Agenda and minutes

Cabinet - Tuesday, 24th July, 2012 6.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Priory Road, Spalding

Contact: Amanda Taylor  01775 764837

Items
No. Item

13.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 63 KB

To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 19 June 2012 (copy enclosed). 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 June 2012 were signed by the Leader as a correct record.

14.

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

In relation to agenda items 6a (Final Report of the Community Interest and other Local Authority Companies Task Group) and 6b (Final Report of the Red Lion Quarter Task Group), Councillors H R Johnson and P S Przyszlak declared that they were Directors of the Red Lion Quarter Community Interest Company.

 

In relation to agenda item 6a (Final Report of the Community Interest and other Local Authority Companies Task Group), Cllr Chandler, declared that he was a Director of the South Holland Housing Company. 

15.

Questions raised by the public under Cabinet Procedure Rule 2.4

Minutes:

No questions were raised by the public under Cabinet Procedure Rule 2.4.

16.

Matters subject to call-in

Minutes:

There were no matters subject to call-in.

17.

Matters arising from the Policy Development and Performance Monitoring Panels pdf icon PDF 30 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

a) Final Report of the Community Interest and other Local Authority Companies Task Group

 

Consideration was given to the final report of the Community Interest and other Local Authority Companies Task Group containing recommendations which had been approved by the Performance Monitoring Panel.

 

The appendices to the final report of the Community Interest and other Local Authority Companies Task Group, Appendix A (Background note on companies) and Appendix B (Guidance on governance of community interest companies), were tabled at the meeting.

 

The Chairman of the Task Group, Councillor B Alcock, presented the recommendations to the Cabinet. 

 

The Leader referred to the recommendation regarding the Housing Company and advised that a meeting had not been held as the national policy was currently in a state of flux.  Inevitably a decision would need to be made as to whether the company would continue to run or not.  He added that the Company had nine directors which was not extraordinarily large for a company of that nature. 

 

Members noted the recommendation regarding remuneration for directors.  The Leader referred to Compass Point Business Services (East Coast) Limited and advised that the company was owned jointly with East Lindsey District Council and therefore there could be circumstances of some directors receiving more than others.

 

The Leader referred to the recommendation regarding an annual meeting of a company being held prior to Annual Council and requested clarity that this would not be the actually annual general meeting of the company, which would have to consider certain items within that meeting.  Councillor Alcock confirmed that the Task Group had recommended a meeting to be held annually prior to Annual Council to discuss accounts, position of the company, etc, which would not be an annual general meeting.  A closed shareholders meeting to enable shareholders to challenge and question the company.  The Leader suggested that a standing item could also be added to the Annual Council agenda in order to receive feedback from any such meeting. 

 

DECISION:

 

The following recommendations were specifically divided, regarding the companies considered, as part of the report and generic recommendations regarding South Holland District Council’s approach to setting up companies in future:

 

a)      That where an alternative form of delivery was to be considered as a possible means of achieving Council outcomes it was recommended that an outline business case be prepared which covered all of the following areas:

 

           (i)            Clearly define what council outcomes were to be achieved;

         (ii)            Consider all options including in house, out sourced and companies;

       (iii)            What were the relative strengths and weaknesses of each in this context;

        (iv)            Consider the risks involved within each option; and

          (v)            Decide upon the most appropriate vehicle and set out the reasons for that choice.

 

b)      That where a company form was the chosen method of delivery the following template should be followed as good practice:

 

           (i)                             Commence consideration and debate early enough to give sufficient time for all stages of development;

         (ii)                             Involve members at all stages from preparation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

18.

Refresh of Corporate Plan for 2012/13 pdf icon PDF 23 KB

For approval.  (Joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Internal services, Performance and Business Development and the Assistant Director Democratic Services enclosed.)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Internal Services, Performance and Business Development and the Assistant Director Democratic Services which sought approval of proposed updates to the Council’s Corporate Plan 2011-2015.

 

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

 

That the proposed updates to the Corporate Plan 2011-2015 be approved. 

 

(Other options considered:

  • To approve the recommendations with amendments; and
  • Not to approve the recommendations.

Reason for decision:

  • Under each Corporate Priority within the plan we outlined ‘Our particular focus in x year – x year will be to:’, these sections required updating annually.)

19.

CCTV Service Improvements

To agree options for improved CCTV Services in South Holland.  (Joint report of the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Localism and Big Society and the Interim Community Development Manager to follow.)

Minutes:

This item was deferred for consideration at a future Cabinet meting.

20.

Council Tax Support Scheme pdf icon PDF 93 KB

To agree proposed consultation of the scheme.  (Joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Finance and Democratic Services and the Assistant Director Commissioning to follow.)

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Internal Services, Performance and Business Development, the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Finance and Democratic Services and the Assistant Director of Commissioning which sought approval to undertake formal consultation on a draft council tax support scheme.  Furthermore, it requested that delegated authority be given to the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive to formally agree the draft scheme prior to its publication.

 

Councillor R Gambba-Jones advised that it would be appropriate to consult with Parish Councils on the matter prior to their precepts being finalised.  The Chief Executive stated that as soon as things became clearer a meeting would be organised at the Council Offices to enable the Parish Councils to discuss the matter.

 

DECISION:

 

a)      That the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive be given delegated authority to determine the draft council tax support scheme for consultation;

 

b)      That the draft council tax support scheme be published for consultation, in order to meet the statutory timetable to approve a final scheme before the end of January 2013; and

 

c)      That once arrangements became clearer a meeting would be organised at the Council Offices to enable the Parish Councils discuss the matter

 

(Other options considered:

  • To approve the recommendations with amendments;
  • Not to approve the recommendations; and
  • To undertake consultation on a draft council tax support scheme that made savings through new support arrangements and generated income through appropriate technical changes in council tax collection.

Reason for decision:

  • To do nothing would have the effect of invoking the Government’s default statutory scheme and as a result, the precepting authorities would bear the full cost of the grant reduction.  This was, therefore, not deemed to be an appropriate option; and
  • The approach outlined above and in the appendices within the report would, where possible, use appropriate technical changes to fill the funding gap but would also consider savings that could be made by changing levels of support, e.g. capping entitlement.)

21.

Exclusion of Press and Public

Minutes:

DECISION:

 

That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

22.

Construction Services Unit (CSU) Proposed Restructure

To obtain approval to proceed with the proposed CSU restructure.  (Joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing Landlord and the Interim Housing Manager enclosed.)

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the joint report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing Landlord and the Interim Housing Manager which sought approval to proceed with the proposed Construction Services Unit (CSU) restructure.

 

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

 

That approval be given to proceed with the proposed CSU restructure.

 

(Other options considered:

  • To approve the recommendations with amendments; and
  • Not to approve the recommendations.

Reason for decision:

  • The proposals would demonstrate greater value for money and produce significant financial savings for the HRA;
  • To reduce the expenditure of the CSU so that its expenditure was in line with its productivity and performance; and
  • To increase the skill set of operatives.  Where required, the operatives would have to undergo multi skill training to NVQ standard. This would mean that the CSU would be equipped with a flexible workforce.)