The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Governance presented the Officer Scheme of Delegations for Members’ consideration. Members were advised that the Council was required to review the content of the Scheme of Delegations on an annual basis, and this occurred at the Annual Council meeting.
A typographical error was highlighted for Members’ attention in respect of the S106 Monies to the Value of £15k, as detailed in Appendix 1 of the Scheme of Delegations report. It was confirmed that the figure of £50k had been incorrectly included and that the details should have read as follows:
“Authority to spend S106 monies up to a value of £15k to spend in line with the S106 agreement which caused the receipt of the receipt of the S106 monies.”
During consideration of this item Councillor P.M McDonald drew Members’ attention to areas in the Scheme of Delegations that he wished to be clarified. These were as follows:
· Appointment of Heads of Service delegatedto Executive Directors – it was clarified that although the Appointments of Heads of Service had been delegated to the Executive Directors, an appointment would still be considered by the Appointments Committee on behalf of the Council.
· Early Retirement Payments – It was confirmed that the Chief Executive Officer had a legislative duty to inform Members of the numbers of staff within the Council. It was clarified that any early retirement payments that were made would not include any enhancements.
· Housing Association Nominations – Members were informed that the Council had a statutory duty to provide homelessness support. However, the Strategic Housing Manager would be able to provide further clarification in this area.
· Civil Injunctions – Further clarification was provided to Members, where it was explained that Ward Members would only be informed ‘where appropriate’ as detailed in the delegation, as any civil injunction might be part of a criminal investigation. In these circumstances it would not be appropriate to share information with the Ward Member due to its sensitive nature.
· Varying Charges for the Business Waste Collection and Recycling Service - It was confirmed that the Business Waste Collection and Recycling Service was a very competitive area, and that the potential 25% variance was necessary in order to compete with private companies.
· Police and Crime Panel Budget – Members were provided with information on the budget prior to its approval.
· Alteration of Polling Places – It was reported that thiswould be considered by the Electoral Matters Committee when necessary. It was noted that it was already included in the Constitution that the Committee could exercise powers and undertake functions relating to electoral matters and elections.
· Minor Amendments to a planning application and advertisements on roundabouts within the District – currently these were delegated to the Head of Planning, Regeneration and Leisure Services. However, it was suggested that it would be more appropriate that these issues were referred back to the Planning Committee.
· Use of the Parkside Suite by charities – It was suggested that this would be an area that Members should make decisions on rather than it be delegated to officers.
In considering this matter, it was suggested by some Members that this was not the most appropriate setting to discuss the Scheme of Delegations in such detail. It was noted that it would be more appropriate being discussedat the Constitution Review Working Group meetings and would be included on the agenda for consideration at a future meeting of the Working Group.
The recommendation was proposed by Councillor G. Denaro and seconded by Councillor K. May.
the Scheme of Delegations be agreed.