Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor J. D. Stanley.

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.

Councillor A. Bailes declared an Other Disclosable Interest in relation to Agenda Item Number 15, Minute Number 112/23 – Parking Enforcement Consultancy, as he was a Manager of a Consultancy specialising in Transport Planning, Traffic Engineering, Sustainable Transport, Parking, and Transport Economics. Councillor A. Bailes confirmed that the Consultancy did not operate in Bromsgrove District.

Councillor A. Bailes remained in the meeting for consideration of this item and took part in the debate thereon.

There were no further Declarations of Interest.

The Head of Legal, Democratic and Property Services introduced the report which provided details of the outcomes of the last meeting of the Constitution Review Working Group (CRWG) which took place on 12^th March 2024. It was reported that various changes to the Council’s constitution were discussed at that meeting, details of which were included in the report. The Board was asked to determine whether to endorse the CRWG recommendations for onward consideration by Cabinet and full Council.

Following the presentation, Members asked a number of questions and the following was noted:

·       Proposal to remove reference to the former Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership (GBSLEP) from the Joint Arrangements document – It was noted that reference to GBSLEP was being removed from the Council’s constitution because the organisation was no longer in existence.

·       Changing the location of Planning call in process in the Council’s Constitution – The review of the Council’s constitution found that guidance in respect of the call in process for planning applications was not placed in the most logical position. It was therefore proposed that it should be incorporated into the Planning Procedure Rules at Part 14 of the Constitution, as detailed in Appendix B to the report.

·       Arrangements regarding Planning site visits – It was proposed by CRWG that temporary arrangements regarding site visits, introduced as a result of the covid-19 pandemic, be removed from the constitution. In response to a question about frequency of planning site visits, Members were advised to contact the Head of Planning, Regeneration and Leisure Services separately about the subject.

·       Clarification on the proposed changes to the Scrutiny Procedure Rules in respect of the types of items that would not be accepted for Overview and Scrutiny Board consideration and in respect of when a subject might not be debated by the Board – Members were of the view that the term ‘significant’ was imprecise when used in the last sentence of the first bullet point of paragraph 3.14 in the report. This stated: “It is therefore proposed that the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules should be amended so as to clarify that a subject may not be considered at a meeting if it has previously been debated at a meeting of the Board held in the preceding 6 months, unless there has been a significant change in circumstances”

·       It was felt by Members that the closing clause of the above sentence should read: “significant in the opinion of the Chairman, having discussed it with Officers”. Officers undertook to incorporate this into the updated document to be presented to Cabinet.

·       Reference was made to the Member Enquiries Guidance - ‘Best Practice for Handling Members’ Enquiries’ - document proposed as an appendix to Part 22 of the Council’s Constitution. It was felt that this document was much needed in terms of defining the level of service that Councillors could expect from Officers, and responsiveness to elected member enquiries.

Following the discussion, recommendations as printed in the report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100/23

The Council’s Representative on the Worcestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC), Councillor B. Kumar, updated the Board on the matters discussed by HOSC at its meetings on 15^th March 2024 and 16^th April 2024. Members were provided with a written copy of the updates provided by Councillor B. Kumar. Some of the points highlighted for Members’ consideration included:

·       An inspection of the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust (including Hill Crest Mental Health Ward) had taken place, and the Trust was given an overall rating of ‘Requires Improvement’ by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Concerns were raised in particular about staffing levels and patient experience at the Hill Crest Mental Health Ward in Redditch.

·       Acute Dermatology Service Provision – It was reported that a series of resignations and retirements by Consultants and the Trust’s difficulty in recruiting permanent staff, were having an adverse impact on dermatology services, including longer waiting times. However, the Trust had made interim arrangements and a contract with a private sector provider, HealthHarmonie, had eased the impact.

• Cancer detection in Worcestershire – Worcestershire was reported as having good rates of cancer detection at 60 per cent which compared favourably with the England average of 54.1 per cent. Various agencies were involved in optimising early cancer detection, for example the use of Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) in primary care to identify patients at risk of having colorectal cancer. It was noted that take up rates for cancer screening, including cancer screening programme for women, bowel cancer, breast screening rates were higher than the national average in Worcestershire.

·       Routine Immunisation – It was reported that there was a high level of take up of the MMR vaccine in Worcestershire at 90 per cent compared to 83 per cent nationally.

Following the update, Members asked about an improvement plan for the Hill Crest Mental Health Ward in the context of long-term issues at that setting. Councillor B. Kumar explained that there were persistent issues with this Mental Health Ward which included a shortage of staff and contract arrangements in place whereby in the event of lack of beds at the facility patients were being transferred to a unit in Wales. Furthermore, the Ward was old and dilapidated.

