Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 3 May 2018 and 17 May 2018.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 3 May and 17 May 2018 were approved as true and correct records and signed by the Leader.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Lee Dillon declared an interest in Agenda Item 8, and reported that, as his interest was a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other registrable interest, he would be leaving the meeting during the course of consideration of the matter.

Members of the Executive to answer questions submitted by members of the public in accordance with the Executive Procedure Rules contained in the Council’s Constitution.

A full transcription of the public and Member question and answer sessions are available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As.

“How much did the Council spend during the winter of 2016/17 helping the homeless with emergency accommodation in Newbury?”

A question standing in the name of Mr Thomas Tunney on the subject of the Council’s expenditure during the winter of 2016/17 in helping the homeless with emergency accommodation in Newbury would receive a written answer from the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“How much did the Soup Kitchen and West Berkshire Homeless save you in winter 2017/18?”

A question standing in the name of Mr Thomas Tunney on the subject of the amount of money the Soup Kitchen and West Berkshire Homeless had saved West Berkshire Council during the winter of 2017/18 would receive a written answer from the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“What are the projected costs for the extra fly tipping and landfill charges that will be produced as a by-product of the new garden waste charge?”

A question standing in the name of Mr Thomas Tunney on the subject of the projected costs for the extra fly tipping and landfill charges that would be produced as a by-product of the new garden waste charge would receive a written answer from the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“Did West Berkshire Council, as sponsor of Healthwatch West Berkshire’s research into homelessness, ensure NHS Research Ethics Committee approval was gained to conduct the research, given that people were interviewed because of and in relation to their present or past use of health/social care services?”

A question standing in the name of Ms Julie Wintrup on the subject of whether West Berkshire Council, as sponsor of Healthwatch West Berkshire’s research into homelessness, ensured that NHS Research Ethics Committee approval was gained to conduct the research would receive a written answer from the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Culture and Leisure.

“Does West Berkshire Council, as sponsor of Healthwatch West Berkshire’s research into homelessness, consider itself to have protected adequately the data of the vulnerable adults who participated in the research?”

A question standing in the name of Ms Julie Wintrup on the subject of whether West Berkshire Council, as sponsor of Healthwatch West Berkshire’s research into homelessness, considered itself to have protected adequately the data of the vulnerable adults who participated in the research would receive a written answer from the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Culture and Leisure.

‘’Will West Berkshire residents be charged a reduced amount for their garden waste bin if they receive council tax support as is the case in Reading?’’

A question standing in the name of Mr David Marsh (asked on his behalf by Ms Carolyne Culver) on the subject of whether West Berkshire residents would be charged a reduced amount for their garden waste bin if they received council tax support, in line with the practice for residents in Reading, was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“Will West Berkshire residents be offered a 25% reduction for their garden waste bin if they receive single person discount on their council tax?”

A question standing in the name of Mr David Marsh (asked on his behalf by Ms Carolyne Culver) on the subject of whether West Berkshire residents would be offered a 25% reduction for their garden waste bin if they received single person discount on their council tax was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“Please can I ask the Portfolio Holder what financial and operational contingencies she will be putting in place in the likelihood that black bins will be stuffed with garden waste and fly tipping will increase, as a result of the £50 charge for garden waste bins?”

A question standing in the name of Ms Carolyne Culver on the subject of what financial and operational contingencies would be put in place in the likelihood that black bins would be stuffed with garden waste and fly tipping would increase, as a result of the £50 charge for garden waste bins, was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“Do you agree that it would have been appropriate for representatives from Veolia and the council's waste management team to have attended the recent planning meeting that determined the applications regarding the Padworth recycling centre so that they could have addressed concerns raised by local residents and members of the committee?”

A question standing in the name of Mr Gabriel Stirling on the subject of whether it would have been appropriate for representatives from Veolia and the Council’s Waste Management Team to have attended the recent planning meeting that determined the applications regarding the Padworth recycling centre, so that they could have addressed concerns raised by local residents and Members of the Committee, was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

Councillors or Members of the public may present any petition which they have received. These will normally be referred to the appropriate Committee without discussion.

Petition to be presented by Professor Keith Bright, requesting that the Council introduce traffic calming and road safety measures in Benham Hill and Pound Lane in Thatcham.

Professor Keith Bright presented a petition containing 416 signatures which called upon the Council to implement traffic calming and other safety measures along Benham Hill from Henwick Lane to the Tull Way/Turnpike Road roundabout. The petition would be referred to the Portfolio Holder for Highways and Transport, Environment and Countryside, and to the Head of Transport and Countryside for a response.

(CSP: MEC & MEC1)

Purpose: To inform Members of the provisional revenue outturn for 2017/18.

Resolved that:

·         The financial performance of the Council be noted.

·         The provisional outturn report be approved.

·         The paper would be referred to the Budget Scrutiny Task Group for further review.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      Report is to note only

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 6) which informed Members of the provisional revenue outturn for 2017/18, sought approval of the provisional outturn report and sought approval to refer the paper to the Budget Scrutiny Task Group for further review.

Councillor Graham Jones, in presenting the report, advised that the provisional outturn was an overspend of £276k against a net revenue budget of £117.4m (which was 0.23% of the net budget and therefore close to being on budget).

He reported underspends in both the Resources Directorate and the Economy and Environment Directorate. These helped to offset the overspend in the Communities Directorate.

The report also detailed the reasons for making use of the risk reserves for Adult Social Care (ASC) and Children and Families. A significant proportion of the ASC Risk Reserve was used to help meet inflationary pressures in that service.

Councillor Jones reiterated that the Council had been close to balancing its budget and was managing well when considering the pressures being faced by the authority. Difficult decisions had needed to be made by the Council to reach this year-end position, however very difficult alternative measures would have become necessary if this had not been the case. This was particularly true when considering the reductions to the Council’s budgets over recent years. The Council’s annual budget had reduced by £7.5m since 2015/16 and Central Government support (Revenue Support Grant (RSG)) had decreased from £25m to zero. As a result the Administration had been forced to increase Council Tax.

A high proportion of the Council’s expenditure was on care, Adult Social Care and for Children and Family Services. Councillor Jones advised that around 60% of the Council’s resources were spent on 3% of the population. He acknowledged that this was a startling statistic.

Volatility would continue moving forward. A particular concern was the potential for negative RSG and the Government was being lobbied on this point. While West Berkshire, together with all local authorities across Berkshire, was able to retain its business rates income as part of a pilot project, this held no certainty into the future.

Councillor Graham Bridgman continued to emphasise the financial challenges that the Council had faced over recent years. At his request and to aid comparisons, Accountancy had investigated the funding level that would have been required in 2017/18 to maintain service provision as per the 2013/14 funding level (if this had continued). This took into account issues such as inflationary rises and there was a stark difference. Councillor Bridgman informed the Executive that funding would need to have been £153m in 2017/18 when it reality the budget was £117m. Therefore a real term reduction in expenditure of £35m. This illustrated the difficulties faced by the Council in setting its budgets.

Councillor Jones also drew Members’ attention to the 2017/18 Savings and Income Generation Programme and highlighted the high success rate of achieving savings and income targets.

Councillor Lee Dillon gave his support to lobbying government to prevent negative RSG. He hoped it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Purpose: To inform Members of the provisional capital outturn for 2017/18 and the likely impact of this on the 2018/19 Capital Programme.

Resolved that the financial performance of the Council be noted.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      Report is to note only

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 7) which informed Members of the provisional capital outturn for 2017/18 and the likely impact of this on the 2018/19 Capital Programme. This was subject to the final result of the closedown and External Audit.

Councillor Graham Jones explained that total capital expenditure in 2017/18 was £38m from a revised budget of £49.8m. The budget was revised during the year to take account of funds brought forward from 2016/17, additional grant and Section 106 funding allocated during the year and spend re-profiled into 2018/19.

The budget remaining unspent at the end of the financial year mainly consisted of:

·         £4.4m of the budget for commercial property acquisition for the purchase of further property now expected to be completed in July 2018;

·         £4.5m of the Highways and Countryside Programme, including three resurfacing schemes which were delayed due to bad weather and the Kings Road Link on which the developer was behind schedule, together with delays to the A4 cycle route, Sandleford access improvements and a number of smaller schemes;

·         An underspend of £751k on disabled facilities and home repair grants;

·         Underspends on a number of education schemes (£413k) and Adult Social Care schemes (£309k).

Councillor Jones explained that £11.1m had been carried forward into the 2018/19 financial year within the services to which it had been allocated.

