Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.  

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Jim Moley and Roz Smith. 

To adopt and sign as a correct record the public minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 2 September 2005 (previously circulated). 

The minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2005 were adopted and signed as a correct record. 

To receive notification of any matters, which the Chair determines, should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances, which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the Chair.

The Chair announced that Councillor Jim Moley had formally resigned from the Executive.  Councillor Richard Farrell was the nominee replacement to be appointed at the next Council meeting. 

Members wished Councillor Moley well after his short illness.  

(a)               Strategic Review Committee - Review of the Grants Allocation Formula

The Strategic Review Committee, at its meeting on 6 September 2005, received an update from the Grants Review Panel on its review of the Council’s Grants Allocation Formula.  The Panel had identified three options for allocating the total grants budget across the Executive and each of the Area Committees, as follows:-

·               £600 lump sum and 50p for each elector

·               £500 lump sum and 58p for each elector

·               £400 lump sum and 67p for each elector

Each of the options investigated proposed a lump sum payment to each Parish (in the case of Abingdon and Wantage to each Ward) irrespective of size, together with a variable figure based on the number of electors in each Parish and/or Ward.  Each of the options proposed was based on the 2005/06 Grants Budget Allocation.  A table detailing each of the options and the proposed allocation of grant monies across the Executive and each Area Committee is attached at Annex 1.

The Executive is recommended to:

(a)        amend the principle of the Grants Budget Allocation Formula from one of an electorate based allocation to one which reflects electorate and geographical factors;

(b)        use Option 3 (£400 lump sum for each parish and 67p for each electorate) as the starting point in allocating the 2006/07 Grants Budget across the Executive and each of the Area Committees; and

(c)        undertake an annual review of the Grants Allocation Formula as part of the formulation of the Executive’s budget proposals.

(b)   Scrutiny Committee – Procurement of Financial Services

The Scrutiny Committee, at its meeting on 22 September 2005, considered a report of the Strategic Director which gave an update on the joint work currently being undertaken by this Council and South Oxfordshire District Council on exploring the scope for shared financial services.

            that the Executive be recommended:

(i)         to agree that the Scrutiny Committee establish a small group of Members to operate as an advisory group to the Executive in respect of the joint work currently being undertaken by this Council and South Oxfordshire District Council in exploring the scope for shared financial services, so that the Committee is  kept informed of developments and thereby avoid the need for any future call-in;

            (ii)        that an  Executive  Member  be appointed  to  support the in-house  bid.

(a)               Strategic Review Committee - Review of the Grants Allocation Formula

(Time: 2.39pm to 2.54pm)

The Strategic Review Committee, at its meeting on 6 September 2005, had received an update from the Grants Review Panel on its review of the Council’s Grants Allocation Formula.  The Panel had identified three options for allocating the total grants budget across the Executive and each of the Area Committees, as follows:

·               £600 lump sum and 50p for each elector

·               £500 lump sum and 58p for each elector

·               £400 lump sum and 67p for each elector

Each of the options investigated proposed a lump sum payment to each Parish (in the case of Abingdon and Wantage to each Ward) irrespective of size, together with a variable figure based on the number of electors in each Parish and/or Ward.  Each of the options proposed was based on the 2005/06 grants budget allocation.  A table detailing each of the options and the proposed allocation of grant monies across the Executive and each Area Committee was appended to the Executive's agenda. 

There was some concern expressed that the suggestions by the Strategic Review Committee had not taken into account the index of deprivation across the Vale.  It was noted that the Area Committees were also being asked to adopt a prospectus to better target the resources to meet the Area Committees' priorities.  Any new apportionment of the community grants budget should take these factors into account. 

It was suggested that Town and Parish Councils and Vale Members should be consulted on these suggestions.  Careful explanation was needed of the existing mechanism and the suggestions from the Strategic Review Committee.  Views should be sought on whether the suggestions would bring any improvement together with reasons why.  Members also welcomed any other suggestions on how the grants budget could be apportioned. 

RESOLVED

that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive in consultation with the portfolio holder for Leisure, Councillor Joyce Hutchinson, to approve the letter of consultation to seek the views of Town and Parish Councils and Vale Members on the apportionment of the community grants budget and that these views be considered at the Executive's meeting on 2 December 2005. 