A reference was made to the Impact of Heatwaves Short Sharp Review currently taking place and the importance of the Council providing awareness, particularly the young and people with fair skin, about the dangers of direct exposure to strong sunlight.

RESOLVED that the Worcestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee Update be noted.

Councillor M. Marshall introduced the item, having been appointed Chairman of the Impact of Heatwaves Short Sharp Review at its first meeting. Councillor M. Marshall recapped on the background to the decision to launch this review. It was note that full Council agreed on 24^th January 2024 to commission the Overview and Scrutiny Board to undertake a review of the impact of extreme heat events.

Councillor M. Marshall provided a detailed explanation of the aims of the Short Sharp Review as set out in the Terms of Reference. It was reported that the first meeting was held on 26^th March 2024, which was attended by Public Health Officer from Worcestershire County Council and a representative from Applied Resilience, an organisation providing Emergency Planning service to the Council.

It was highlighted there was plenty of resources already available to the public regarding heatwave risk and protection. A number of public agencies were aware of this issue and had procedures in place. The key aims of this Review were to identify ways to improve coordination between agencies with regard to heatwave events planning and to ensure there were readily accessible resources available advising residents on how to prepare for heatwaves.

In response to a question, it was reported that the next meeting would be held on 24^th April 2024. It was planned that meetings of the Short Sharp Review Group would take place once per month and it was hoped the investigation could be concluded by July 2024.

RESOLVED that the Terms of Reference for the Impact of Heatwaves Short Sharp Review be approved and that Councillor M. Marshall be confirmed as the Chairman of the Short Sharp Review.

[At the discretion of the Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Board, this item was moved forward to be considered as item 6 on the agenda].

The Environmental Services Manager provided a report on reprofiling of capital fleet replacement budget and in doing so noted that in 2021, as part of a review of Council finances, the decision was taken to extend the life of operational refuse fleet vehicles by an extra year, from 7 to 8 years, before replacement. At that time, it was also decided to start refurbishing Waste Collection Vehicles to extend their life by a further period in order to reduce capital expenditure on new vehicles and make savings that could be put towards the future purchase of more expensive energy efficient vehicles, as part of the Council’s carbon reduction ambitions.

It was reported that as part of the decision in 2021, no appropriate allowance was made for the operational impact that refurbishment, which removed multiple vehicles from use for extended periods and required the use of hire vehicles to support service delivery. This had resulted in unbudgeted revenue pressure. In addition, the first few vehicles took around 12 months to be refurbished due to parts and supply issues that were affecting the sector in 2022-23. Subsequent vehicles had also overrun on planned refurbishment timescales, resulting in significant unbudgeted costs on hire vehicles.

The delays in refurbishment timescales and the need to prioritise work on the Waste Collection fleet (Domestic & Commercial) had impacted on the availability of other vehicles required for statutory services such as road sweepers, Place Team vans for litter picking and fly tip removal. There had also been impact on discretionary and chargeable services such as the District Public Toilet cleaner’s vehicle, and WRS’s dog warden van, impacting on income generation of these services.

It was reported that in light of the increased costs and operational challenges arising from extended operational lifespans of the vehicles, overruns on refurbishment periods, and staffing issues within the workshop, it was proposed to revert to a seven-year replacement cycle on the Council’s Waste fleet, and to re-profile the Capital Fleet Replacement budgets to support the purchase of replacement vehicles.

It was proposed that revenue funding be increased to support the ongoing use of hire vehicles to safeguard operational service delivery of the waste service during 2024-25. Revenue pressures were anticipated at £88,000 in 2024-25, £342,000 in 2025-26, and £372,000 in 2026-27 before a reduction in revenue payments as a result of bringing the replacement costs forward would result in predicted revenue saving of £339,000 in 2028-29, £660,000 in 2029-30, and £644,000 in 2030-31. The next vehicle replacement cycle would then be due in the 2031-32 financial year, when alternative types of vehicles, including electric-powered refuse vehicles, might become a more viable option for the Council.

It was also proposed that as part of reprofiling of capital fleet there be a purchase of 10 new internal combustion (ICE) refuse collection vehicles (at £210,000 per vehicle) in the 2024-25 financial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 103/23

An update in relation to Members’ questions on the Council’s Agile Working was provided. The responses were provided in the briefing note. The following additional queries were raised at the meeting:

1)    Review of the title ‘Agile working’ as it might be misconstrued as in project management terms it was a way of implementing large projects. Officers undertook to review the title as the initiative was important for recruitment and retention.

It was asked whether space utilisation exercise was being undertaken on a regular basis to identify issues such as double-booking of hot desk spaces within Council Offices and/or under-utilisation of shared space. The Executive Director undertook to ascertain whether space utilisation checks were being carried out by the Agile Project Team in relation to the hot desking booking system.

The Interim Executive Director explained that the Agile Project Team had a Project Manager who reported to the Agile Board. The Board was chaired by the Council’s Chief Executive. It was noted that the majority of office-based staff at the Council were signed up to agile working arrangements. It was highlighted that some staff were required to be available on site during all contracted hours due to the nature of their jobs. This applied for example to refuse collectors or staff employed at the depot. In general, service requirements took priority over agile arrangements so, when necessary, working patterns were adjusted to suit service requirements. Members requested that they be provided with quantitative data on the take up (number and proportion of staff) of agile working across the Council.

2)    Investigate the possibility of introducing a follow up to measure satisfaction with customers’ interaction with services. For example, a form of trustpilot-style of providing feedback when customers interact with service areas.

A Member commented that the Council needed to be able to measure Members’ satisfaction with responsiveness of service areas to elected member enquiries. A question was asked concerning why the Council used a survey company to create a pilot survey for customers. It was responded that surveys produced by the Council in house generally had low response rates; a survey company would offer expertise that was hoped would result in greater engagement with this pilot. Members requested that details with regard to the cost of engaging survey company be provided.

3)    Progress on increasing responsiveness of officers to member enquiries and what progress had been made in looking at this issue so far by the project team.

It was noted that the ‘Best Practice for Handling Member Enquiries’ document, as presented under item 3 (Minute No. 100/23), was endorsed by the Board. This document provided details of the process which would be followed when Members raise complaints / compliments in relation to officer responsiveness.

In summary, the following information was requested by Members:

• Whether a space utilisation exercise was being carried out periodically to determine the effectiveness of hot desking;
• Number and proportion of overall Council staff that had taken up agile working;
• The cost of engaging a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104/23

The Strategic Planning and Conservation Manager provided a briefing update, which set out the progress to date in creating the Local Heritage List (LHL) and showed the proposed action plan for completion of the LHL in 18 months.

It was reported that four the parishes – Alvechurch, Belbroughton, Beoley, and Dodford – had been surveyed and draft LHL’s for these areas had now been compiled. 129 buildings and structures were being proposed for the LHL from these parishes. Draft lists for these parishes were ready to be consulted on in late spring 2024. Areas currently being surveyed included Bromsgrove Town, Lickey and Blackwell Parish, and Wythall Parish.

It was noted that at the previous meeting of Overview and Scrutiny a recommendation was (subsequently agreed by Cabinet) that the final Local Heritage List (LHL) for Bromsgrove District be completed within 18 months. This provided a target date for completion of LHL of September 2025. The works on compiling a list for parishes / areas would be carried out in alphabetical order. It was highlighted that Officers could not be certain how much work was required in each area until a survey for a given area was carried out. As the work progressed, Officers would be providing quarterly updates on progress to the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

The Strategic Planning and Conservation Manager reported that during the process of creating LHL for their areas/wards, Ward Members would be contacted a minimum of three times: (1) when officers begin surveying; (2) on completion of the draft LHL for the Ward; (3) prior to adoption of the list for the area. It was highlighted that for parishes where survey work had been undertaken already, Ward Members would be contacted imminently to update on progress. This would also be the case for the three areas where survey work was being carried out at the moment.

Following the update, a Member thanked Officers for providing this briefing which set out a plan for completion of LHL and which included details of Member involvement in the process. A question was asked regarding whether submissions of proposals for inclusion on the LHL could still be made in respect of Lickey and Blackwell Parish. It was responded that the list creation was a continuous and iterative process and proposals for addition to the list could be submitted at any time.

In response to a question, it was noted that in areas which had parishes, Officers worked on the basis of parish boundaries rather than ward boundaries in respect of creating LHLs. A Member requested that it be highlighted and corrected in future documents that the correct name for  Belbroughton Parish was Belbroughton and Fairfield Parish Council – the  area covered by this Parish being the villages of Belbroughton and Fairfield (rather than only Belbroughton).

With respect to publicity for LHL consultations in each area, it was noted that Officers would be in contact with the Parish Councils. The LHL consultations would also be publicised at events in each local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 105/23

The Strategic Housing Services Manager provided an overview of the Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG). It was noted that these were mandatory grants to support the provision of adaptations to promote independent living within the home, subject to the provisions of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996.

It was explained that the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) provided each local authority in England with a DFG allocation contained within the Better Care Fund paid to the County Council and passported to Local Housing Authorities (including Bromsgrove).

