Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillors J. Elledge, S. Evans, D. Forsythe and J. Stanley for this meeting.

A Standards mater was raised during consideration of this item. The Vice-Chairman in the Chair suggested this matter be discussed with the Monitoring Officer outside of the meeting.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Leader presented Local Government Reorganisation Report - Mutual Ventures for Members’ consideration. In doing so, it was noted that the purpose of the report was to provide the outcome of an options appraisal carried out by Mutual Ventures on Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). 

The report and associated appendices considered two main options for LGR in Worcestershire.

Option A: One unitary authority for the whole of Worcestershire.

Option B: presented as options B1 and B2 considered the creation of two unitary authorities made up of North Worcestershire (covering Bromsgrove District, Redditch Borough and Wyre Forest District) and South Worcestershire (covering Malvern Hills District, Worcester City and Wychavon District).

It was reported that option B consisted of two variants, detailed as follows:

Option B1 provided for two unitary councils to be established across Worcestershire; North Worcestershire and South Worcestershire. It involved the disaggregation and transferring of all statutory and non-statutory services, functions and operating model from Worcestershire County Council to the new unitary councils and the aggregation and transfer of all statutory and non-statutory services, functions and operating models from district Councils to their respective new (north or south) unitary Council.

Option B2 provided two unitary Councils established across Worcestershire; North Worcestershire and South Worcestershire. This option offered a shared service/hybrid model across both new unitary Councils, with specific services (i.e. Adult Social Care, Children’s Services, Education, Adult Education and Transport) jointly delivered and commissioned. All other services would be delivered and commissioned by each new unitary Council, including prevention and early help. It was noted that the exact arrangement would be determined during the development of any future full LGR proposal.

Members were reminded that on 5^th February 2025 the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, wrote to all the Worcestershire authorities inviting Council leaders in the area to develop a proposal for single tier reorganisation in exercise of powers under Part 1 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007.  The timetable imposed by the Government required interim proposals to be submitted by 21^st March 2025 and final proposals by 28^th November 2025.

An extraordinary Council meeting was held on 12^th March 2025 when an interim plan was agreed that covered two main options for unitarisation. One of the options considered at this meeting was for a single unitary authority for the county of Worcestershire with the alternative option being two unitary authorities covering north and south Worcestershire.

At the extraordinary Council meeting it was determined to agree the interim plan for submission and to further explore the options.  On that basis Bromsgrove District Council along with the Councils of Redditch Borough, Worcester City, Malvern Hills District and Wychavon District agreed to commission consultants to carry out an options appraisal. The company, Mutual Ventures, secured the commission to undertake the options appraisal.

Members were informed that there were six criteria under which the Government would assess LGR proposals. These were as follows:

1.     The establishment of a single tier  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42\25

Councillor C. Hotham raised that a £1.4million overspend had been identified at the Nailer’s Yard site and queried why this matter could not be discussed under this item during this meeting.

The Monitoring Officer explained that the decision in respect of the funding for this site had been taken in line with the Council’s urgency procedure rules and that this matter would be reported retrospectively to Full Council at its next ordinary meeting in line with standard process.