(b)        Scrutiny Committee – Procurement of Financial Services

(Time: 2.54pm to 3.25pm)

The Scrutiny Committee, at its meeting on 22 September 2005, had considered a report of the Strategic Director which gave an update on the joint work currently being undertaken by this Council and South Oxfordshire District Council on exploring the scope for shared financial services.  The Scrutiny Committee had recommended to the Executive that the Committee should establish a small group of Members to operate as an advisory group to advise the Executive on the joint work with South Oxfordshire District Council in exploring the scope for shared financial services.  The Committee had suggested that this would keep it informed of developments and avoid the need for any future call-in.  The Committee had also suggested that an Executive Member should be appointed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

To receive the Forward Plan containing Executive decisions to be taken from October 2005 to January 2006. 

Recommendation

that the Forward Plan be received. 

(Time: 3.25pm to 3.27pm)

The Executive received the Forward Plan containing Executive decisions to be taken from October 2005 to January 2006.  It was noted that the review of Parish Cleansing Grants would now be considered by the Executive in November.  

RESOLVED

that the Forward Plan for October 2005 to January 2006 be received. 

To receive and consider report 134/05 of the Strategic Director.    

(Time: 3.27pm to 3.29pm)

The Executive received and considered report 134/05 of the Strategic Director regarding the Council's Treasury Management performance in 2004/05.  In accordance with the Treasury Management Policy, the report analysed the performance over the last year of the funds managed in-house and the performance of the re-appointed investment fund manager, Investec.  It also provided a general overview of the current situation in the investment market. 

Members noted that the rates of return on cash investments had been 4.75% for the in-house team (resulting in £741,580 at the year end) and 4.72% (after fees) for Investec (a year end balance of £15,077,085).  This compared well to the Local Authority 7-day rate published by the Local Government Chronicle for 2004/05 at 4.58%.  It was noted that the in-house team's result had been boosted by a two year £4m investment, which was no longer available.  Results in future years were likely to reflect this. 

Independent investment advisers, Butlers, believed that the current economic situation was making it difficult to get good returns on investment funds.  Poor returns on bonds and the very flat yield curve on interest rates was making the generation of profits hard to achieve. 

The Council's property investment income during 2004/05 fell short of the revised budget by £49,225 (£1,513,205 to £1,562,430, equating to 3%).  Considering the downturn in the economy, it was considered that the return on cash investments was satisfactory, although interest rates were starting to fall and investment income might be a little lower than that estimated in the medium term plan. 

RESOLVED

(a)        that the return on cash invested during 2004/05 and the balances of funds at 31 March 2005 be noted;

(b)        that the re-appointment of the external Fund Manager be noted. 

To receive and consider report 137/05 of the Strategic Director. 

(Time: 3.29pm to 3.48pm)

The Executive received and considered report 137/05 of the Strategic Director which highlighted the opening position for the 2006/07 budget preparation.  The report set out the potential roll forward position from 2005/06, taking into account the outturn form 2004/05.  The issues that would require further consideration throughout the budget setting process were also set out. 

The Medium Term Plan presented in the February 2005 budget showed that, with the assumptions made at that point, the General Fund Balance would be sustainable through to 2009.  The assumptions had been revised in the light of the latest information available, enabling the Executive to make an initial budget proposal for consultation. 

The challenge to set an achievable annual budget within a sustainable medium term financial strategy was still difficult, even given the early achievement of many of the cost-reduction measures set out in last year’s budget.  Membersrecognised the need to take firm decisions regarding affordable service levels and the Council Tax required to fund them.  That process involved a complex amalgamation of many factors set out in the report for consideration. 

Members noted that there were several emerging issues that would impact on the budget and they asked that detail on the likely financial impact was provided as soon as possible in order to prepare the draft budget for consultation.  

RESOLVED

that the information contained in report 137/05 be used as the basis for the budget deliberations and consultation. 

The Council sets a contingency budget each year to meet unexpected costs.  It is also used to house corporate budgets such as pay award and capacity-building before they are allocated to services.  The Strategic Director (Chief Finance Officer) is the Contingency budget-holder.

The process covering the use of Contingency was approved in 1999 (report 759/98) and it has been operating generally well since.  One aspect which has caused delays is the requirement for reports to be made to Committee before contingency budget can be released.

Much of the contingency budget is earmarked for specific purposes, so the need for a separate report is unnecessary.  Also, the un-earmarked element is often needed at short notice to resolve an unexpected or urgent matter, which is delayed by the necessity to submit a report to Members.

