Agenda and minutes

To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 10 January 2023 (copy enclosed). 

The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 10 January 2023 were agreed and signed by the Leader.

(Where a Councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest the Councillor must declare the interest to the meeting and leave the room without participating in any discussion or making a statement on the item, except where a Councillor is permitted to remain as a result of a grant of dispensation.)

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

To approve: 1) The General Fund and Housing Revenue Account Budget for 2023/24 including the use of reserves, Medium Term Financial Strategy, Capital Programme and Strategy, Treasury Management Strategy, MRP Policy and Annual Investment Strategy, Fees and Charges for 2023/24; 2) Approval of Council Tax for recommendations to Full Council; and 3) the Annual Delivery Plan (report of the Deputy Chief Executive – Corporate Development (S151)).

Consideration was given to the report of the Deputy Chief Executive – Corporate Development (S151) which presented the General Fund and HRA budgets for 2023/24 including the use of reserves, Medium Term Financial Strategy, Capital Programme and Strategy, Treasury Management Policy/Strategy, MRP Policy and Annual Investment Strategy and the Annual Delivery Plan.

The Portfolio Holder – Finance, Commercialisation and Partnership presented the report, advising that the Budget position had changed slightly to that presented at the last Cabinet meeting.  The following background was provided:

·       The 2023/24 budget was one of the most challenging budgets ever set , the extent of issues faced being significant and occurring at the same time.  There were changes impacting on a variety of areas including Business Rates, staff pay and pensions, fuel, power and contracts.  However investment income had improved.  There were a large number of assumptions to be made, the largest being around pay increases, investment income and the IDB levy – this made the budget very uncertain and subject to change.  More recent pressures relating to homelessness and the cost of living crisis continued to impact on residents’ and the Council’s budgets.

·       With regard to the IDB levy, significant representation had been made to the Government on this issue.  Following a meeting between the Leader, our MP and the minister, a further response to the concerns raised as part of the budget consultation process was awaited.  The embedding of the levy within the budgets was considered a structural defect of the funding formula with the removal of RSG over a number of years.  Work was also ongoing with the IDBs and other affected Councils.

·       With this hugely significant pressure increasing this year by £332,000 (around £541,000 over two years), which was embedded within the budget, and with the constraint of the referendum limit, it was necessary to recommend a £5.76 increase in Council Tax for a Band D property.  This would raise £257,000 towards the £3.1million IDB levy which now made up 55% of all Council Tax raised.  However, with the majority of residents being in properties lower than Band D, this would be a lower increase for most households.

·       Despite the challenges, there had been success in securing access to grant funding – Changing Places; Green Home Grants; UKSPF; Levelling Up Fund; and NPO.  These now featured in SHDC’s and delivery partners’ 2023/24 revenue and capital budgets.  In additions, other funding bids had been submitted and outcomes on these were awaited.

·       The capital programme was now a very significant part of the budget and delivery would take place in this and future years through the Green Homes Grants, Levelling Up Fund and UKSPF.  It was important to support and drive growth in the area, and a budget to achieve this had been created.

·       In respect of the HRA, investment continued in replacing stock that had been subject to Right to Buy, and the improvement of housing stock and sheltered accommodation.  The programme of acquisitions and build through Welland Homes continued, which contributed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

To advise the Cabinet about a draft Partnership Litter and Fly-Tipping Engagement and Enforcement Strategy and seek approval to go out to public consultation (report of the Assistant Director - Regulatory enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director Regulatory which advised Cabinet of a draft Partnership Litter and Fly-Tipping Engagement and Enforcement Strategy.

The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection presented the report, which introduced the draft Litter and Fly-Tipping Engagement and Enforcement Strategy for adoption across the S&ELCP.

The strategy set out the ambition to tackle these issues through a stronger focus on engagement, education and enforcement.  An Action Plan had also been provided to detail the key activities to take place, which included a social media campaign, improved signage and the use of overt cameras.  The strategy supported the new enforcement contract, which had just been agreed across the Partnership.

Members were advised of a change to the recommendation as published within the report, as it was felt that a review and consultation after six months would be more meaningful in order to measure the impact the Strategy was having.  Members were therefore asked to approve the Litter and Fly-Tipping Engagement and Enforcement Strategy and Action Plan with the commitment to review and carry out a consultation in six months.

