
|
|
Housing Revenue Account Capital Programme 2012-15 Report of the Strategic Director: Place (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That Cabinet approves the capital programme budget of £27.229 million and financing for 2012/13 as set out in paragraph 4.1 of the report. Minutes: 191.1 Councillor Wakefield introduced the report which sought approval for the 2012/13 Capital Programme and detailed a provisional Capital Programme for the following two years, 2013/14 and 2014/15 for the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). She stated that the intention was to improve the quality of provision and tackle inequality by providing more suitable homes. It was hoped to bring back over seventy long-term empty properties into use and by the end of 2013 to have all homes at the Decent Homes Standard. The challenge ahead was to address the housing shortage in the city and to build new homes as well as bring others back into use.
191.2 Councillor Mitchell welcomed the report and was pleased to see the separate programme to deal with mould and damp problems which was a concern for tenants.
191.3 Councillor G. Theobald referred to the feed in tariff scheme and queried why it had previously projected an income of £9m but was now listed as having a loss of £8m.
191.4 Councillor J. Kitcat stated that the Government had changed the process for the scheme which prevented collective bodies such as the council from being able to take advantage of the scheme and install solar panels. He stated that he would ensure Councillor Theobald received a written explanation as to how the situation had changed and its impact for the council.
191.5 RESOLVED: That the capital programme budget of £27.229 million and financing for 2012/13 as set out in paragraph 4.1 of the report be approved. |
|
|
Targeted Budget Management (TBM) 2011/12 Month 9
Report of the Director of Finance (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the provisional outturn position for the General Fund, which has an under spend of £3.187m be noted;
(2) That the forecast out-turn for the Section 75 Partnerships and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for 2011/12 be noted;
(3) That the provisional out-turn position on the capital programme be noted; and
(4) That the following changes to the capital programme, the new schemes, variations and slippage as set out in Appendices 1 & 2 to the report be approved. Minutes: 192.1 Councillor J. Kitcat introduced the report and noted that an underspend was being projected for the year end and wished to thank his Cabinet colleagues and officers across the service areas for their work in tackling the pressures and finding solutions that had led to the current position.
192.2 Councillor G. Theobald noted the provisional underspend for the General Fund, but also noted that there were significant increases in areas such as foster placements, travellers and a substantial amount identified for the Downland Initiative. He was disappointed that an overspend remained for HR and Communications.
192.3 The Chair stated that in regard to foster care placements, it was a national trend and action was being taken to try to address the costs such as using more carers from within the city.
192.4 Councillor J. Kitcat noted that both the HR and Communications overspends had been reduced and improvements made which was encouraging. He stated that officers were looking at the possibility of shared services with other authorities and it was hoped that further progress would be made.
192.5 Councillor Mitchell welcomed the projected underspend and stated that she hoped the support to major projects would not be lost as part of the savings exercise and noted the improvement in the Communications area.
192.6 RESOLVED:
(1) That the provisional outturn position for the General Fund, which has an under spend of £3.187m be noted;
(2) That the forecast out-turn for the Section 75 Partnerships and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for 2011/12 be noted;
(3) That the provisional out-turn position on the capital programme be noted; and
(4) That the following changes to the capital programme, the new schemes, variations and slippage as set out in Appendices 1 & 2 to the report be approved. |
|
|
The Council's Commissioning Work Plan
Report of the Chief Executive (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the Commissioning Work Plan (Appendix 1 to the report) be agreed and the progress in taking forward commissions to deliver Corporate Plan priorities be noted;
(2) That the Commissioning Work Plan be taken to the Local Strategic Partnership and the Public Service Board to support joint working and the effective delivery of the plan; and
(3) That it be noted that annual updates of the Work Plan would be brought to Cabinet or the relevant committee and that Members would receive reports on individual commissions as relevant. Minutes: 193.1 The Chair introduced the report which outlined the Commissioning Work Plan and was the key vehicle for the delivery of the council’s Corporate Plan and the city’s Sustainable Community Strategy. He noted that there had been extensive discussions with partner organisations and it was supported across the council and the city.
193.2 Councillor Mitchell noted the report and stated that she was still concerned about where the efficiencies would be achieved and that they should be clearly identified within the work plan.
193.3 Councillor G. Theobald agreed with Councillor Mitchell and stated that he felt the glaring omission was that of financial detail. He would like to know what savings would be made and how they were built into the budget process and how central services such as IT, HR and Communications would be included.
193.4 Councillor J. Kitcat stated that central services were not part of the commissioning model, however they would still be reviewed and officers were already looking at the options for shared services.
193.5 RESOLVED:
(1) That the Commissioning Work Plan (Appendix 1 to the report) be agreed and the progress in taking forward commissions to deliver Corporate Plan priorities be noted;
(2) That the Commissioning Work Plan be taken to the Local Strategic Partnership and the Public Service Board to support joint working and the effective delivery of the plan; and
(3) That it be noted that annual updates of the Work Plan would be brought to Cabinet or the relevant committee and that Members would receive reports on individual commissions as relevant. |
|
|
Joint Community Safety Delivery Unit Report of the Strategic Director: Communities (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposals set out in the report for the joint integrated delivery of neighbourhood policing and those community safety services currently delivered by the Council, including those listed under paragraph 3.3 of the report be agreed;
(2) That the Chief Executive and the Strategic Director, Communities be authorised to take all steps necessary or incidental to the implementation of the proposals in this report; and
(3) That the Head of Law be authorised to make any necessary consequential amendments to the scheme of delegations to Officers or, if he considers it more appropriate, bring proposals to the Governance Committee and Cabinet for approval. Minutes: 194.1 Councillor Duncan introduced the report which outlined the proposed merger of neighbourhood policing and relevant council services under one delivery unit. It was intended that this would reduce duplication and help to improve service delivery and had been fully supported by all the agencies concerned. He also noted that Brighton & Hove was the first authority in Sussex to move to this model and it was likely that others would now follow suit.
194.2 Councillor Mitchell welcomed the report and stated that it was a logical step but queried whether there would be direct links with the Youth Offending Service and if the integration would lead to savings for the police and the council.
194.3 Councillor Duncan stated that whilst there may be some savings resulting from the integration it was difficult to identify the level at this point as the primary objective was to improve service provision and develop working relations within the delivery unit and with other service areas.
194.4 The Strategic Director, Communities noted that the integration should make more resources available and lead to improvements which could then result in savings in future years, but initially there was a need to develop working arrangements and prepare for the forthcoming changes which would follow from the appointment of the Police & crime Commissioner.
194.5 Councillor G. Theobald welcomed the report and the approach to joining up services and queried whether the police would be working from their existing location or would be moving into Hove Town Hall.
194.6 Councillor Duncan stated that the intention was to work from existing locations initially, but opportunities for co-locations and other sites would be explored. He believed that the transfer of police staff into Hove Town Hall was a separate team.
194.7 RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposals set out in the report for the joint integrated delivery of neighbourhood policing and those community safety services currently delivered by the Council, including those listed under paragraph 3.3 of the report be agreed;
(2) That the Chief Executive and the Strategic Director, Communities be authorised to take all steps necessary or incidental to the implementation of the proposals in this report; and
(3) That the Head of Law be authorised to make any necessary consequential amendments to the scheme of delegations to Officers or, if he considers it more appropriate, bring proposals to the Governance Committee and Cabinet for approval. |
|
|
Brighton & Hove Child Poverty Strategy 2012-2015
Report of the Strategic Director: People (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the Child Poverty Commissioning Strategy as presented in appendix 1 to the report be approved; and
(2) That the progression of the Child Poverty Commissioning Strategy to the Public Service Board (PSB) and the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) for their approval be agreed. Minutes: 195.1 Councillor Shanks introduced the report which detailed the proposed Child Commissioning Strategy for the city. She stated that it was very sad to think that 20% of children were living in poverty and that 22% of children and young people in the city were in poverty. She stated that the strategy was effectively a Families in Poverty Strategy and noted that the figures were likely to increase in the current economic climate. The aim of the strategy was to target lone parents and families with complex problems and she hoped it would be fully supported.
195.2 Councillor Mitchell stated that it was regrettable that such a report had to be received but she felt that it was an excellent strategy and she fully supported the steps proposed. There had been an excellent consultation process and it was important to recognise the good work that took lace across the city.
195.3 Councillor G. Theobald welcomed the strategy and hoped that various elements would work together rather than any overlapping of responsibilities take place e.g. Joint Commissioning Board and the Child Poverty Task Group.
195.4 Councillor Shanks welcomed the comments and stated that she believed the strategy would enable various bodies and agencies to work cohesively.
195.5 RESOLVED:
(1) That the Child Poverty Commissioning Strategy as presented in appendix 1 to the report be approved; and
(2) That the progression of the Child Poverty Commissioning Strategy to the Public Service Board (PSB) and the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) for their approval be agreed. |
|
|
Risk Management Strategy 2012-15 Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That Cabinet approve the Risk Management Strategy 2012;
(2) That Cabinet delegate authority to the Director of Finance to alter the Risk & Management methodology as necessary so that the Risk Management Strategy is kept up to date with changing requirements and best practice. Minutes: 196.1 The Chair introduced the report which outlined the new Risk Management Strategy for 2012 and would remain in place for the next three years. He stated that he believed it would be to the benefit of all Members to have spent some time serving on the Audit Committee and understanding the importance of risk management.