It would assist officers if contingency could be released for proper purposes without the need for a report.  In order to maintain clear accountability the Chief Finance Officer should have sole authority to release contingency after consultation with the Chair of the Executive.

Recommendation

that the Executive delegates authority to release Contingency budget to the Chief Finance Officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive.

(Time: 3.48pm to 3.50pm)

The Executive was asked to consider delegating authority to allow the use of the Contingency budget without the need to seek Executive approval. 

The Council set a contingency budget each year to meet unexpected costs.  This budget was also used to house corporate budgets such as pay award and capacity-building before they were allocated to services.  The Strategic Director (Chief Finance Officer) was the Contingency budget-holder.

The process covering the use of Contingency was approved in 1999 and had operated well ever since.  However, delays had been caused by the requirement for reports to be made to the Executive before the budget could be released. 

The Executive considered that much of the contingency budget was earmarked for specific purposes, so the need for a separate report was unnecessary.  Also, the un-earmarked element was often needed at short notice to resolve an unexpected or urgent matter, which was delayed by the necessity to submit a report to Members.  It was concluded that it would assist officers if the Contingency budget could be released for proper purposes without the need for a report to the Executive.  In order to maintain clear accountability, the Chief Finance Officer should have sole authority to release contingency after consultation with the Chair of the Executive. 

RESOLVED

that authority be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive to release Contingency budget. 

To receive and consider report 135/05 of the Strategic Director. 

(Time: 3.50pm to 4.00pm)

The Executive received and considered report 135/05 of the Strategic Director requesting that a new post was established to co-ordinate work on the Uniform database.  This was the primary system for several services: Environmental Health, Planning, Building Control, Housing, Legal, Land Charges, Estates and Asset Management. 

There were two areas where support was needed to maintain and develop the Uniform system.  Firstly, in the Environmental Health service area there was no modular system administrator to provide expert advice on system development, report-writing, data retrieval, query resolution, best practice research and user group representation.  Secondly, there was no corporate resource across all the service areas to provide cross service area co-ordination, resolve system-wide problems and manage system-wide upgrades. 

The first of these areas was recognised in the Council's budget when a Contingency sum was earmarked for support in one of the service areas.  A recent corporate review had confirmed the continuing need for this additional resource as well as the corporate resource.  The report set out the business case for creating a new post of Database Co-ordinator.

The report set three options for the Executive to consider:

·         Option 1 - status quo: do not create a new post.  This would release Contingency budget for other work and not incur employee costs.  However the officers considered that this would lead to an increased risk of failure and was not sustainable.  The performance management and contract enforcement problems in Environmental Health would continue to escalate and corporate Uniform maintenance and development would be impeded

·         Option 2 - create more than one support post.  Each of the four service areas could possess their own support officer (although not necessarily full-time posts) to specialise in the system aspects relevant to their own module.  This would increase the costs.  As the exact resource had not yet been quantified this could actually lead to over-staffing

·         Option 3 - create a single full-time post initially to address immediate service needs and quantify the exact resource requirement

The Executive considered that option 3 should be chosen, creating a single post initially.  Although the postholder would reside in Environmental Health to provide immediate support to address the most pressing need, the post would also be made available to the other Uniform-using service areas whilst the Assistant Directors assessed whether the resource was sufficient.  The Executive considered that the impact of the new post should be reviewed within twelve months to ensure that the investment was cost-effective.  If it is not considered to be adequate any additional resource need will have to be demonstrated.  

It was likely that the new post would be Grade 5 – 6 (subject to job evaluation), total cost £25 - 35k including oncosts.  Part of this cost (£15k per annum) would be met from earmarked Contingency.  The remaining net cost after utilising the earmarked Contingency would be £10 - 20k per annum. 

It was hoped that this cost could be met from savings likely to result from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

To receive and consider report 136/05 of the Strategic Director. 

(Time: 4.00pm to 4.06pm)

The Executive received and considered report 136/05 of the Strategic Director containing proposals to update the Council's scheme of charges for building regulations.  The report presented a departure from previous practice where rates recommended by the Local Government Association were used. 

In answer to questions from Members, examples were given of existing and proposed charges.  The changes were intended to ensure that the charges: did not fall below the 'proper costs' of the service; were maintained at competitive and reasonable levels; were presented in a simple and logical format; and continued to represent best value and a good quality service.  It was noted that councils were allowed to make a profit or deficit in any one year but not every year.  Over a three year period costs had to be covered.  It was noted that the intention was to make a slight profit in the forthcoming year to redress the deficit in the past year.  The charges would be reviewed again in a year's time. 