It was explained that the grant was means-tested and there was a robust process followed to arrive at grant allocation decisions, starting with a comprehensive assessment of the applicant’s needs.

It was noted that it was considered good practice to offer a Home Improvement Agency (HIA) service to support an accepted applicant and their family through the complicated process of carrying out major building works. In Worcestershire a partnership of the 6 Local Housing Authorities and Worcestershire County Council commissioned a HIA referred as the Worcestershire Promoting Independent Living Service and this was provided by Millbrook Health Care under a contract until March 2025.

Performance data was provided on the use of DFG in 2022-23, including on the types of building jobs carried out to enable a home adaptation, expenditure on the home adaptations by type, breakdown of the types of recipients of DFG by tenure and breakdown by age. It was noted that over 50 per cent of DFGs were for bathroom and stairlift adaptations.

Following the presentation, Members asked questions regarding the DFG and the following responses were noted:

• Review of maximum amount of DFG grant amount that can be awarded – It was noted that the current maximum amount of DFG grant that can be awarded to an individual was £30,000 and currently there were no discussions nationally around increasing that amount. However, the Council had the power to provide discretionary top-ups to DFG grants.

• Resistance of landlords to providing adaptations through DFG grant – It was noted that in cases where recipients of DFG grant were living in rented accommodation, the landlord could refuse an adaptation being installed in their property. The Council did not possess powers to force the landlord to have the adaptation installed. However, the Council would discuss the issue with a landlord, explaining why the adaptation was needed and what the benefits they could have from the work undertaken.

• It was highlighted that the Operational Therapists (OT) service used for the DFG provision was specifically used by the Council for provision of DFG service and not shared with NHS Acute Trusts.

• Median delivery times of delivering an adaptation – It was clarified that delivery time of adaptations for DFG recipients were calculated from the time of OT referral to the home improvement agency (HIA) to completion of the works.

• It was noted that there was a statutory requirement for the Council to assess and process DFG applications sent from HIA within 6  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106/23

The Chairman of the Foodbank and Community Provision Task Group, Councillor E. M. S. Gray, presented the final report of the Task Group. In doing so, Councillor E. M. S. Gray provided details of the final recommendations of the Task Group, explaining rationale behind each recommendation in detail.

Following the opening remarks by the Chairman of the Task Group, Members discussed the following aspects of the work undertaken by the Task Group:

·       Funding provision to foodbank organisations –It was noted that one of the areas considered by the Task Group was distribution of funding to foodbanks in the District. Following visits to the foodbanks, it was deemed imperative for Members to understand mechanisms through which funding was provided to foodbanks. Members also asked for updates on which foodbanks operating in the District were being funded by the Council and/or via the funding that was distributed by the Council.

·       An explanation was provided that Bromsgrove District Council did not provide any funding to foodbanks from its General Fund (the Council’s budget). The Council had awarded the Government’s Household Support Fund (HSF) to local organisations.  This money had been provided to the District Council from Worcestershire County Council in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding. The purpose of the Fund was to support vulnerable households through lead local authorities as part of the support linked to the increase in the cost of living. This fund specifically related to providing assistance to vulnerable households in most need of support to help with energy and water, food, wider essentials, advice services and housing costs.

·       As part of HSF grant funding distribution, foodbanks were awarded some funding. The requirement to receive funding was that the foodbank had been in existence for a minimum of 12 months as of the start of each new phase of Household Support Fund (HSF). It was reported that in March 2024 the HSF had been extended for an extra six months, and five foodbanks in the District benefited from this round of HSF funding. Information with regard to which foodbanks had been awarded this funding were published on the Council’s website.

·       It was reported that several organisations listed in the report provided other support services alongside foodbank operation. These organisations could also bid and receive funding from the Council in respect of other areas of their operation. For instance, some organisations received Homelessness Prevention Grant Support, approved annually by Cabinet, in respect of housing support. This funding was subject to its own eligibility and monitoring processes as detailed in Cabinet reports.

·       Residents in need of travel across local authority boundaries to access foodbank provision – It was highlighted that in the course of  investigation, Task Group Members highlighted anecdotal evidence of residents in wards bordering other local authorities, such as in Rubery and Hagley, accessing foodbanks across district boundaries. This was attributed to lack of foodbank provision in the outlying wards in Bromsgrove. A question was asked with respect of whether this issue was also identified in the Belbroughton  ...  view the full minutes text for item 107/23

(Report to follow). This report will be published in a Supplementary Papers pack.