Councillor Lee Dillon referred to the underspend of £751k on disabled facilities and home repair grants. He queried whether government grant funding would need to be returned. Councillor Dillon also questioned the reasons for the underspend and asked if it was due to a lack of need or an inability to conduct assessments.

Councillor Graham Bridgman explained that expenditure of the Disabled Facilities Grant was demand led and grants had to be awarded to any disabled person who was eligible for the Council to fund adaptations in their home. However, there had been a backlog in processing grant applications over the last couple of years which had resulted in the budget being underspent. This was mainly because of a lack of occupational therapy resource to carry out assessments. In 2017/18, the surplus government grant had been used to fund occupational therapy equipment, which was administered by Adult Social Care (in line with the Better Care Fund agreement). The Housing Team had now recruited three new occupational therapists and a technical officer, who would be funded from the grant and would help to speed up the processing of grant applications. It was therefore the expectation that spend on Disabled Facilities Grants and administration would be in line with the budget of £1.5m in 2018/19.

Councillor Bridgman concluded by stating that it was the intention to utilise this funding wherever appropriate. Councillor Dillon was pleased to note this intention. Equipment such as a grab rail could do much to improve a person’s quality of life.

Councillor Dominic Boeck explained that the Property Investment Board had done its best to reduce the underspend for the acquisition of commercial property. He confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Purpose: To seek approval to establish a Joint Venture with Sovereign Housing Association as a Limited Liability Partnership to deliver the Council’s housing objectives through the provision of additional homes, in a range of tenures, to meet housing need in the district.

Resolved that:

·         The establishment of the Joint Venture (JV) with Sovereign be approved in accordance with this report.

·         Authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste, the Head of Finance and the Head of Legal Services, to:

·         establish a JV with Sovereign Housing structured through a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) to support the provision of additional homes in the District;

·         agree and authorise the execution of documentation required to implement the LLP model;

·         name the LLP; and

·         make appointments to the Management Board of the JV LLP of the Corporate Director of Economy and Environment, Head of Commissioning and Legal Services Manager (Governance & Environment).

·         Agreement be given to allocate land adjacent to the Phoenix Centre, Newbury and land at Chestnut Walk, Hungerford (“the Projects”) to be developed for housing by the JV, subject to a separate decision by this Executive on the disposal to JV together with valuation of the land and approval of the business plans for the Projects. Future projects in the JV Business Plan will also require approval by the Executive including any financial appraisals, business plans and the disposal of sites.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 21 June 2018, then it will be implemented.

(Councillor Lee Dillon declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 8 by virtue of the fact that he was an employee of Sovereign Housing Association. As his interest was a disclosable pecuniary interest he left the meeting at 5.36pm and took no part in the debate on the matter).

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 8) which sought approval to establish a Joint Venture (JV) with Sovereign Housing Association as a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) to deliver the Council’s housing objectives through the provision of additional homes, in a range of tenures, to meet housing need in the District.

Councillor Hilary Cole presented the item which was a good news story. The Council would be working with Sovereign, an established and trusted partner, to help deliver affordable housing in West Berkshire. This proposed approach would give the Council a much greater level of control over the delivery of its housing objectives. Councillor Cole highlighted the significant level of preparatory work that had been undertaken for the JV.

Councillor Cole explained that the proposal was for the Council and Sovereign to incorporate a new LLP on a 50:50 basis. The LLP would acquire, fund, develop, sell and own (as applicable) a mixture of tenures with the primary aim of achieving the Council’s housing objectives. Developments would be brought forward on the basis of individual site appraisals to deliver a range of tenures would include affordable rent, shared ownership, market rent, starter homes and rent to buy.

Subject to Executive approval of the proposal, the first two potential sites for redevelopment had been identified: a decanted supported scheme in Hungerford for circa eight homes and a site in Newbury for circa 48 homes. A separate report covering the disposal of these two sites to the JV would be placed before the Executive once the financial appraisal and business plan had been developed.

Councillor Cole placed on record her thanks to officers of the Council and Sovereign for all their work in developing the JV. Councillor Graham Jones, in seconding the proposal, added his thanks for the efforts of all involved.

Councillor Graham Bridgman endorsed the points that had been made and added his particular thanks to officers for the enormous amount of work they had put into developing the JV.

Councillor Alan Macro felt this to be a good initiative. He did however have some points of concern. He questioned the start date for the JV when considering the Council’s target of building 1,000 affordable homes by 2020. Work was needed to try and achieve this. Councillor Macro then noted that the JV could generate a financial surplus. He sought assurance that this would be ring-fenced and reinvested into affordable housing.

Councillor Jeff Brooks commented that this was a legal framework as opposed to a business plan. He queried when the business plan with details of costs etc would be provided, how this would be monitored and the frequency for doing so. An investment profile was needed.

Councillor Cole explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

(CSP: BEC, SLE, P&S, HQL, MEC, BEC1, BEC2, SLE1, SLE2, P&S1, HQL1, MEC1)

Purpose: to report quarter four outturns for the Key Accountable Measures which monitor performance against the 2017/18 Council Performance Framework; to provide assurance that the objectives set out in the Council Strategy and other areas of significant activity are being managed effectively; to present, by exception, those measures that are RAG rated ‘red’ (targets not achieved) and provide information on any remedial action taken and the impact of that action; and to recommend changes to measures/targets as requested by services.

Resolved that:

·         Progress against the Key Accountable Measures (KAMs) and the key achievements in all services be noted. In comparison to last year, it was noted that the same proportion of measures are RAG rated Green (against similar or more challenging targets than in 2016/17). In absolute terms, it was noted that the results for the majority of the KAMs have further improved this year.

·         Those areas reported as ‘red’ had been reviewed to ensure that appropriate action was in place. Consideration was particularly given to the results and improvement actions for:

·         Educational attainment of the Free School Meals and for disadvantaged pupils cohorts.

·         Older people and vulnerable adults’ wellbeing.

·         Progress towards adopting the Local Plan and Minerals & Waste Local Plan.

·         A change in target from ‘December 2019’ to ‘April 2020’ be agreed for both ‘the submission of a New Local Plan for examination’ and ‘the submission of a Minerals and Waste Local Plan for examination’.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 21 June 2018, then it will be implemented.

(Councillor Lee Dillon returned to the meeting at 5.45pm).

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 9) which outlined quarter four outturns for the Key Accountable Measures which monitored performance against the 2017/18 Council Performance Framework; which sought to provide assurance that the objectives set out in the Council Strategy and other areas of significant activity were being managed effectively; which presented, by exception, those measures that were RAG rated ‘red’ (targets not achieved) and which provided information on any remedial action being taken and its impact; and which recommended changes to measures/targets as requested by services.

Councillor Graham Jones in introducing the report stated that the Council set itself stretching and ambitious targets. The targets would have been set at too low a level if they had all been achieved. He highlighted the point made in the report that following an analysis of the absolute results achieved in 2017/18 compared to 2016/17, 65% of the key accountable measures had improved.

Councillor Jones went on to report that in terms of priorities for improvement, good performance had been maintained for areas such as protecting children and vulnerable adults, and in most of the key infrastructure projects.

Good performance also continued in quarter four in relation to children’s social care, waste recycling and timeliness in determining planning applications.

Councillor Jones commended the report to the Executive and asked his colleagues to comment on the exception reports.

Councillor Lynne Doherty echoed the points made about positive performance levels in children’s social care. She also reiterated the point made earlier in the meeting that 95% of West Berkshire’s schools were rated either Good or Outstanding by Ofsted. This was a massive achievement and one that schools should be commended for.

Educational attainment in West Berkshire was improving in most areas, but the ambitious target of being in the top quartile nationally had not been achieved for Key Stages 2 and 4 as similar improvements to those achieved in West Berkshire had been achieved in other local authorities. Efforts would continue.

The Council remained ‘red’ in terms of closing the attainment gap. Councillor Doherty reassured Members that the educational attainment of disadvantaged pupils remained a priority and she acknowledged that performance was not where it needed to be. She did however make the point that this Council Strategy priority concerned a very low cohort of pupils and therefore percentages could be significantly altered by any changes to the attainment of this small number of pupils. There was unfortunately no magic answer to this national issue, but work would continue in taking this forward.

Councillor Doherty highlighted ambition as being key, in particular for disadvantaged pupils. She gave an assurance that the Council would aim to achieve in line with or above peer local authorities for this cohort of pupils. This included the need to work closely with children and their families to encourage them to share this level of ambition and aim to achieve in line with their peers.

Councillor Graham Bridgman referred to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Purpose: To seek approval for the transfer of the Wash Common Library building to Newbury Town Council on a 5 year short term lease for use by the Friends of Wash Common Library for use as a small part-time library and community hub. 

Resolved to proceed with the transferral of leaseholder responsibility to Newbury Town Council and to permit this empty building to be reused as a library and community hub.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 21 June 2018, then it will be implemented.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 10) which sought approval for the transfer of the Wash Common Library building to Newbury Town Council (NTC) on a five year short term lease for use by the Friends of Wash Common Library for use as a small part time library and community hub.

Councillor Dominic Boeck presented the report and reminded Members of the Council’s decision to withdraw support to the Wash Common Library in 2016. It was however well used and popular amongst residents and Councillor Boeck was pleased to report that the Friends of Wash Common Library and Ward Members had worked together to develop a Business Plan to retain the library, this included consideration of funding. In addition, Newbury Town Council had added its support to the Business Plan.

Councillor Boeck proposed acceptance of the recommendation to transfer leaseholder responsibility to Newbury Town Council on a five year short term lease, with West Berkshire Council retaining the freehold.

Approval of this recommendation would enable the Friends of Wash Common Library to restart the library and this was an excellent opportunity for residents. This would also align with the devolution programme for a greater level of service devolution to parishes.

Councillor Alan Macro was concerned that the proposal for a five year lease could hamper the Town Council’s ability to obtain grants in order to make improvements to the building. He queried whether this had been taken into account. Councillor Boeck confirmed that many potential funding mechanisms were referenced within the Business Plan.

Councillor Boeck added that the library would be operated by the Friends of Wash Common Library as a Community Interest Company, they would therefore be able to access funds by virtue of this charitable status.

Councillor Boeck concluded by wishing the Town Council and the Friends of Wash Common Library every success with operating the library.

RESOLVED to proceed with the transferral of leaseholder responsibility to Newbury Town Council and to permit this empty building to be reused as a library and community hub.

A full transcription of the public and Member question and answer sessions are available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As.

“Will the Council support the target to end homelessness in West Berkshire by 2020?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro on the subject of whether the Council would support the target to end homelessness in West Berkshire by 2020 was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“How does the Council plan to reach out to businesses nationwide to capitalise on the top tech award?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Jeff Brooks on the subject of the Council’s plans to reach out to businesses nationwide to capitalise on the top tech award was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Economic Development and Communications.

“Can the Portfolio Holder for Waste clarify arrangements for the roll out of the new green bin tax which is now only weeks away?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro seeking clarification of the arrangements for the roll out of the new green bin charge was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Housing and Waste.

RESOLVED that members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the under-mentioned items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as contained in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information)(Variation) Order 2006. Rule 8.10.4 of the Constitution also refers.

(Paragraph 5 - information relating to legal privilege)

(CSP: P&S, HQL and P&S1)

Purpose: To seek approval for an exception to the current procurement rules in order to secure a three year contract, delivering a cumulative saving for West Berkshire Council. Savings will be realised by the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) budget.

Resolved that the recommendations in the exempt report be approved.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      a delay in implementing the decision could cause the Council serious financial implications and could compromise the Council's position.

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

(Paragraph 5 – information relating to legal privilege)

The Executive considered an exempt report (Agenda Item 13) which sought approval for an exception to the current procurement rules in order to secure a three year contract, delivering a cumulative saving for West Berkshire Council. Savings would be realised by the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) budget.

RESOLVED that the recommendation in the exempt report be agreed.

Reason for the decision: as outlined in the exempt report.

Other options considered: as outlined in the exempt report.

(Paragraph 1 – information relating to an individual)

(Paragraph 2 – information identifying an individual)

Purpose: To agree the organisational change proposal for the Culture Team in Public Protection and Culture.

Resolved that the recommendations in the exempt report be approved.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      a delay in implementing the decision could cause the Council serious financial implications or could compromise the Council's position.

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

(Paragraph 1 – information relating to an individual)
(Paragraph 2 – information identifying an individual)

The Executive considered an exempt report (Agenda Item 14) concerning the organisational change proposal for the Culture Team in Public Protection and Culture.

RESOLVED that the recommendations in the exempt report be agreed.

Reason for the decision: as outlined in the exempt report.

Other options considered: as outlined in the exempt report.