The following points were raised:

·       While welcoming the proposals, concern was raised around how effective the new Strategy would be in addressing the constant issues faced in the area around litter and fly-tipping.  The proposals would not assist private landowners who regularly had to deal with fly-tipping.  Cabinet members responded that it was felt that the proposals were a step in the right direction, but it was also acknowledged that the rural nature of South Holland made it a particularly difficult problem to resolve.  Education was important, and nationally there should be higher fines to act as a deterrent.  The recent decision to award the Enviro-Crime Enforcement Contract to Kingdom L A Support Ltd would allow the Authority to work alongside the contractor, providing more scope to address the problems of littering and fly-tipping.

·       With regard to cameras that had already been purchased, it was noted that some had already been deployed.  Cameras could be used for covert and overt surveillance, and the new contract with Kingdom L A Support Ltd would provide more capability in this regard, in addition to undertaking some overt surveillance with them in the future.  It was acknowledged that stronger regulation around surveillance at a national level was required.

DECISION:

That the Litter and Fly-Tipping Engagement and Enforcement Strategy and Action Plan be approved, with the commitment to review and carry out consultation in six months’ time.

(Other options considered:

·       To do nothing;

Reasons for decision:

·       To enable the Council to take forward the Strategy and Action Plan to tackle the issues of Litter and Fly-tipping.  A review to be carried out in six months to consider the impact that the Strategy and Action Plan are having on the issues of litter and fly-tipping).

To consider a proposal to make investment in up to four areas of public realm within Spalding Town Centre (report of the Assistant Director for Strategic Growth and Development enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director for Strategic Development, which detailed a proposal to make investment in up to four areas of public realm within Spalding Town Centre.

In the absence of the Portfolio Holder for Assets and Planning, the Assistant Director for Strategic Development provided a summary of the proposals.

The four identified areas for improvement were:  Hall Place; Double Street; Swan Street/New Road; and Red Lion Street.  The need for the project had been identified through the Spalding Town Centre Improvement Plan Steering Group, which consisted of members and partners with an interest in the town.  Councillor Grocock, the member lead for the Spalding Town Centre Improvement Plan, had identified the project as a priority for the programme.

The proposed funding strategy for which approval was sought, as detailed more fully in section 2.13 of the report, was as follows:

·       A £46,000 contribution from the Town Centre Improvement Plan budget for Spalding;

·       A £32,000 contribution from the remaining unallocated s106 funds available from the Springfields s106 agreement;

·       A re-allocation of £57,000 in Springfields s106 funds;

·       A £147,035 contribution from s106 funds available from the Holland Park s106 agreement.

The following points were raised:

·       Members welcomed the proposals within the report and noted that the improvements to Spalding Town Centre had been needed for some time.  However, investment was also required for other towns within South Holland, and a better relationship with Parish Councils was needed to assist in accessing funding.  Members were reminded that the recently awarded UKSPF funding would provide the opportunity for Parish Councils to bid for monies, and that they would shortly be able to attend a briefing which would explain how they could do this.

·       Members raised the importance of all relevant groups working together on the subject of Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) – the issues of town improvement and TROs were linked and one could not be done without the other.

·       The importance of proceeding promptly with the town centre improvements was highlighted. The funding provided a finite amount of money and inflationary rises would only make goods and services more expensive going forward.  It was also important to ensure that improvements were undertaken in a strategic and joined-up manner.

DECISION:

1)    That the proposals contained within the report in respect of the ambition to make improvements to four areas of public realm within Spalding Town Centre be approved;

2)    That the funding strategy as set out within the report, including the reassignment of £57,000 in s106 funds as historically agreed in 2014 for investment in Ayscoughfee Hall and Gardens, be endorsed for the proposed public realm project; and

3)    That the capital project of £282,935 and associated funding strategy be included in the Council’s proposed 2023/24 capital budget, to be presented to Full Council on 2 March 2023.

(Other options considered:

·       To do nothing – Under this option, the proposal to create a budget to make improvements to up to four areas of existing public realm in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

To consider the preparation required for National Portfolio Organisation funding from Arts Council England (report of the Assistant Director for Economic Growth).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director for Economic Growth which asked the Cabinet to consider the preparation required for National Portfolio Organisation (NPO) funding from Arts Council England.

The Portfolio Holder for People, Places and Economy presented the report which confirmed investment by the Arts Council England (ACE) of £651,993 per annum over the next three years to the S&ELCP.  The Assistant Director for Economic Growth and her team were thanked for their work on this bid.

Feedback from ACE was attached at Appendix A and identified areas of work expected to be preserved within the updated Activity plan included:

·       Programmes of work with schools and young people;

·       Digitisation of collections;

·       Working across heritage and museum sites to enable stronger cultural programming including a focus on heritage within arts;

·       Engagement with the new Cultural Strategy;

·       Embedding approaches to supporting the involvement of children and young people.

