Agenda item - Recommendations from the Cabinet

Agenda item

Recommendations from the Cabinet

To consider the recommendations from the meeting of the Cabinet held on 6th September 2017

Minutes:

Acquisition and Investment Strategy

 

The recommendations from Cabinet in respect of the Acquisition and Investment Strategy were proposed by Councillor K. J. May and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.

 

Councillor May, as Portfolio Holder for Economic Development, the Town Centre and Strategic Partnerships, presented this report and in so doing highlighted that within the Council Plan economic development was a key driver for the regeneration of the District as a whole and for the Council to work towards achieving financial stability and income generation.  This Strategy would provide a resource to promote economic development and a framework to ensure the resources were allocated prudently.  It was confirmed that any acquisitions would be within Bromsgrove District’s boundaries to ensure that all benefits remained local.

 

Councillor Mallett proposed an amendment to recommendation (c) in that all business cases should be initially brought before a cross party panel of the Overview and Scrutiny Board for pre-scrutiny purposes before being referred on to Cabinet for a decision.  On speaking to his amendment Councillor Mallett supported the proposal, which was a positive move for the Council but, highlighted the importance of any acquisitions being within the District and requested that if there should be any changes to the Strategy these should be brought back to the Chamber for further debate.

 

Councillor Baxter also spoke in support of the proposals and welcomed the innovative ways of helping our communities.

 

On being put to the vote the amendment was carried.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)  That the Acquisition and Investment Strategy be approved;

(b)  That the Executive Director of Finance and Resources together with the Head of Economic Development and Regeneration (North Worcestershire) be responsible for identifying suitable opportunities and developing the viability appraisal and business case for the Council; and

(c)  that all business case be brought before a panel of the Overview and Scrutiny Board before being referred to Cabinet for a decision.

 

Consultation responses to Wyre Forest District Council’s preferred option plan and the Worcestershire Rail Investment Strategy

 

The recommendations from Cabinet in respect of the consultation responses to Wyre Forest District Council’s preferred option plan and the Worcestershire Rail Investment Strategy were proposed by Councillor C. B. Taylor and seconded by Councillor K. J. May.

 

Councillor Taylor, as Portfolio Holder for Planning and Strategic Housing, introduced the report and explained that draft responses had been prepared due to the time constraints of the consultations.

 

In respect of the Wyre Forest District Council Plan he highlighted a number of areas of concern including the lack of detail in respect of Option A, where the sites referred to were positioned on main roads and the impact this would have on a number of areas in the District.  It would appear, from the consultation that no consideration had been given to the impact of the sites outside of Wyre Forest District.

 

Councillor Taylor went on to highlight a number of areas within the Worcestershire Rail Investment Strategy, which whilst welcomed, were believed to be very ambitious.  In particular reference was made to the need for more car parking spaces, but not to where these would be located.  It was hoped that all Members would take the opportunity to respond to both these consultations where they impacted on individual Wards.

 

During the following debate a number of issues were highlighted:

 

·         The current levels of congestion on the roads which would be affected by the suggested sites of developments in the Wyre Forest District Council Preferred Option Plan.

·         Concern over the extent to which Worcestershire County Council was addressing the impact growth had on the already busy roads in the District.  There had been a larger than expected increase over recent years which would only increase further with these developments.

·         The benefits of having both a western and eastern ring road if these plans were to come to fruition.

·         The lack of Ward Councillor involvement in any issues around the impact of developments on surrounding areas and the need for investment in the infrastructure to accommodate further growth.

·         How the Worcestershire Rail Investment Strategy appeared to be aspirational and the need for Worcestershire County Council to continue to invest in the rail network.

·         The need for more south bound trains to stop at the Bromsgrove Train Station.

·         The need for the BRUG and the Campaign for Rail to continue to be involved in rail developments in the District.

 

Councillor Taylor thanked Members for their input and assured them that their comments would be included within the responses where appropriate.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(1)  the draft officer response to Wyre Forest Local Plan Review Preferred Option (as detailed in Appendix A to the report) be approved by Council, and submitted to Wyre Forest District Council as the formal consultation response; and

 

(2)  the draft officer response to Worcestershire Draft Rail investment Strategy (as attached at Appendix B to the report) be approved by Council and submitted to Worcestershire County Council as the formal consultation response.

 

Provision by Bromsgrove District Council of a Garden Waste Service on behalf of Redditch Borough Council

 

The recommendations from Cabinet in respect of the provision by Bromsgrove District Council of a Garden Waste service on behalf of Redditch Borough Council were proposed by Councillor P. J. Whittaker and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.

 

Councillor Whittaker, as Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Cultural Services, Environmental Services and Regulatory Services, presented this report which proposed that Bromsgrove District Council should operate a garden waste service on behalf of Redditch Borough Council, under a service level agreement.

 

During the following debate a number of areas were discussed in detail, including:

 

·         Concerns in respect of how the report would be perceived, as it would appear the Council were providing the service to Redditch at “cost” yet the charge made to residents brought the Council a profit.

·         The potential for Redditch Borough Council to make a profit from the service and the extent to which this was provided by this Council.

·         The current investigation into shared services and the need for this work to be completed before any further shared service work be undertaken.

 

Following further discussion the item was deferred.

 

Treasury Management – updated borrowing limits 2017/18 to 2020/21

 

The recommendations from Cabinet in respect of Treasury Management, update borrowing limits 2017/18 to 2020/21, were proposed by Councillor B. T. Cooper and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.

 

Councillor Cooper, as Portfolio Holder for Finance and Enabling, introduced this report and reminded Members that the current borrowing limits had been authorised and operational since March 2017.  There were two factors to take into consideration in respect of the current request; the benefits of paying the pension costs in a lump sum rather than on a monthly basis and the ability to make funds available in line with the Acquisition and Investment Strategy, both of which was approved.

 

A number of areas were discussed during the debate:

 

·         Clarification around the pension borrowings and discounted payments.

·         Some concerns were raise in respect of the size of the Council’s borrowing and the financial position of the authority in general terms.

·         Members were advised that these figures were not actual, but limits which were available to access if needed.

·         It was highlighted that the figure in respect of the Acquisitions and Finance Strategy would also hopefully in time provide revenue which could be offset against the Council’s borrowing.

·         The ongoing management of investments and revenue – the Leader suggested that appropriate measures would be put in place when the need arose to ensure this was done.

Councillor Cooper advised that the Finance and Budget Working Group had taken time to scrutinise the pension payments which had been helpful and it may be that this avenue was used for the monitoring of investments and revenue in the future.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)  that the Operational Limit for borrowing be increased as follows:-

 

 

2017/18

£m

2018/19

£m

2019/20

£m

2020/21

£m

Operational Limit  brought forward

12.0

20.0

23.0

26.0

Add Pension Advance Payment

6.0

-2.0

-2.0

4.0

Add Acquisitions and Investment Strategy

2.0

5.0

5.0

8.0

Revised Operational Limit for approval

20.0

23.0

26.0

38.0

 

(b)  that the Authorised Limit for borrowing be increased as follows:-

 

 

2017/18

£m

2018/19

£m

2019/20

£m

2020/21

£m

Authorised Limit  brought forward

15.0

23.0

26.0

29.0

Add Pension Advance Payment

6.0

-2.0

-2.0

4.0

Add Acquisitions and Investment Strategy

2.0

5.0

5.0

8.0

Revised Authorised Limit for approval

23.0

26.0

29.0

41.0

 

Finance Monitoring 2017/18 Quarter 1

 

The recommendations from Cabinet in respect of the Finance Monitoring 2017/18 Quarter 1 were proposed by Councillor B. T. Cooper and seconded by Councillor G. N. Denaro.

 

Councillor Cooper, as Portfolio Holder for Finance and Enabling explained that the Capital Programme be increased to show Section 106 Projects which had been detailed within the report.  The inclusion of these within the Capital Programme had been discussed at a recent Finance and Budget Working Group meeting that he had attended.

 

RESOLVED that the 2017/18 Capital Programme be increased by £414k to include S106 Projects as included in Appendix 2 of the report.

Supporting documents: