Venue: Council Chamber - Civic Offices
Contact: Frank Jeffrey, Head of Democratic Services on 01483 743012 or email frank.jeffrey@woking.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for Absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Andy Caulfield, Daryl Jordan and Tom Spenser. |
|
Declarations of Interest. PDF 49 KB (i) To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary and other interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting. (ii) In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Strategic Director - Corporate Resources, Kevin Foster declares a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he is a Council-appointed director. The companies are listed in the attached schedule. The interests are such that Mr Foster may advise on those items. (iii) In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Strategic Director - Communities, Louise Strongitharm, declares a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which she is a Council-appointed director. The companies are listed in the attached schedule. The interests are such that Mrs Strongitharm may advise on those items. (iv) In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Head of Transformation and Digital, Adam Walther, declares a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he is a Council-appointed director. The companies are listed in the attached schedule. The interests are such that Mr Walther may advise on those items. Additional documents: Minutes: In accordance with the Local Code of Conduct, Councillor Ian Johnson declared a disclosable personal interest (pecuniary) in item 9a, Medium Term Financial Strategy, in relation to his wife being an employee of Citizens Advice Woking which was mentioned in the report. The interest was such that Councillor Johnson would remain in the Chamber during the discussion as the resolution was simply to undertake consultation on a raft of proposals and any decisions regarding future funding would be made at a later stage. In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Strategic Director - Corporate Resources, Kevin Foster declared a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he was a Council-appointed director. The companies were listed in an attached schedule. The interests were such that Mr Foster could advise on those items. In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Strategic Director - Communities, Louise Strongitharm, declared a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which she was a Council-appointed director. The companies were listed in an attached schedule. The interests were such that Mrs Strongitharm could advise on those items. In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Head of Transformation and Digital, Adam Walther, declared a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he was a Council-appointed director. The companies were listed in an attached schedule. The interests were such that Mr Walther could advise on those items. |
|
To approve the minutes of the meetings of the Council held on 20 July 2023 and 22 August 2023, as published. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Davis stated that at the last meeting on 22 August 2023, Councillor Brown had been prevented from speaking on an item which had not been recorded in the minutes, and therefore did not believe the minutes could be regarded as accurate. The Monitoring Officer reported that no complaint had been received to date and that the minutes of the meeting would be deferred to the next meeting for approval so that the matter could be looked into further. The Council was advised that the Council minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2023 contained an error to Mayor and Deputy Mayor. The minutes should have stated that Councillor Raja was Mayor, Councillor Morales was Deputy Mayor, and Councillor Hussain was present. It was noted that the error had been corrected since the publication of the agenda. RESOLVED That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 20 July 2023 be approved and signed as a true and correct record. |
|
Mayor's Communications. Additional documents: Minutes: The Mayor reported that from 20 August to 19 September 2023 he had been abroad. Since returning to the UK, numerous events had been attended which had been informative, enjoyable and highly rewarding, for example a function at St. Paul’s Church with Christian healthcare professionals Network UK which provided support to people from different communities by breaking down barriers to accessibility. On 27 September the Mayor had attended a rewards evening for staff at St. Peter’s Hospital, celebrating those that had given their careers to serving the NHS and the community. On 1 October, the Mayor would be attending a Charity Walk for Woking Community Hospital, the Mayor’s Charity, and encouraged Members to join in. |
|
Urgent Business. To consider any business which the Chairman rules may be dealt with under Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972. Additional documents: Minutes: No items of Urgent Business were considered. |
|
Questions from Members of Public WBC23-036. PDF 81 KB To receive questions from Members of the Public of which due notice has been given. Additional documents: Minutes: Questions had been received from five members of public. The questions, together with the replies from the Portfolio Holder, were presented as follows.
Question 1 – Karen Woodhead It was noted that Karen Woodhead had been unable to attend the meeting.
“Why does the pool in park have to close?”
Supporting Statement
“I am a disabled woman. I go swimming every Monday and Friday. I get there by bus as I don’t drive and not on a lot of money. My surgeon has recommended me to go to help lose weight and ease my joint. If this closes I will struggle to get to the nearest pool. Please reconsider the pool for disabled people as it not our faults and feels like we are suffering for your mistakes in the past.”
Reply from Councillor Ellen Nicholson
“The Council recognises the significant health and wellbeing benefits of swimming, particularly for our residents with disabilities.
At the moment the Pool in the Park receives significant subsidy from the Council to run the facility, in part due to the age of the facility. However due to the Council’s financial situation, we do need to look at all of our discretionary services provided to see if they can be self-funding.
The Council will be launching its residents consultation on Monday 2 October on the proposed phased closure along with other options for consideration. We will also be seeking to understand the impact of our proposals on residents through the impact assessment.
I would also say that the consultation and the corresponding impact assessment that starts on Monday will allow the Council to have a much more robust understanding of how possible decisions will affect our residents, and during this time we will be speaking to specific groups of stakeholders and residents who may be impacted and we need to see these results before any decisions are made.”
Question 2 – Gillian Bernadt The Mayor welcomed James Harvey to the meeting, who was attending on behalf of Gillian Bernadt, and invited him to put her question to the Portfolio Holder.
“If alternative sources of funding can be found to fill the funding gap (and create a saving of £700,000 per year over the 4 years proposed, as a major element of the proposed Leisure service savings) would the Council be willing to maintain support to the Pool through existing contract management arrangements?”
Supporting Statement
“The proposed withdrawal of funding to Pool in the Park (PITP) will have a massive impact on the community, in terms of health, well-being and sports education & water safety. Consultation over the summer showed PITP to be in the top three services residents wanted to be retained, showing its value and the popularity of the Pools as a community asset. The Council clearly needs to make a saving, and the scale of the saving to be made, as outlined in the MTFS makes PITP, as a major part of the Leisure service savings, an obvious choice to cut (not ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
|
Questions from Members of the Council WBC23-37. PDF 81 KB To deal with written questions submitted by Members of the Council. Copies of the questions and of the draft replies (which are subject to amendment by the Leader of the Council) will be published shortly before the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: Copies of questions submitted under Standing Order 13.1 together with draft replies had been published in advance of the meeting. The replies were confirmed by Members of the Executive, supplementary questions were asked and replies given as set out below:
1. Question from Councillor Saj Hussain
“Is there capacity at the Eastwood Centre to take on extra swimmers and groups displaced by closing pool in the park?”
Reply from Councillor Ellen Nicholson
“Eastwood Leisure Centre has proved to be very popular since it opened in October 2021. Whilst the Eastwood Leisure Centre will have some capacity to take on a proportion of Pool in the Park users, it would not have sufficient capacity to accommodate all displaced users and groups.”
Supplementary Question
No
2. Question from Councillor Steve Dorsett
“What are the latest visitor numbers on a monthly and annual basis that use the Pool in the Park every year?”
Reply from Councillor Ellen Nicholson
“Please see Appendix 1 for visitor numbers for Pool in the Park and our other leisure facilities.”
Supplementary Question
No
Reply from Councillor Ellen Nicholson
“I was just going to suggest if you did have a supplementary question that the Freedom Leisure performance board will be meeting in October, if you wanted to come along to that Councillor Dorsett, I can invite you along if you wanted to look at the performance.”
Reply from Councillor Steve Dorsett
“Thank you very much, I am already a member of the Leisure Partnership Board.”
3. Question from Councillor Kevin Davis
“Is the new S151 officer contracted inside or outside of IR35?”
Reply from Councillor Ann-Marie Barker
“The Section 151 role is a statutory post and as such any appointment is deemed to be an employee of the Council and would be inside of IR35 regulations.”
Supplementary Question
No
4. Question from Councillor Josh Brown
“How much CIL developer contributions has WBC received since the S114 was issued?”
Reply from Councillor Liam Lyons
“The Council has received £688,524.56 of CIL contribution since the S114 was issued.”
Supplementary Question
No
5. Question from Councillor Saj Hussain
“Surrey county council have taken over highway verges who is responsible for areas which are not highways?”
Reply from Councillor Peter Graves
“A land owner is ultimately responsible for maintaining their land. Woking Borough Council continue to maintain its own land and any land it has historic agreements in place to manage.
In addition, during this transitional period, Council Officers are supporting Surrey County Council to improve the accuracy of their mapping data (to ensure their new verge maintenance contract covers all SCC land) and investigate any areas where the land ownership appears unclear. These are reviewed on a case by case basis to ensure the most appropriate outcome. Any areas of specific concern can be raised to our Neighbourhood Officers.”
Supplementary Question
“Historically, we've got no man’s land in Goldswork Park, areas like that, which are classed as no man’s land, and ... view the full minutes text for item 7. |
|
Announcements by the Leader of the Council, Committee Chairmen and the Chief Executive. In accordance with Standing Orders, the Council to receive any announcements from the Leader of the Council (or their nominated spokesperson), Committee Chairmen and/or the Chief Executive. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council, Councillor Ann-Marie Barker, stated that these were difficult and challenging times for the Council, its Members, staff, residents and businesses following the Government intervention in May and the Section 114 Notice in June. Two key steps had been taken to date: firstly, the Council meeting in June to agree the next steps, and secondly the Council meeting in August to approve the first iteration of the Improvement and Recovery Plan, which had been prepared within three months of the six months allowed by Government.
Members were encouraged to work together to achieve the Council’s goals, noting that there were significant proposals to consider, due to the organisation’s inherited financial position. The Leader stated that information on social media had incorrectly stated that the decisions were being made tonight. Proposals had been received by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Executive, which had been recommended to Council for a public consultation to take place on the savings identified.
It was stated that, in addition to the Pool in the Park, areas affected included sports pavilions, the arts, public toilets and the support for the voluntary and charitable sector. The Leader stated that the implications would be fully assessed before final decisions would be taken by Council, noting that way forward needed to be found for the Borough to live within its means going forward. |
|
Recommendations of the Executive and Officers WBC23-035. PDF 95 KB To receive and consider recommendations from the Executive. Included within the report is an addendum drawn up by Officers. Additional documents: Minutes: The Council had before it a report on the recommendations from the Executive, setting out the extract from the minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 14 September 2023. In accordance with the Constitution, the recommendations were deemed to have been moved and seconded. |
|
Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) EXE23-064 Additional documents: Minutes: The Council received the recommendations of the Executive in respect of the updated Medium Term Financial Strategy (the MTFS) for the period 2024/25 to 2028/29. The document set out the strategic financial approach that the Council would need to take to deliver the Improvement and Recovery Plan (IRP) and respond to the Section 114 Notice, whilst continuing to meet its statutory duties. The paper included feedback from the recent resident engagement exercise, alongside next steps for a six week public consultation on proposed changes to Council services beginning Monday, 2 October 2023.
In addition, following the proposal by the Leader of the Council at the meeting of the Executive on 14 September 2023, an addendum had been included which noted that the Council’s Investment Programme would accommodate investment which had received full Government funding and support to facilitate the completion of assets that were partially complete and to deliver best value for the public purse. The addendum stated that investment in ThamesWey and Victoria Square would continue whereby it fell in accordance with Principle C as set out in the MTFS which referred to items where, following support from Government and Commissioners, resources were provided for specific schemes that were already in delivery when the Section 114 Notice had been issued. Noting that a further report would be brought back to the Executive setting out the actions being taken by Officers to implement those decisions, the addendum included a request for the Council to consider an additional recommendation drawn up by the Interim Director of Finance / Section 151 Officer:
(v) the Council notes the action to be taken by the s151 officer to accommodate Government supported funding for the Victoria Square and Thameswey Regeneration projects and requires a further report to be presented to the Executive setting out the detail of actions taken and the impact on the Council’s finances.
The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Roberts, set out a historical timeline of events since July 2022 through to the proposals being presented at the current meeting for the purpose of the public consultation. The Council had agreed a savings target of £12m of which £8.5m had been identified, against a total service spend of £45m. Despite additional cost pressures of £8.3m arising in September 2023, the savings target had been maintained at the same level of £12m as further reductions at this stage could not be reasonably identified, following consultation with the Commissioners.
Councillor Roberts emphasised the importance of restoring the confidence in the Council with Commissioners, the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, and the Treasury as it had been unable in hindsight to set a balanced budget since at least 2018; the reserves held had therefore been illusory; past claims of financial strength in light of high borrowing levels had been incorrect; past borrowing for revenue purposes was not permitted; and the Council had borrowed funds from the Public Works Loan Board to fund loss making Council owned companies, taking a margin and ... view the full minutes text for item 9a |