196.2 RESOLVED:
(1) That Cabinet approve the Risk Management Strategy 2012;
(2) That Cabinet delegate authority to the Director of Finance to alter the Risk & Management methodology as necessary so that the Risk Management Strategy is kept up to date with changing requirements and best practice. |
|
|
Report of the Strategic Director: Place (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That the proposed revisions and continued benefits to the ‘Grow Brighton’ project at Circus Street as set out in paragraphs 3.3 to 3.10 of the report be noted. Minutes: 197.1 The Chair introduced the report which outlined the potential changes to the ‘Grow Brighton’ regeneration scheme at Circus Street. He noted that it had been a long-running project and welcomed the fact that it was now coming to fruition and hoped that it would be supported.
197.2 Councillor Mitchell stated that it was good to see the project coming forward and praised the officers for keeping it going during some difficult times. She believed that it would enhance the area and hoped that it would encourage further development and improvements to the wider environment.
197.3 Councillor G. Theobald welcomed the report and stated that it was important to have the development in the area.
197.4 RESOLVED: That the proposed revisions and continued benefits to the ‘Grow Brighton’ project at Circus Street as set out in paragraphs 3.3 to 3.10 of the report be noted. |
|
|
Report of the Strategic Director: Resources (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the Strategic Director; Resources be delegated authority to proceed with the short term option in respect of the site shown on the plan at Appendix 1 (“the Released Land”), as described in paragraphs 6.2(b) and 7.1 of the report, subject to consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for PEER, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services and that this consultation should be carried out following receipt by the council from The Community Stadium Limited (“TCSL”) of a viable business case for the proposal;
(2) That subject to (a) the delegated decision to proceed with the temporary solution in (1) above, (b) the granting of a waiver under Contract Standing Order 18 and (c) TCSL gaining planning permission, it be agreed that the Council enter into licences to achieve the temporary solution, the detailed terms of such licences to be drawn up by the Strategic Director, Resources in consultation with the Head of Law, the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for PEER, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services;
(3) That the preparing of a Development Brief to test the market and procure a development partner as described in paragraphs 6.4 (i) and 7.5 of the report be agreed and the Strategic Director, Resources be granted delegated authority to approve the Development Brief; in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Planning Employment Economy & Regeneration, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services, so that the Released Land can be marketed as a development site and the outcome of such marketing be further considered by Cabinet; and
(4) That it be noted that a report to the Planning Employment Economy & Regeneration Cabinet Member Meeting of 2nd February 2011 recommended the form of the Planning Brief for the Released Land in the form appended to the report. Minutes: 198.1 The Chair introduced the report and noted that the football club had worked closely with the council to produce a traffic strategy to enable the proposed redevelopment and temporary use of the site, involving demolition of the surplus school buildings, temporary accommodation for the Bridge Community Education Centre and match day and event parking for the Amex Community Stadium. He noted that the Bridge Community Education Centre was very happy with the proposal and that there would be consultation on the Business Plan.
198.2 Councillor G. Theobald stated that he felt the process had come full circle and the agreement with the football club was near to that which had been agreed with the previous Administration. He also queried what the situation was in regard to the club’s intention to increase capacity and secure additional parking.
198.3 The Chair stated that a planning application was expected to be submitted in the very near future and that the Transport Strategy would be used to evaluate the need for parking and other material considerations would be dealt with as part of the planning process.
198.4 Councillor Mitchell welcomed the report and queried whether the forthcoming Planning Brief would take into account the details included in the Development Brief that had been circulated. She also referred to paragraph 6.4 of the report and queried whether option (ii) would be considered if a capital receipt materialised.
198.5 The Chair stated he did not believe an agreement had previously existed with the football club and stated that he was happy to give an assurance that option (ii) would be considered if matters progressed as it was hoped.
