Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Fisher, Holliday, Lansley, McLain, McCloskey, Stennett, Sudbury and Williams.

Councillors C Hay and Smith declared an interest in Agenda Item 11 as Trustees of the Leisure and Culture Trust and Board Members of Cheltenham Borough Homes.

Councillor Driver declared an interest in Agenda Item 11 as Board Member of Cheltenham Borough Homes.

Minutes of the meeting of 28 February 2014

The minutes of the last meeting were approved and signed as a correct record.

The Mayor informed Members of the sad loss of Councillor Holliday’s father and expressed her condolences. She then informed Members that she had attended the launch of the Race for Life and had launched the school art exhibition at the Wilson. Finally she made reference to the fact that the Mayor of Annecy had been re-elected in the recent municipal elections.

The Leader of the Council referred to the recent retirement of the Executive Director, Grahame Lewis. He paid tribute to his work for Cheltenham and said that he would be missed.

The Leader reminded members that the Late Night Levy would come in to force on 1 April 2014. In terms of member involvement in the Late Night Levy Advisory Group, the proposal was to have proportionate representation and members would be appointed to the body after the elections in the normal way.

These must be received no later than 12 noon on the fourth working day before the date of the meeting

Report of the Leader

The Leader of the Council introduced the report and explained that the Council, together with all the other local authorities in Gloucestershire, was a key partner in the development of the Gloucestershire Strategic Economic Plan which would support a bid for Growth Plan funding to the Government in March 2014. He added that whilst Cabinet held the formal decision making powers to authorise the process it was felt that Council should have an opportunity to comment on it. He emphasised that there was a very tight schedule for approving the process.

The Leader stated that there was a mechanism for signing off the plan and he was keen to obtain the support of all local councillors. Members were invited to feedback directly to the Leader or via Group Leaders. In terms of governance, a local joint committee, comprising members of the local authorities, would oversee the input to the process. This was business led but local authorities had a role in coordinating funding. The Leader would attend the meetings of the Joint Committee. He explained that the committee had a process of majority voting but if there was an issue specific to a particular district, the countywide approach was that this could not be voted in against the will of the authority in that area. He also added that the committee could not stop the things an authority was already doing in an area, for example Cheltenham already provided a local business advice service.

The Leader also informed that the County intended to establish a scrutiny body, similar to the County Council’s Health and Care Overview Scrutiny Committee, comprising 6 members from the County Council and 6 representatives from the district councils. The Leader stated that the person going to the Joint Committee meeting would announce the decision to be taken in advance and this decision could be called in locally.

Members discussed the issue and the following points of clarification were raised :

• The figure of 3200 homes referred to in the document related to the potential development capacity at junction 10. This number had not been incorporated into the JCS
• Barn Farm which ran alongside junction 10 was in the ownership of CBC.
• Resolution 4 referred to authorities not requiring a vote by Council
• Executive functions were delegated to the Leader and he was able to delegate them to Cabinet and anyone else
• A request for a budgetary contribution was expected at some point as a post would be created to coordinate the process but had yet to be allocated. In any case CBC would contribute one-seventh of the cost. Longer term there would be discussions on how to fund the proposed infrastructure whether this be by the use of the New Homes Bonus, pooled business rates or the community infrastructure levy
• In response to a question on timings the Leader commented that they were working to a very tight schedule and Government was “making it up as they went along”.
• It was clarified that under paragraph  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance

**Please note that should members wish to discuss exempt elements of the report they will need to go into closed session under part 1, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the report and explained that Cabinet had agreed to acquire the Shopfitters Site at St George’s Place along with open land at Synagogue Lane from the County Council. Council was now being requested to authorise the capital investment necessary for the cost of acquisition, planning application, demolition, site remediation and construction of a temporary surface public car park and all ancillary costs.

The Cabinet Member explained that as the transaction had yet to be completed, the detailed figures were commercially sensitive but the broad principles of the transaction were in the public domain.

He explained that the acquisition of the site would realise to the Council a substantial brownfield site suitable for development in the short-term as off street public car parking, and offer wider opportunities thereafter for future development of the site in part or whole. The benefits would be to clear the former Shopfitters site which was currently derelict, provide the opportunity to merge the Chelt Walk and the Synagogue Lane car parks thereby generating additional income, provide an opportunity for regenerating that particular part of the town centre and would allow the Council to assemble a significant town centre site with substantial development potential which may include options to build out new Municipal Offices and other public facilities.

The Cabinet Member Finance said that this was an example of how officers had been thinking creatively and proactively in investigating opportunities for the future of the town centre.

In terms of timescale the Cabinet Member Finance clarified that the County Council were keen to acquire a capital receipt in the current financial year which explained why the transaction had been brought forward and the council intended to ensure that a car park was operational as quickly as possible. The Head of Property and Asset Management was invited to address Council and he clarified that planning permission and the subsequent demolition and construction works would take approximately six months.

When asked whether there had been any changes to the flood risk assessment at the bottom of Cheltenham Walk which had been highlighted when a previous development had been considered, the Head of Property and Asset Management said that initial investigations had confirmed that this site was in the flood zone and should there be a development on site in the future this would be factored into the considerations. Another Member requested that should the site be developed in the future, then the whole area should be considered as part of one big project with parking, in particular residents parking, being a specific concern. In response the Cabinet Member Finance agreed that the future should be considered very carefully. He highlighted that the immediate intention was to create a car park and the longer term discussion for the site would be considered in the coming year. He assured Members that this would not be considered in isolation.

RESOLVED (unanimously)

That the amount of useable capital receipts (outlined in the Exempt Appendix III) be set  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the report and said that as this was a significant issue it was considered that full Council should have an opportunity to discuss it.

He explained that it had become necessary to expand the current remit for alternative accommodation. Staff numbers in 2016/17 were estimated to be 220 as a result of further commissioning and restructuring of services. This meant that less than half of the space in the current Municipal Offices would be required which was wasteful in terms of maintenance and general overheads. In addition the current office space was not suited to modern working methods.

The Cabinet Member Finance explained that officers had been active in looking for alternative accommodation for some time within the existing remit.

Expanding the current brief would open up options for officers to consider new purpose built accommodation, the potential of a split site and provide opportunities for the current Municipal Offices.  He added that it was the intention to retain the freehold of the Municipal Offices and the frontage of the building should be preserved and protected. He paid tribute to the hard work of officers in seeking the right opportunities at the right price and emphasised that the programme board was committed to finding a solution to enhance the town and best serve the public.

Some Members questioned why Council was being asked for a view when it had no decision to make. In response the Cabinet Member Finance reiterated that its role was to endorse the brief recently updated by Cabinet. When asked whether the Municipal Offices could somehow be divided up to be more fit for purpose for office space, the Cabinet Member Finance explained that this would only be possible at considerable cost and with the move towards more flexible working and hot desking this was not being considered as an option. Assurance was also sought with regard to the future of the current building and the Cabinet Member Finance explained that the Municipal Offices would not be left vacant for any period of time so there would be some form of synchronisation of the council moving out and new occupiers moving in. In response to a question regarding potential new accommodation at the Royscott building which had underground parking, the Cabinet Member Finance reassured members that every opportunity for alternative accommodation was being taken into account.

Whilst Members recognised the commitment of officers in seeking a solution, some commented on the waste of time and money spent over the last two years on working to the restrictive remit. They welcomed however the plan to seek an independent source of income from the Municipal Offices and thought this should be thoroughly explored. Members had mixed views as to whether a high street presence was still important. Examples were given of reduced footfall where neighbouring authorities had moved out of town but with modern, accessible (particularly for the elderly and the disabled) and online services the need appeared to be less and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Report of the Leader

The Leader introduced the report on the development of the corporate strategy action plan 2014-15 which was circulated to all Members with the agenda. He explained that Council were being asked to approve the action plan which had been produced in parallel with the budget process. There had been consultation with overview and scrutiny and partnerships and the senior leadership team had verified that the plan was achievable within the current level of resources.  Overall he felt the action plan represented a positive programme for Cheltenham and urged Members to support the action plan.

Members were invited to ask questions on the detail in the report and the Leader clarified a number of points in the following responses:

• the setting of milestones, baselines and targets was an evolutionary process which had started in 2010 when the five-year strategy was first drawn up. Some measures may need to change due to changes in external factors.
• The action plan distinguished between community targets and targets specific to Cheltenham Borough Council where the council had more control over their achievement.
• COM14 – He considered the management of the 2014 District and European Elections was a significant piece of work and therefore it was appropriate that it was included in the action plan.
• VFM12 -  He reminded Members that Council had agreed a major sum in the budget to support the investment in the ICT infrastructure.
• Referring to risk CR33 - if the council does not keep the momentum or the JCS going he acknowledged the point made by a Member that there could be other risks if the council did agree the JCS and these should be considered when reviewing the corporate risk register.
• He noted that Members of O&S were pleased to see that their recommendations on dog fouling and street cleaning had been accommodated in the plan.
• theCabinet Member Housing and Safety confirmed that the proposed improvement actions relating to people having access to decent and affordable housing would be picked up by the appropriate commissioning review working group.
• The Cabinet Member Leisure and Culture explained that the baseline target for attendances on Sport/Play programmes had remained at 10,000 as that was the maximum capacity that could be accommodated.  There also needed to be a balance in setting targets for subsidised activities versus commercial viability..
   

Members went on to debate the action plan. Some Members felt it was a difficult document for residents to read and understand all the linkages. Other Members questioned some of the terminology used and suggested the document should be written in more plain English, the drafting of the document improved and milestones made more specific.

A Member reminded Council that the document had been to the March meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and challenged why these points had not been made at that stage. He felt that all Members had a duty to engage in the democratic process in bringing this document to Council.

A Member suggested that Council should look  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Report of the Cabinet Member Corporate Services

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services introduced the report on the Council Diary September 2014 to August 2015. He proposed two amendments.

i)                    that the Council meeting on 6 October 2014 should be moved to 13 October 2014 in order to avoid the party conference dates.

ii)                  that the Council Tax Setting meeting planned for Friday 27 February 2015 should start at 6 p.m. rather than 2:30 p.m. to accommodate Members who work.

A Member felt strongly that the start time of the Council meeting had always been a 2.30 start and should remain so. Another Member disagreed and felt that it was important that meeting times were set to encourage more young people to stand for council. A Member suggested that the 6 p.m. start should be reviewed if it turned out there was additional business at the tax setting meeting. This was agreed to be a good way forward.

Upon a vote it was

Resolved that the draft Council diary of meetings for September 2014 to August 2015 be approved subject to the above amendments.

Voting: this was agreed with one abstention

There were no notices of motion.

There were none.

None.