Agenda and draft minutes

To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 22 January 2024

(Note: If any Member wishes to propose an amendment to the minutes they should submit this in writing to committeeservices@horsham.gov.uk at least 24 hours before the meeting.  Where applicable, the audio recording of the meeting will be checked to ensure the accuracy of the proposed amendment.)

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2024 were approved as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive

The Chairman announced that there was the potential of receiving a further sum of money from central government for purchasing a number of homes and invited the Director of Resources to provide further details.

The Director of Resources reported that the Council had been informed by government on 7 March that it had been allocated a £1 million grant under the Local Authority Housing Fund (LAHF) Round 3. If accepted, the Council would need to add £1.3 million of its own funds and use the combined sum to purchase five further homes: two standard size resettlement homes, one large resettlement home and two temporary accommodation homes. The scheme was similar to previous LAHF schemes except that there was a proposed uplift of 10% on the government grant if new homes were delivered. The Council had until the end of March to express its interest in the allocation.

Following the update, Members made comments and asked questions. Among the points raised were:

·         The total amount involved across the three schemes. The Director of Resources confirmed that the total amount across Rounds 1, 2 and 2.5 was a government grant of £4.2 million and a Council contribution of £5.25 million. Including Round 3, the total government grant was £5.2 million and the total Council contribution was £6.5 million. This was to provide 29 homes.

·         Whether the expected financial benefits from Rounds 1 and 2 had been realised. The Director of Resources confirmed that overall the yield for Round 1 was around 5.26% and the yield for Round 2 was 5.16% (without the government grant the yield would be just under 3%). This exceeded the yield that the Council generally hoped to receive for housing of between 4% and 5%. He advised that he thought the scheme had been worthwhile financially, considering that the Council was receiving perhaps 5% interest on average on funds held in the bank and there was the potential for the interest rate to fall. Additionally, the scheme enabled the Council to provide affordable housing.

·         The impact of the scheme on the Council’s housing waiting list. The Director of Resources explained that, unlike the first scheme which involved only resettlement homes, later schemes involved a combination of resettlement homes and temporary accommodation homes. In the longer term, it was hoped that those living in resettlement homes would be in a position to return to their homeland or move on from that accommodation. The Director of Communities confirmed that the homes would become Horsham District Homes stock after six years, at which point they could be used for those on the Council’s housing waiting list.

To receive a draft Cabinet report from the Director of Communities

The Director of Communities provided an update on the Drill Hall.

The Drill Hall was acquired by the Council in 2001. There was a proposal in 2020 to use the site to build affordable housing, but this was met with significant local concern and the Cabinet agreed to allow a period of time for community organisations to develop a bid to acquire the site.

The Horsham branch of the Royal British Legion submitted a proposal, the terms of which were a 30 year lease with a right to buy at the end of the lease term. This proposal was approved by Council but did not proceed as it was subsequently not supported by the national Royal British Legion as they considered that it did not represent value for money for their members.

The Council was approached by another organisation, Lifespring Church, in May 2023 with a proposal that they acquire the site on the same terms as approved for the Royal British Legion. Lifespring Church was based in Southwater but worshipped in Horsham town on Sundays, and it was proposed that the site would become their new headquarters.

Lifespring Church would invest a significant sum of money into the site and would provide a range of community support including a foodbank, advice services and after school activities. The site would also be available for community organisations to hire.

Lifespring Church had engaged with all current users of the site and only one tenant would not be able to stay as the arrangement that was in place did not fit with their business model. The Council would consider whether it could accommodate this tenant.

The Drill Hall was a failing building. Three of its four boilers had failed and it was no longer possible to purchase spare parts for them. The building would close once the final boiler had failed and would require significant investment if retained by the Council.

The Drill Hall was also an Asset of Community Value which meant that, if Cabinet approved the disposal, there would be a window of opportunity for any other community organisations to express an interest in, and to develop a bid for, acquiring the site. The Council would have to consider any such bid.