In line with the application, ACE expected the development of three Creative Hubs to help deliver the activity and the establishment of a Culture Board to oversee the programme.  East Lindsey District Council would be the lead authority and accountable body for the Partnership’s NPO investment, with a focus on three hubs – Boston Guildhall (Boston Borough Council), Ayscoughfee Hall and Gardens (South Holland District Council) and the Colonnade at Sutton on Sea (East Lindsey District Council).

DECISION:           

1)    That it be agreed that East Lindsey District Council be authorised to act as the Accountable Body for the fund that has been awarded, and that necessary arrangements for its delivery be made;

2)    That the use of Ayscoughfee Hall and Gardens as a Cultural Hub, and any necessary in-kind contributions to support the delivery of the programme, be approved; and

3)    That the Activity Plan be noted, and delegated authority given to the Assistant Director – Economic Growth, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, to modify and approve future plans.

(Other options considered:

·       The application to Arts Council England was a competitive process and the funding award was based on the commitment to deliver the Activity Plan.  Funding would not be awarded, or could be withdrawn if the Council did not support the proposals;

Reasons for decision:

·       To meet Arts Council England requirements to access annual funding allocations through the National Portfolio Organisation funding, and to enable Ayscoughfee Hall and Gardens to be a Cultural Hub).

To adopt the Housing Comments, Complaints and Compensation Policy, Tenant Engagement Framework and the Housing Estate Management Policy  (report of the Assistant Director – Housing enclosed). 

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Housing, which requested adoption of the Housing Comments, Complaints and Compensation Policy, Tenant Engagement Framework and the Housing Estate Management Policy.

The Portfolio Holder – HRA and Private Sector Housing presented the report which contained the following draft documents:

·       Housing Comments, Compliments, Complaints and Compensation Policy;

·       Tenant Engagement Framework;

·       Housing Estate Management Policy

The new Social Housing (Regulation) Bill, which focussed on strengthening the regulation of the social housing sector, was progressing through the House of Commons.  This new regulation would provide the Regulator of Social Housing with enhanced powers including ‘Ofsted style’ inspections of social landlords along with requiring social landlords to publish annual data on tenant satisfaction, ASB, complaint handling, repairs, building safety and more.   

The following new policies have been drafted to support the Council’s ongoing preparation for this regulated environment:

Comments, Compliments, Complaints and Compensation Policy 

As part of the new Regulated enforcement, the role of the Housing Ombudsman had been enhanced.  A new Complaint Handling Code had been published and the Ombudsman was being heavily resourced. 

Housing complaints were currently administered in line with the Local Government Ombudsman’s requirements – the same as all other Council departments.  However, this new environment placed additional requirements on social landlords.  These requirements differed to the Local Government Ombudsman, making it necessary to have a separate policy for Housing.   

The policy set out the difference between complaints and service requests and what were not considered to be complaints.  It set out the process for complaints set by the Housing Ombudsman, provided clarity on the role of the Ombudsman and the stages where they could become involved.   A compensation matrix had been included, as recommended by the Ombudsman and the differences between mandatory and discretionary compensation, evidence required of the tenant to support these claims, and that debt owed to the authority would be deducted from these funds before payment, had been set out.  Also detailed was how complaints would be monitored, and the governance involved with quarterly reporting to the Portfolio Holder. 

Tenant Engagement Framework

As part of the Regulated environment, there was a requirement to engage with tenants and evidence this work. The framework set out how engagement with tenants over the next 3 years would be explored and developed.   It focussed on how tenants were informed and involved in improving and shaping the service.

Estates Policy

This policy was the last of the suite of policies for the HRA, and focussed on how estates and communal areas were maintained.  

It set out the approach regarding maintaining the physical condition, cleanliness and safety of the housing environment in order to preserve its fabric and promotion of community pride.  The document made reference to estate inspections, management of open space, response to environmental ASB, garage sites and management of communal areas including  responsibilities around fire safety, and Health and Safety.

Finally, members were advised that the delegations for payments of compensation detailed in Section 6 of Appendix  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

Note:         (i)      No other business is permitted unless by reason of special circumstances, which shall be specified in the Minutes, the Leader is of the opinion that the item(s) should be considered as a matter of urgency. 

(ii)     Any urgent item of business that is a key decision must be dealt with in accordance with the Constitution’s Access to Information Procedure Rules.

There were none.