R E C O M M E N D E D

that the revised 'Scheme for the Recovery of Building Regulation Costs and Associated Matters', as attached as Appendix A to these minutes, be adopted as the formal scheme made under the Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 1998, and that this takes effect from 1 November 2005. 

To receive and consider report 125/05 of the Assistant Director (Building Control). 

(Time: 4.06pm to 4.12pm)

The Executive received and considered report 125/05 of the Strategic Director which set out proposals for the introduction of a scheme of out-of-hours working arrangements relating to incidents of dangerous structures and emergencies.  Under the Building Act 1984, the Council had a responsibility to deal with incidents of dangerous structures where through serious damage or deterioration a building posed a threat to health and safety.  The Building Control service area undertook this function.  When the Council was alerted to a dangerous structure out of normal working hours, the attendance of an officer had relied on their goodwill and professional attitude.  The report suggested a formally recognised system of out-of-hours working to bring the authority into line with other Councils.  The estimated cost of the scheme was £5,000 but would depend on the number of call out incidents.  It was noted that this cost was around the median when compared to other local authorities.  

The Personnel, Regulatory and Appeals Committee had considered the report and had approved the scheme as set out in the appendix to the report.  The Executive was asked to agree an annual supplementary estimate of £5,000 pro rata for the remainder of 2005-06 and to consider future year financial consequences as part of the budget setting process. 

RESOLVED

that a supplementary estimate of £5,000 pro rata be agreed for the remainder of 2005/06 for the provision of an out-of-hours scheme for incidents of dangerous structures and emergencies and that this scheme be considered as part of the budget setting process for future years.   

As part of the Vale’s Local Plan applies to the proposed major development area west of Didcot which was also covered by the South Oxfordshire Local Plan, a joint Local Plan Inquiry was held into objections to this development at the end of 2004.  The joint Inspectors’ Report was published in May 2005. 

The normal process following the Council’s consideration of the Inspectors’ recommendations would be to publish proposed modifications to the Local Plan for further comment.  However, this could not take place until the Council had received and considered the recommendations in the Inspector’s Report on the main part of the Local Plan.  The Inspector had indicated that he expected his report to be with the Planning Inspectorate by the end of this year.  Rather than not progressing the Inspectors’ recommendations for Didcot at all at this stage, the Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group considered that in view of the planning applications for Didcot West, it would be useful for the Council to consider the Inspector’s recommendations on the joint inquiry for Didcot and publish ‘draft proposed modifications’.  These will be formally published with the Local Plan next year.  At the Advisory Group meeting held on 31 August 2005, a Local Member expressed her disquiet at this situation. 

The Advisory Group considered the Inspector's recommendations and agreed largely with the officer's recommended responses, as set out in Appendix 2, but Members added wording to indicate that the Vale's view was that the provision of a Harwell by-pass should be a priority.  A copy of the Officers' report to the Advisory Group, complete with appendices is appended to this agenda. 

Members asked that the Political Assistants should be advised when the Inspector's report was published on the Council's website. 

Recommendation

That the Executive be recommended to:

(i)         agree the officer’s observations and recommendations in Appendix 2 and paragraph 4.5 to report 86/05, subject to the addition of the words "The Council considers that the provision of a Harwell by-pass is a priority" to the end of paragraph 8.51; and

(ii)        that the recommended changes to the draft Local Plan, as set out in Appendices 3 and 4 be posted as draft proposed modifications to the Plan on the Council’s website pending the publication of the proposed modifications to the main part of the Local Plan next year. 

(Time: 4.12pm to 4.16pm)

The Executive recalled that, as part of the Council’s Local Plan applied to the proposed major development area west of Didcot which was also covered by the South Oxfordshire Local Plan, a joint Local Plan Inquiry was held into objections to this development at the end of 2004.  The joint Inspectors’ report was published in May 2005. 

The normal process following the Council’s consideration of Inspectors’ recommendations was to publish proposed modifications to the Local Plan for further comment.  However, Members noted that this could not take place until the Council had received and considered the recommendations in the Inspector’s Report on the main part of the Local Plan.  The Inspector had indicated that he expected his report on the Local Plan to be with the Planning Inspectorate by the end of this year.  Rather than not progressing the Inspectors’ recommendations for Didcot at this stage, the Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group had considered that, in view of the planning applications for Didcot West, it would be useful for the Council to consider the Inspector’s recommendations on the joint inquiry for Didcot and publish ‘draft proposed modifications’ to the Local Plan.  These would be formally published with the Local Plan modifications next year. 

The Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group had considered the Inspector's recommendations and agreed largely with the officer's recommended responses, as set out in Appendix 2 to report 86/05 appended to the Executive's agenda, but Members had suggested additional wording to indicate that the provision of a Harwell by-pass should be a priority. 

The Executive agreed with this approach and noted that the Inspector had opted for the development boundary based on the Vale's suggestion in its Local Plan. 

RESOLVED

(a)       that the officer’s observations and recommendations, set out in Appendix 2 and paragraph 4.5 to report 86/05, be agreed subject to the addition of the words "The Council considers that the provision of a Harwell by-pass is a priority" to the end of paragraph 8.51; and

(b)       that the recommended changes to the draft Local Plan, as set out in Appendices 3 and 4 to report 86/05, be posted as draft proposed modifications to the Local Plan on the Council’s website, pending the publication of the proposed modifications to the main part of the Local Plan next year. 

The Executive will be aware that a review of the housing grants regime, originally due before the Executive at this meeting has been delayed to allow the Strategic Review Committee to examine the policy implications in more detail and to provide the Executive with a report and recommendations in time for it to inform the 2006-7 budget. 

At the meeting held on 6 September 2005 the Strategic Review Committee considered a request from the portfolio holder that they set up a working party alongside her to progress this matter.  The committee considered instead that they would prefer to receive a full report and presentation on this from the Assistant Director (housing and community safety) at the November meeting. 

A report to the Executive will follow the November meeting of the Strategic Review Committee. 

(Time:4.16pm to 4.17pm)

Members recalled that a review of the housing grants regime, originally due before the Executive at this meeting, had been delayed to allow the Strategic Review Committee to examine the policy implications in more detail and to provide the Executive with a report and recommendations in time for it to inform the 2006/07 budget. 

At the meeting held on 6 September 2005, the Strategic Review Committee considered a request from the portfolio holder to set up a working party to progress this matter.  The Committee considered instead that it preferred to receive a full report and presentation on this matter from the Assistant Director (Housing and Community Safety) at its November meeting.  Members noted that a report to the Executive would follow the November meeting of the Strategic Review Committee. 

'U13 in OX14' is a scheme which helps young people in one of the Vale's most deprived wards to overcome anti-social behaviour and criminal activity.  The project focuses on reducing offending behaviour by breaking the negative peer influence coming from older groups of young people in the area.  Twelve youngsters successfully completed the mentoring course last year, helping them integrate into the community; and a further five are currently being mentored.

The scheme relies on volunteers and grant aid.  The Council has previously made a partnership grant commitment to support the scheme with £8k annual funding.  (Although, like all partnership grants this is being re-assessed as part of the Service Prioritisation Plan to reduce grant costs).

Due to an oversight, no budget has been approved for this grant from 2005/06 onwards.  This is contrary to the Council's service level agreement.

Recommendation

that the Executive approves an £8k recurring supplementary estimate to be met from Contingency from 2005/06 onwards for this partnership grant.

(Time: 4.17pm to 4.19pm)

'U13 in OX14' was a scheme which helped young people in one of the Vale's most deprived wards to overcome anti-social behaviour and criminal activity.  The project focused on reducing offending behaviour by breaking the negative peer influence coming from older groups of young people in the area.  Twelve youngsters successfully completed the mentoring course last year, helping them integrate into the community and a further five were being mentored. 

The scheme relied on volunteers and grant aid.  The Council had previously made a partnership grant commitment to support the scheme with £8,000 annual funding.  Like all partnership grants, this was being re-assessed as part of the Service Prioritisation Plan. 

Due to an oversight, no budget had been approved for this grant from 2005/06 onwards.  This was contrary to the Council's service level agreement.  The Executive was requested to approve a supplementary estimate.  

RESOLVED

that authority be delegated to the Section 151 Officer in consultation with the portfolio holder for Community Development, Councillor Joyce Hutchinson, to approve up to as a £8,000 recurring supplementary estimate to be met from Contingency from 2005/06 onwards for this partnership grant. 

(Time: 4.19pm to 4.20pm)

It was reported that the contract for the redevelopment at Limborough Road, Wantage had been concluded.  The Executive expressed its delight at this news. 

None