The Council would seek to ensure, as part of the sale, that covenants were put in place to secure that the site was used for community purposes in the very long term, as well as overage to secure a financial benefit to the Council or its successors in the event that the site was able to be sold for some other purpose.

A proposal to dispose of the site to Lifespring Church was promoted in September 2023 and community feedback was encouraged. Whilst there had not been a lot of feedback, the main objections were (i) that the site should be owned and managed by the Council and (ii) objections in relation to religious organisations.

Following the update, Members made comments and asked questions. Among the  ...  view the full minutes text for item SO/56

To receive a draft Cabinet report from the Head of Recycling and Waste

The Chairman welcomed the Cabinet Member for Environmental Health, Recycling and Waste to the meeting.

The Cabinet Member provided an update on the proposed additional service for the isolated property rounds. This was the refuse collection service that the Council provided to residents who lived in rural locations which could not be accessed by regular sized refuse collection vehicles.

The Cabinet Member reported that the isolated property collection service had been reviewed following an accident that had occurred over the Christmas period and it was concluded that a smaller refuse collection vehicle should be purchased.

The Cabinet report recommended the approval of an additional capital budget which would cover the cost of the new vehicle and an additional revenue budget which would cover the cost of a new member of staff.

The Cabinet Member explained that the new vehicle would either be an electric vehicle or a HVO diesel vehicle. An electric vehicle would cost around £130,000 with fuel and maintenance of around £15,000 a year, whereas a HVO diesel vehicle would cost around £70,000 with fuel and maintenance of around £35,000 a year. As the Council replaced its vehicles over a seven year period, an electric vehicle would be more cost effective provided that it was suited to the task.

Following the update, Members made comments and asked questions. Among the points raised were:

·         Whether the Cabinet Member was satisfied that an electric vehicle would be able to cover the distance that would be required. The Cabinet Member advised that this would be reviewed as part of the procurement process.

·         Whether the Council distinguished between long lanes which were driveways and long lanes which were highways in terms of waste collection points. The Director of Communities agreed to request an answer to that question.

·         The ability to extend the charging point that would need to be installed if an electric vehicle was purchased. The Cabinet Member advised that the operation of The Depot would need to be reviewed as a result of the proposals for food waste collections so there was an opportunity for the purchase to be made so that it aligned with those plans.

To receive a verbal update on the proposed One-Off Cost of Living Supplement from the Head of HR and OD

The Head of HR and OD provided an update on the proposed one-off cost of living supplement.

The proposal, which was the result of negotiations with Unison, was for employees on up to Grade 4 to receive a one-off payment of £450. This would impact around 200 employees and would cost the Council around £100,000. Payments would be spread over nine months and would stop if the national pay award was agreed within that period. This was affordable as the Council had received some funds in the central government settlement that it had not expected. The proposal had been accepted by Unison.

The Head of HR and OD advised that he was satisfied with the proposal from an equalities perspective. 

The Committee resolved to go into exempt session prior to asking, and receiving answers to, questions on the proposals.

RESOLVED that, under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for this item of business, on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act, by virtue of paragraph 4 (information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority).

To receive a report from the Director of Resources

The Director of Resources introduced the report on the Council’s finance and performance. The report identified the revenue position as at month ten, capital expenditure as at month ten, and performance for quarter three.

In terms of revenue performance, a surplus of £350,000 was forecasted as at month ten.

In terms of capital expenditure, expenditure as at month ten was £12.2 million, which was 70.5% of the £17 million capital programme. This was an improvement on the previous year when the outturn was £5.2 million or 43%, but there was a concern that performance was slightly masked by Local Authority Housing Fund (LAHF) spend. Excluding the £7.4 million that had been spent on LAHF schemes, performance was £4.75 million, which was 49% of the remaining budget of £9.9 million. The forecasted outturn excluding the LAHF spend was £6.1 million, which equated to 62%. This compared to 78% when the LAHF spend was included. The Director of Resources considered that there was room for improvement and would reiterate to officers the importance of profiling correctly.

The Director of Resources explained that there were still eight schemes to be started in the final quarter and the outturn figures would be adversely impacted by the addition of LAHF Round 2.5 as it was not possible to deliver the spend by the end of the financial year.

The Director of Resources drew Members’ attention to three overspends. The first was the purchase of Bramber Brooks which was due to legal fees being higher than anticipated. The second was the LED lighting replacement at The Capitol which was due to additional works being undertaken. The third was the s106 and CIL spend which was due to the budget being set too low; this had, however, been revised for the 2024/25 financial year. In each case, there was sufficient underspend in the portfolio area to offset the overspend.

Key performance indicators for the third quarter (where available) were provided in Appendix A to the report. Only three key performance indicators remained red. These were:

·         Quality assurance on the local authority error:

o   2022/23: The housing benefit audit indicated an extrapolated error of £191,000 of subsidy loss post audit. This was an increase from the previously reported £123,000 pre-audit loss position. This would be reported to the Audit Committee at the end of the month.

o   2023/24: There was around £45,000 worth of headroom to the lower threshold as at month 11. This was an improvement on the previous year where the upper threshold had already been crossed.

·         Fly-tipping incidents

·         Households in bed and breakfast accommodation: There had been delays to the Page Court scheme in Horsham which had prevented nominations to 40 new homes. LAHF Rounds 2.5 and 3 should result in a further four temporary homes.

Members had an opportunity to make comments and ask questions throughout the presentation. Among the matters raised were:

Capital Programme

·         Whether capacity to deliver projects was an issue. The Director of Resources advised that capacity was one factor. Other  ...  view the full minutes text for item SO/59

To receive an update from Task and Finish Groups

Fair Space Task and Finish Group

The Chairman reported that Councillor Vickers had offered to join the Fair Space Task and Finish Group.

Councillor Bateman provided an update on the Task and Finish Group. She had been working with the Democratic Services Officer on the first draft of a survey and the Group was scheduled to hold its next meeting the following week. She advised that Councillor Beard had also offered to join the Task and Finish Group.

In response to a question raised as to whether the Group would be looking at a new park that was due to be set up in Holbrook East ward, Councillor Bateman advised that the Group had not been given sight of, or been asked to share opinions on, that new facility.

The Chairman agreed to find some additional Members to join the Task and Finish Group in view of the possibility of Councillor Emery stepping down should he become Chairman of the Council.

Lease Contracts Task and Finish Group

Councillor Walters provided an update on the Lease Contracts Task and Finish Group following its first meeting, where Members had been joined by the Head of Property and Facilities.

She advised that the name had been changed from Building Contracts to Lease Contracts on the basis that it more accurately reflected the purpose of the Task and Finish Group.

She reported that the Head of Property and Facilities had agreed to provide access to six lease agreements that Members had immediate concerns about, and that Members had also decided that they wished to observe an ongoing negotiation on one of the Council’s assets.

It had also been agreed that the Head of Leisure and Culture and the Head of Housing and Communities would be invited to a future meeting due to concerns Members had about contracts which did not fall within the remit of the Head of Property and Facilities.

Councillor Walters highlighted a potential resource issue in collating the information that Members were seeking.

Subject to resources being available, the Group was intending to report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in July with a view to concluding its work in September.

s106 (Non-Financial) Task and Finish Group

The Chairman reported that there were about seven or eight members who wished to join the s106 (Non-Financial) Task and Finish Group. It was anticipated that the Group would commence its work once the Lease Contracts Task and Finish Group had concluded and reported back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

To review the current Overview and Scrutiny work programme

The Chairman highlighted that the Lease Contracts Task and Finish Group was scheduled to finish in September and the Fair Space Task and Finish Group was scheduled to finish in November.

The Overview and Scrutiny work programme was noted.

To review the current Forward Plan

The Cabinet Forward Plan was noted.

Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as urgent because of the special circumstances

There was no urgent business apart from the Local Authority Housing Fund Round 3 which had been considered under ‘Announcements’.