198.6 RESOLVED:
(1) That the Strategic Director; Resources be delegated authority to proceed with the short term option in respect of the site shown on the plan at Appendix 1 (“the Released Land”), as described in paragraphs 6.2(b) and 7.1 of the report, subject to consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for PEER, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services and that this consultation should be carried out following receipt by the council from The Community Stadium Limited (“TCSL”) of a viable business case for the proposal;
(2) That subject to (a) the delegated decision to proceed with the temporary solution in (1) above, (b) the granting of a waiver under Contract Standing Order 18 and (c) TCSL gaining planning permission, it be agreed that the Council enter into licences to achieve the temporary solution, the detailed terms of such licences to be drawn up by the Strategic Director, Resources in consultation with the Head of Law, the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for PEER, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services;
(3) That the preparing of a Development Brief to test the market and procure a development partner as described in paragraphs 6.4 (i) and 7.5 of the report be agreed and the Strategic Director, Resources be granted delegated authority to approve the Development Brief; in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Planning Employment Economy & Regeneration, Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm, and Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services, so that the Released Land can be marketed as a development site and the outcome of such marketing be further considered by Cabinet; and
(4) That it be noted that a report to the Planning Employment Economy & Regeneration Cabinet Member Meeting of 2nd February 2011 recommended the form of the Planning Brief for the Released Land in the form appended to the report. |
|
|
Mercury Abatement at Woodvale Crematorium Report of the Strategic Director: Resources (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposal for replacement of old and antiquated plant and the introduction of mercury abatement measures via an OJEU compliant tender process be approved;
(2) That the Strategic Director of Resources, be granted delegated authority, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services, to approve the purchase and installation of new equipment up to a value of £1.2m procured directly through an OJEU compliant route; and
(3) That the funding of £1.2m from the council’s Capital Investment Programme for replacement of new cremators and mercury abatement equipment to be funded through a combination of the Mercury Abatement Reserve and borrowing be agreed. Minutes: 199.1 Councillor J. Kitcat introduced the report and stated that in view of the changes in legislation in relation to mercury emissions it was proposed to replace the existing cremators and install compliant mercury abatement plant to enable Woodvale Crematorium to continue to operate effectively. He noted that the crematorium was operating competitively and provided an excellent service and felt that this investment would be a positive one for the service.
199.2 Councillor G. Theobald noted that it was not compulsory and queried whether other authorities which operated crematoria were intending to follow this approach or may seek to utilise the council’s facility by way of a trading scheme.
199.3 Councillor J. Kitcat stated that he did not believe the legislation intended to see the establishment of trading schemes, although some authorities had indicated that rather than invest in the change they would pay any consequential fines. He stated that he would ask officers to prepare a briefing note for Councillor Theobald on the matter.
199.4 RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposal for replacement of old and antiquated plant and the introduction of mercury abatement measures via an OJEU compliant tender process be approved;
(2) That the Strategic Director of Resources, be granted delegated authority, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services, to approve the purchase and installation of new equipment up to a value of £1.2m procured directly through an OJEU compliant route; and
(3) That the funding of £1.2m from the council’s Capital Investment Programme for replacement of new cremators and mercury abatement equipment to be funded through a combination of the Mercury Abatement Reserve and borrowing be agreed. |
|
|
Part Two Minutes of the previous meeting - Exempt Category 3 Part Two Minutes of the Meeting held on 19th January 2012 (copy circulated to Members only). Minutes: 200.1 RESOLVED - That the Part Two minutes of the meeting held on the 19th January 2012 be approved as a correct record. |
|
|
Circus Street Development Site - Exempt Category 3
Report of the Strategic Director: Place (circulated to Members only). Decision: RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposed revisions to the ‘Grow Brighton’ project at Circus Street as set out in paragraphs 3.4 to 3.8 of the report be noted; and
(2) That the proposed heads of terms of a revised development agreement at Appendix 1 to the report be approved and the Head of Law be given delegated authority to complete the revised development agreement in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy and Regeneration and Strategic Director, Place. Minutes: 201.1 The Chair noted that the report detailed the financial information that related to the proposed development and moved the recommendations as listed in the report.
201.2 RESOLVED:
(1) That the proposed revisions to the ‘Grow Brighton’ project at Circus Street as set out in paragraphs 3.4 to 3.8 of the report be noted; and
(2) That the proposed heads of terms of a revised development agreement at Appendix 1 to the report be approved and the Head of Law be given delegated authority to complete the revised development agreement in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy and Regeneration and Strategic Director, Place. |
|
|
Falmer Released Land - Exempt Category 3
Report of the Strategic Director: Resources (circulated to Members only). Decision: RESOLVED: That the additional information contained in the report be noted. Minutes: 202.1 The Chair noted that the report detailed further financial and development information that related to the proposed release of land and moved the recommendation as listed in the report.
202.2 RESOLVED: That the additional information contained in the report be noted. |
|
|
Part Two Items To consider whether or not any of the above items and the decisions thereon should remain exempt from disclosure to the press and public.
Additional documents: Minutes: 203.1 The Cabinet considered whether or not any of the above items should remain exempt from disclosure to the press and public.
203.2 RESOLVED – That items 201 and 202 and the decisions thereon contained in part two of the agenda, should remain exempt from disclosure to the press and public. |