The Overview and Scrutiny Board Annual Report 2023-24 was submitted for Members’ consideration. The Chairman reported that together with the Vice-Chairman of the Board he was due to meet with Officers to propose that the number of meetings of Overview and Scrutiny be increased in future municipal years. An outcome of this discussion would be reported to Members at the next meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Board.

A typographical error on page 9 of the Annual Report with respect to the membership of the Finance and Budget Working Group was reported. It was noted that the Member represented on the Finance and Budget Working Group was Councillor R. Bailes, not Councillor A. Bailes.

RESOLVED that subject to the amendment in the preamble above the Overview and Scrutiny Board Annual Report 2023-24 be noted.

The Cabinet Work Programme was presented for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet Work Programme be noted.

It was requested that an item with respect to new build affordable housing be added to the Board’s work programme for the next meeting. It was requested that this report cover the topics of the current number of affordable houses in the District, affordable housing targets and whether the Council was meeting its targets, as well as projections for future demand.

RESOLVED that the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme be updated as per the pre-amble above.

RESOLVED: that under Section 100 I of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it/they involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, as amended, the relevant paragraph of that part, in each case, being as set out below, and that it is in the public interest to do so:-

RESOLVED: that under Section 100 I of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of scheme 12A to the Act, as amended, the relevant paragraph of that part, in each case, being as set out below and that it is in the public interest to do so:-

The Interim Head of Environmental and Housing Property Services introduced this report and in doing so recapped that at the meeting of full Council on 21^st February 2024, the Parking Enforcement Service Level Agreement with Wychavon District Council was considered and Members agreed to undertake a strategic review of parking services. The review would include on and off street parking enforcement and would support preparation of a business case for the future of the service. At 21^st February 2024 full Council, it was agreed that a one-off budget of £50,000 be included in the Medium-Term Financial Plan for 2024-25 to fund the proposed strategic review, including through engagement with consultants.

It was noted that the brief for the strategic review included three key deliverables:

• A review of existing parking requirements including supply and demand for now and in the future;
• A review of car park management arrangements with solutions identified to reduce the need for off street parking enforcement;
• Review of On-Street Enforcement will be carried out to address member and resident concerns around coverage of activities.

It was highlighted that through the strategic review the consultants would be engaging with Ward Members and Parish Councillors to identify local issues with regard to parking.

• Timeline for the consultants’ work – It was anticipated at this point that the appointed consultants would begin work on the strategic review in mid-May with the work to take three months to complete. Final consultants’ report was anticipated in September 2024 with regular meetings to ensure that the review remained on track.

• Number of car parks operated by Bromsgrove District Council – A Member commented that the Council operated 9 car parks and not 11 car parks, as stated under paragraph 2.1 of the report. The Member stated that this figure probably included Churchfield Car Park which was closed and one other should not be included. The Officer responded that part of the work was about understanding demand and currently 2 of the car parks, although closed currently, had uncertainty with regard whether they would be used in the future, hence the report stated a figure of 11 Council-operated car parks.

• Specialist parking consultants – The need to ensure that the Council employed specialist parking consultancy as part of this strategic review was highlighted by a Member. It was noted that understanding the specific parking issues and needs in areas outside of Bromsgrove Town Centre such as: occupancy and duration of use in car parks, the impacts of overspill into surrounding streets. It was highlighted by a Member that involvement of the County Council in the strategic review was needed in order to ensure its success.

• Understanding how traffic wardens are operating – The Interim Head of Environmental and Housing Property Services reported that there was regular monthly reporting by Wychavon District Council to catalogue what areas the parking wardens were visiting and at what frequency.

• A Member commented that he thought an on-the-ground survey of parking provision in Alvechurch needed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112/23

An update was provided on the progress in the transfer of economic development unit (EDU) from Wyre Forest DC to Bromsgrove and Redditch Councils, including on the recruitment to the key posts in respect of the proposed new Economic Development, Regeneration and Property Service.

RESOLVED that the update be noted.

(During the consideration of this item, Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to move to exclude the press and public prior to any debate of exempt matters on the grounds that information would be revealed which related to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and which related to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority).

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Board held on 11^th March 2024, including the record of the confidential matters discussed at the meeting, were considered.

There was a request for an amendment to the minutes record in respect of the inaccuracy in the confidential minutes record of the subject matter that was considered in exempt session (Minute Item 86/23 – To confirm the accuracy of the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Board held on 12^th February 2024). It was resolved that the inaccuracy would be corrected.

RESOLVED that subject to the amendment in respect of the confidential minutes record, the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Board meeting held on 11^th March 2024 be agreed as a true and correct record.

(During the consideration of this item, Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to move to exclude the press and public prior to any debate of exempt matters on the grounds that information would be revealed which related to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and which related to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority).