Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Clucas, Davies, Lewis, Oliver and Sankey.

There were none.

Minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2025

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2025 were approved as a true record and signed accordingly.

The Mayor had shared a list of recent mayoral engagements with Members, noting the breadth and variety of events attended.

He shared the following news:

-       the recent No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Awards were a great success, and he welcomed to the chamber two of the officers involved – Richard Gibson and Maisie Fowler - thanking them for their hard work and dedication to improving the lives of children across the borough through this scheme. He invited Members to show their appreciation with a round of applause;

-       congratulations to Councillor Tailford, who has recently become a father.

He went on to share with Members the sad news that former Councillor Barbara Driver has recently passed away.  She served as a Conservative Borough Councillor for Lansdown Ward from 1999 to 2024, was Mayor of Cheltenham in 2011–12, a member of both Planning and Overview & Scrutiny Committees, and subsequently an Honorary Alderman. The Mayor recognised her long and dedicated service to the borough, and although he did not personally serve at the same time, he extended condolences on behalf of the Council to her family and friends.  Members observed a minute’s silence in her honour.

The Leader provided several updates for Members’ attention:

-       the government has launched a consultation on the development of a Spatial Development Strategy and has also requested views on the potential formation of strategic authorities as a precursor to mayoral devolution arrangements. She reaffirmed CBC’s preference to align with the West of England Combined Authority, as economic and cultural evidence demonstrates that Cheltenham’s natural links and strategic direction look southward rather than the Midlands.  This position will continue to be strongly represented to government;

-       the government has announced £63m in additional capacity funding to support Local Government Reorganisation, although allocation details have not yet been issued.  She said the council will lobby robustly to ensure Cheltenham’s interests are heard and that the borough receives an appropriate share of funding, as LGR has been and continues to be a significant drain on resources. Since the publication of the 2024 LGR White Paper, the national process has lacked clarity and coherence, but CBC remains committed to fighting for the best interests of Cheltenham’s residents throughout the process;

-       ahead of the future inspection by the Regulator of Social Housing, the council commissioned an external mock inspection; the feedback received was positive and confirmed progress towards full compliance with consumer standards.  This supports the council’s ambition as set out in the Corporate Plan, and confirms that it is on track to complete its housing improvement programme and achieve a C1 rating by the end of its term. She offered particular thanks to Claire Hughes for her leadership and efforts in reaching this stage.

She ended by congratulating Councillor Tailford who has recently become a father.

There were no petitions.

Three public questions had been received from two questioners, one of whom was present to ask a supplementary question.  The published questions and responses were taken as read:

1.     Question from Trevor Witton-Bourke to Cabinet Member for Housing and Customer Services, Councillor Flo Clucas 

Cheltenham Borough Council has confirmed that it has expressed an interest in participating in the Home Office Asylum Dispersal Pilots scheme. Under what governance route was this expression of interest authorised (for example Cabinet decision, individual Cabinet Member decision, or delegated officer authority), and were elected members formally informed prior to submission? 

Member response

Thank you for your question.   

The expression of interest in the Home Office pilot scheme was submitted by officers in line with the council’s scheme of delegation.  As Cabinet Member for Housing and Customer Services, I am proud that Cheltenham is a Town of Sanctuary and that we continue to welcome refugees and migrants.  I therefore fully support the decision taken by officers.  

It is important to emphasise that submitting an expression of interest does not commit the council to participating in the scheme, even if Cheltenham were to be selected.  Any decision to proceed would be subject to further consideration.  

2.     Question from Trevor Witton-Bourke to Cabinet Member for Housing and Customer Services, Councillor Flo Clucas 

If Cheltenham is accepted into the pilot, will participation be brought to Cabinet or Full Council for formal consideration before implementation, and what arrangements will be put in place to ensure transparency and public reporting as further information becomes available? 

Member response

Thank you for your question. 

If Cheltenham is invited to take part in the Home Office pilot, any decision to participate would be brought through the appropriate democratic route in line with the council’s constitution. At this stage, we do not have any detail of the pilot and therefore it is not possible to confirm what that route will be.  

We are committed to ensuring openness and transparency throughout this process. Should the pilot progress, we will establish clear arrangements for sharing information with elected members and the public. 

3.   Question from Emma Nelson to Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets, Councillor Peter Jeffries 

The recent Audit report from Bishop Fleming raises many concerns including, but not limited to: 

·       Reference to disclaimed audit opinion by previous auditors over the 2022/23 statement of accounts

·       Unable to complete work due to delay in finalising financial statements and quality of said statements 

·       Anticipate issuing disclaimed audit opinion due to lack of assurances over opening balances  

·       Unable to complete work on valuation of land and buildings (and Council dwellings), investment properties, and heritage assets 

Given these concerns, particularly with regards to valuations of assets and of both opening and current balances, how confident is the council of the asset values in the 2026/2027 budget, and how much has been allowed within the budget should any re-statement of asset values or opening balances be required once the audit is completed? This is considered particularly key given the importance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

One Member question was received:

1.     Question from Councillor Suzanne Williams to the Cabinet Member Major Developments and Housing Delivery, Councillor Alisha Lewis 

A recent Green party leaflet delivered in my area referred to the Cyber Park as a vanity project. 

Given that the Golden Valley project will build on our town’s strength as a centre for cyber and technology, bring thousands of new jobs to the town, and include over a thousand new homes, including affordable homes, does the cabinet member agree with me that the description of this as a vanity project is a long way off the mark and that it will bring a much-needed economic boost to the west of the town and to Cheltenham as a whole? 

Member response

I’d like to thank Councillor Williams for the question.  

GCHQ’s association with Cheltenham dates back to the 1950s. Today thousands of people in our town work for GCHQ or in the defence and security supply chain, helping to deliver GCHQ’s central mission of keeping the UK safe. Because of this, technology, security and cyber industries represent a significant, vital and growing part of our local economy. Delivering the Golden Valley Development and the National Cyber Innovation Centre – named IDEA, was included as a commitment within the National Cyber Strategy and it also forms part of the delivery plan for the National Industrial Strategy making it recognised by government as a key to both our security and our economy.  

But more than that, the seven decades relationship between Cheltenham, GCHQ and our national security sector has fundamentally shaped and influenced our town. Employees working to keep us safe are our residents, our community our constituents. In many cases they are even family members.  Almost everyone in Cheltenham will be related to, work with or know someone who works in a role that helps to keep us safe.  So instead of the Green Party choosing words like ‘vanity project’, which only serve to insult to all those who work so hard to protect us, what all councillors should be doing is recording our thanks to all those people who live and work in Cheltenham who are committed to combatting the very real threats that this country faces, just as we did when awarded GCHQ the freedom of the borough in 2019. 

In terms of the opportunity the Golden Valley Development presents, when completed this new district in Cheltenham will have created thousands of high-quality jobs and hundreds of more social and affordable homes which local people will be able to take advantage. As a councillor, I am still struck by how challenging circumstances are for many families and communities, particularly in the west of Cheltenham. This highlights just how important it is to make sure that Golden Valley can provide more opportunities for local people to secure good jobs, get on the housing ladder and feel the benefit of the prosperity and success that Golden Valley can provide.  

Because of its importance to the national security of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance and Assets

Statements by group leaders

On behalf of the Green Party, Councillor Joy acknowledged that continued economic uncertainty makes it particularly hard to pitch the budget at this time.  They welcomed the budget, and had no amendments on this occasion, making the following comments:

-       as a member of the dynamic and inquisitive Budget Scrutiny Working Group, it has been good and useful to examine issues as they come in and submit ideas throughout the budget  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance and Assets

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets said it was his privilege to present this budget, at the heart of which are tenants, residents, and making sure that their homes are safe, warm, and well-managed.  Tenant feedback at the Cabinet Housing Committee had guided priorities, and he thanked everyone on that committee for their hard work over the last 18 months.

Residents are under financial pressure as a result of the high cost of living, and the council must invest to make sure that rent levels are affordable and living standards raised, as well as adding to the affordable housing stock at every opportunity.  This is a steady, sensible plan with tenants at its heart – council housing is not a service, it is a foundation. 

There were no Member questions.

A Member of the Green Group said they were pleased to have participated on Treasury Management Panel and Asset Management Working Group, to learn about decision- making, outside the housing revenue account. There were some tight decisions to be made, but the improvements in disability access and attention being given to keeping people safe and well in their homes is much appreciated.  Thanks to officers for their hard work.

The PAB councillor also appreciated the work done, especially around affordable housing.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets formally proposed the HRA budged proposals for 2026-27 and revised forecast for 2025-26.

In debate, Members made the following comments:

-       as a member of housing committee, it is great to look at the numbers and the changes in movements in support of what the council has been doing and is trying to achieve – this is very much a reflection of discussions at Cabinet Housing Committee about what needs to be done.  As a ‘critical friend’, the committee has seen significant improvements, but also increased costs at times; the money spent reflects what the committee wanted and it is good to see everything coming together; hopefully full implementation of stable processes will create more financial stability.  We are in a good place;

-       it is important to remember there is quite a correlation between areas of town with the highest statistical deprivation and where a lot of council housing stock is situated, and when looking at what we can do as a council to help people balance their budgets, encourage them to consider solar panels, insulation, and other services which will allow them to spend less on heating and more on looking after themselves;

-       as Mayor, he has seen at first hand some of the work that Cheltenham Borough Council Housing, including Enrich and work of the community investment teams,  have done, investing in young people, and making a positive difference to their lives; 

-       it is worth reflecting where we have come from and where we have got to in the last 18 months, since the decision was made that the best way to serve residents was for CBC to take Cheltenham Borough Homes back in house.  20  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Report of Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets introduced the item, which requires Members’ approval of council tax levels for 2026-27.  He reminded them that only 11% of the amount received goes to CBC.

There were no questions.

A Member pointed out that 11% of an average council tax bill amounts to approximately £250 a year which, though not insignificant, is increasingly difficult for the council to stretch.  From this, it covers waste and recycling, green space, supporting people who need support, culture, wellbeing, Golden Valley, and all other investment in the town to make it the great place it is.

RESOLVED THAT:

1.    the formal Council Tax resolution at Appendix 2 is approved and the commentary in respect of the increase in Council Tax at Paragraph 6 of Appendix 2 is noted.

In support (unanimous):

Councillors Allen, Andrews, Atherstone, Baker, Bamford, Barnes, Barrell, Boyes, Chandler, Chelin, Garcia Clamp, Clark, Collins, Day, Dobie, Foster, Harvey, Hay, Holliday, Horwood, Jeffries, Joy, Lynch, Orme, Pemberton, Pineger, Smith, Steinhardt, Tailford, Tooke, Wheeler, Williams and Willingham.

Report of the Chief Executive

The Chief Executive introduced the item, which forms an annual part of the constitution, to nominate a new Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the municipal year 2026-27 to be put forward for election at Annual and Selection Council in May  He said that the order of precedence takes on greater significance as the years go by, and CBC will only go through this process a couple more times.

He asked Members to note the nominations of Councillor Horwood for Mayor and Councillor Collins for Deputy Mayor for the municipal year ahead.

There were no questions.    A Member pointed out that in the Order of Precedence, Councillor Lewis is listed as councillor St Paul’s ward, which she is not.

A former Mayor was pleased to note that the electric Mayoral car introduced when he was in office, which plays an important role in the council’s Net Zero ambition, is still maintained.

There were no further comments or debate.

RESOLVED THAT:

1.    the Order of Precedence in Appendix 2 is noted;

2.    Councillor Martin Horwood be put to the Annual Council Meetingfor election as Mayor for the Municipal year 2026-2027.

3.    Councillor Mike Collins be put to the Annual Council Meeting for election as Deputy Mayor for the Municipal year 2026-2027.

Report of the Leader

The Leader gave a brief introduction to the item which comes to Council every year.  She said it is quite a logistical feat for Democratic Services to put the diary together, and thanked them for organising the many meetings.  Members have had a chance to comment on the diary, and she hoped that they would support it today.

There were no questions and no debate.

The Mayor added his thanks to Democratic Services, saying that county council meetings, school holidays, and many other factors have to be worked around.

RESOLVED THAT:

1.    the draft Council Diary of meetings for September 2026 - August 2027 is approved.

Report of the Leader

The Leader reminded Members that it was agreed in December 2025 to go forward with the second part of the community governance review; this will go live on 24 February, and she asked Members to encourage their residents to support the review.  She said local government reorganisation will result in a single councillor representing as many 20k residents under the new unitary authority which will preclude inclusivity - only those who are retired or who can afford not to work will have the time to dedicate to the inevitable workload – and Liberal Democrats are keen to devolve power to the lowestcommon denominator in our parishes, to make sure that residents have a voice.

She said it is important to include parts of the town not currently represented by a parish council, saying that most councillors know from the doorstep that the Mayor plays an important civic role, and a town council for all the unparished areas of Cheltenham will maintain that and other important aspects of local government. 

In response to Members’ questions, she said:

-       with reference to the parish elections scheduled for May, and whether the proposed minor boundary changes in Leckhampton with Warden Hill parish will require new elections or by-elections for additional vacancies once the new boundaries are settled, no new elections will be needed and the changes to the ward boundaries will apply from the next elections, although a specific order mandating an earlier election can form part of the consultation on parish boundaries;

-       regarding Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) benefits and payments going forward, 75% of all contributions goes towards strategic projects, with strict rules for the local neighbourhood infrastructure levy below that. A parish council receives 15% of the remainder, and a parish council or area with a neighbourhood plan will receive 25%.  She said a town council would fall into that category.   

In debate, Members made the following comments:

-       this update shows the importance of the community governance review, allowing individuals the opportunity to share their thoughts on the town’s future  We currently have five parish councils in Cheltenham, but the centre and west of the town is unparished, and with potentially only two councillors per division in the new unitary council, we need to ensure those residents have a voice once the borough council is abolished. It is important that residents’ opinions on this are heard;

-       the review is welcomed, and the proposed changes to Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council, to include Pilley and parts of Charlton Park and Bournside are strongly commended;

-       if we end up with a town council, it would be useful for understanding to have a clear distinction in the name of it and the outgoing borough council.  As the town has a reputation as a Spa, Cheltenham Spa Town Council would work well, if acceptable;

-       the borough council has always been very supportive of arts and cultural organisations in the town, providing discretionary funding to the Everyman, Playhouse, Town  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

There were none.

There were none.