Agenda item

To consider the recommendations from the meetings of the Cabinet held on 23^rd July 2025 and 10^th September 2025.

Members are asked to note that there was one further recommendation made at the Cabinet meeting held on 10^th September 2025 in respect of Urgent Business. This recommendation has already been agreed as an urgent decision on 16^th September 2025. A copy of the urgent decision can be viewed at item 7 on this agenda.

Members were asked to note that in addition to the recommendations considered at this meeting there was one further recommendation made at the Cabinet meeting held on 10^th September 2025 in respect of the Extension to the Consultation Period for Bromsgrove District Council’s Local Plan. This recommendation had already been agreed in accordance with the Council’s Urgency Procedure Rules on 16^th September 2025, as discussed earlier in the meeting and therefore would not be debated under this item.

Revocation of the Bromsgrove Road and Lickey End Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)

During consideration of this item, the Standing Orders were suspended until the end of the Council meeting in order to allow the Technical Services Manager from Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) to speak on this technical report, if necessary.

The Cabinet Member for Planning and Regulatory Services presented the report for Members’ consideration. In doing so the following was highlighted:

• This report was good news for the District as it indicated an improvement in air quality within the AQMAs at these locations. It was necessary under legislation that if air quality within AQMAs improved consistently then the AQMA would need to be revoked.
• The improvement in air quality might be attributed to several factors including a decrease in traffic and increase in the use of electric vehicles and improvements in efficiency of diesel engine technology.
• Monitoring of locations continued even when AQMAs were being revoked. If any changes to the data were identified, there would be a review of the revocation of the AQMA at these sites.

Members queried how the continued monitoring would be undertaken in the future. The Technical Services Manager for WRS reported that there were three strands to delivery of the monitoring and air quality management work. These were as follows:

1. Diffusion tube networks would remain at the sites and would provide data in order to monitor levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO²). This monitoring equipment was also located at other sites within the District.
2. There were three real time air quality monitoring devices within the District.
3. An Air Quality Strategy was being developed currently in order to tackle air quality in areas within the District that were not subject to an AQMA. This was alongside a ‘behaviour change’ project currently underway across the County.

Members were keen to understand, if monitoring, as detailed above, was still due to be undertaken, how this would be different to the AQMA monitoring currently taking place? It was stated that there would not be the need for formal reporting of the monitoring data collected at these sites which currently was reported to DEFRA. However, the monitoring would remain.

The issue of particulate matter was raised and the monitoring that was currently in place for this type of air pollution. Some Members felt that an increase in this type of monitoring would be greatly beneficial for the District and could potentially be implemented as a community investment project ahead of Local Government Reorganisation. It was felt that this would be an opportunity to improve the health and wellbeing of residents within the District.

The Leader agreed that a report on particulate matter would be presented at a future Cabinet meeting for consideration.

The recommendation was proposed by Councillor K. Taylor and seconded by Councillor P. Whittaker. On being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED that

the Lickey End, Bromsgrove Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and the Redditch Road, Bromsgrove, AQMA be revoked.

Treasury Management Outturn Report 2024/2025

The Cabinet Member for Finance presented the Treasury Management Outturn Report 2024/2025 for the consideration of Council.

Members were informed that the Council had adopted the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice (the CIPFA Code), which required the Authority to approve as a minimum semi-annual and annual Treasury Management Outturn reports. The Treasury Management Strategy, as approved by Council in February 2024, and monitoring continued to take place with risk being at the centre of the reporting.

The Treasury Management Outturn Report 2024/2025 concentrated on the national outlook and a more local economic environment. It was noted that the Council had no external borrowing and that Capital Fund Projects were funded by internal borrowing only.

The CIPFA Code stated that a Council’s Investment Strategy must be prudent. It was confirmed that all of the Council’s Treasury Management activities throughout the year fully complied with the principles in the Treasury Management Code and the Authority’s approved Treasury Management Strategy.

Prudential indicators were monitored by the Authority. These indicators were Liability, Security, Liquidity and Interest Rate Exposures. It was confirmed that the Council was compliant in all the prudential indictors.

The recommendations were proposed by Councillor S. Baxter and seconded by Councillor K. May. On being put to the vote Members

RESOLVED to note 

1) the Council’s Treasury performance for the financial year 2024/25.

2) the position in relation to the Council’s Prudential indicators.

Adoption of Fixed Penalty Charge for Breach of Community Protection Notice

As detailed earlier in the meeting, the Standing Orders were suspended until the end of the Council meeting in order to allow the Technical Services Manager from Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) to speak on this technical report, if necessary.

The Cabinet Member for Planning, Licensing and WRS and the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services and Community Safety presented the report for Members’ consideration. It was noted that, if agreed, the recommendation would strengthen Officer powers in respect of issuing a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) when a Community Protection Notice (CPN) had not been effective. It was hoped that in implementing such FPNs, it would result in a much more formal process in dealing with enforcement issues such as dog fouling.

Members queried whether, alongside the issuing of a FPN, there would be the potential to recoup the cost of the collection of a fly-tip within the District. The Technical Services Manager from WRS explained that in most instances of fly-tipping or littering, these types of FPNs would not be appropriate. In these cases, a different type of FPN would be issued which incurred a higher fine. The specific type of FPN dealt with within the report would be applicable when a process of issuing an informal warning, followed by a formal Community Protection Warning and then a CPN had been issued. For the most part, by the time that the CPN had been issued the breach would have been resolved. Should this not be the case then it might be appropriate to move towards prosecution. However, in cases where there had been partial compliance in a CPN, it might not be in the public’s interest to move to prosecution, in these cases an FPN could be issued to discharge the liability of the breach. Examples of these cases provided were side waste issues and untidy land cases.

Questions were raised about whether it would be appropriate to issue these kinds of FPNs in incidences when ASB e.g. drug use was reported. It was reiterated that the purpose of this suggested FPN was for it to be used if appropriate when a CPN had not been effective. Members queried situations when those who had been served with this type of FPN did not pay the fine and whether there would be an extra incurred cost to the Council if the matter moved to prosecution. For the most part, any costs would be in terms of Officer time. However, in serving the FPN it would strengthen the Council’s’ case that all steps had been taken in order to gain compliance in a reasonable manner prior to legal proceedings.

In terms of reporting, Members were informed that issues such as fly-tipping, untidy land and side waste matters could be reported through Bromsgrove District Council’s website. Wider ASB matters would need to be reported to other appropriate partners.

The recommendation was proposed by Councillor K. Taylor and seconded by Councillor P. Whittaker. On being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED that

A Fixed Penalty Notice Charge of £100 for failure to comply with a Community Protection Notice be adopted.

Quarter 1 2025/26 Finance and Performance Monitoring Report

The Cabinet Member for Finance presented the report for Members’ consideration. In doing so, and as detailed earlier in the meeting, Members were informed that the Council was compliant in terms of Treasury Management and prudential indicators. It was noted that the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee had requested more detailed information in respect of Balance Sheet Monitoring which had been included in this report.

During consideration of this report, it was raised that there seemed to be a discrepancy in the amount of annual deficit forecast for the Council. The report indicated that there was an annual deficit at the end of Quarter one of approximately £173,000. However, in looking in further detail, Members had identified some potential inaccuracies within the savings across several Council service areas (Corporate Services, Legal and Democratic Services and Regeneration and Property Services) which would result in a deficit of £587,360. It was further discussed that, given the report on Expansion of the Commercial Waste Service, also due to be considered at this meeting and which requested additional funding, it would not be appropriate to consider an increase in spending until such time as an accurate picture of the Council’s current financial position could be provided.

Members requested that some further information be provided regarding the concerns that had been raised. It was felt that, as the potential inaccuracies had only just been highlighted, it would not be appropriate to provide a response at this meeting, and the report should be deferred to the Extraordinary Council meeting due to take place on 19^th November 2025. This would give Officers the opportunity to look at the areas raised and provide a more detailed narrative in November 2025. Some specific areas that Members requested be looked at were funding for The Artrix, rent revenue for Nailers Yard and the commentary contained within the report. Members were advised that if there were any further specific areas that Members felt needed to be addressed regarding this report, this should be raised prior to the next meeting, in order for Members and Officers to provide as fulsome responses as possible.

Expansion of Commercial Waste Collection Service

As detailed in the preamble above, this report was not considered at this meeting. It was agreed that consideration of the Expansion of Commercial Waste Collection Service report should instead be deferred to the Extraordinary Council meeting on 19^th November 2025.