Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 388 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Vicky Hibbert or Anne Gowing 020 8541 9938 Email: anne.gowing@surreycc.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies for Absence
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies have been received from Mrs Curran and Mrs Hammond. |
|
|
Minutes of Previous Meeting:
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 31 January 2017 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Procedural Matters
Additional documents: |
|
Additional documents: Decision: Five questions were received. The questions and the responses were attached as Appendix 1. Minutes: Five questions were received. The questions and the responses were attached as Appendix 1.
Supplementary questions
Q1 Mrs Watson considered that the 465 bus service was of critical importance to Mole Valley residents and asked the Leader of the Council for assurance that the funding for this bus service would not be reduced. He informed her that discussions with the Mayor of London’s office and Transport for London (TfL) were ongoing and he would endeavour to obtain the best deal for Surrey residents.
Q3 Mrs Watson asked the Leader of the Council when the written report from CIPFA would be available. He referred her to the last sentence of his written response and reiterated that the report would be made available to all Members when it has been received by the County Council.
Q4 Mr Essex asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning for details of the County Council’s proposed procedures for collecting kerbside recyclable waste with effect from 8 January 2018. The Cabinet Member said that he had written to all Boroughs and Districts in January, a copy of this letter was attached to his written response to the question. He would be holding meetings with all Boroughs and Districts over the next two months to listen to their views and then formulate a solution. He considered that the changes would result in reduced costs for the Surrey council tax payer.
Q5 Mr Essex referred to the Nolan principles of transparency and asked for details in relation to the proposed £93m savings and £30m ‘cuts’. He asked the Leader of the Council if the meetings of the Sustainability Review Board would be open to all councillors to attend. The Leader confirmed that he would be listening to the views of all Members and that any Member could attend a private meeting of this Council. |
|
|
Public Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: No questions were received from members of the public. |
|
|
Petitions
Additional documents: Minutes: No petitions were received. |
|
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
Additional documents: Minutes: Representation was received from Mrs Watson that information in item 20 (the provision of the selection and supply of library stock) should be considered in public. It has been agreed with the Monitoring Officer that three paragraphs from this part 2 report could be included within the part 1 report and a revised item 13 was tabled at the meeting (Appendix 2). |
|
|
Reports from Scrutiny Boards, Task Groups, Local Committees and other Committees of the Council
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
ST. BEDE'S SECONDARY SCHOOL, REDHILL
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for the provision of an additional 300 secondary places be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places, relative to demand.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement informed Members that this was the first of three school expansion projects that she was bringing to Cabinet today, resulting in an additional 540 school places in Surrey.
She presented the first report, which requested approval of the business case for the expansion of St. Bede’s School from a 9 Form of Entry secondary (1,350 places, plus Sixth Form) to an 11 Form of Entry secondary (1,650 places, plus Sixth Form), thereby creating 300 additional places, to help meet the basic need requirements in the Reigate and Redhill area from September 2017.
She also drew attention to the projected demand for secondary school places in this area, as set out in paragraph 3 of the report and said that the immediate pressure of managing demand in the area had resulted in a ‘bulge’ class at this school.
She said that the latest published Ofsted report had rated the school as ‘Good’ and highlighted the consultation process which would be undertaken as part of the pre-planning application process.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for the provision of an additional 300 secondary places be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places, relative to demand.
|
|
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion as set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for the provision of an additional two forms (240 places) of junior places in Ewell planning area be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Epsom and Ewell Borough.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes:
Introducing this report, the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement said that this proposal was part of the Ewell primary school re-organisation which would create another 200 infant and 480 junior places in total to help meet the basic need requirements in the Ewell area from September 2017 and that Ewell Grove Infant School was the final one of three school expansions in this area.
She said that approval was for the business case for the conversion of Ewell Grove Infant and Nursery School which was currently a 2 Form of Entry infant school (180 places) with 26 full time equivalent (fte) nursery places, to a 2 Form of Entry Primary (420 primary places with 26 fte nursery places) and as the school expanded incrementally this would create 240 new junior places overall.
She drew attention to the significant capital works required at the school, due to the restricted site, and that it was also in a conservation area with poor vehicular access. She also confirmed that there had been strong public support for the proposal.
Members were pleased to support this school expansion and expected that the whole project would enhance residents’ experience in this area.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion as set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for the provision of an additional two forms (240 places) of junior places in Ewell planning area be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Epsom and Ewell Borough. |
|
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for rebuilding of this school be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This proposal will streamline Social, Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) provision in the south east of Surrey. It will allow for the more effective use of the available Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) resources. The aim is to develop outstanding provision with a larger and more sustainable single special school for SEMH in the east quadrant of Surrey.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement informed Cabinet that this report set out the business case for the rebuilding of Chart Wood School on its Dorking site, which would enable the release of the school’s Merstham site for alternative use as a location for a new mainstream 6FE secondary free school and 2FE primary free school.
Forecasts of pupil demand in the Reigate and Redhill area were set out in the report and have indicated that this provision was necessary. Without this site (and the free schools that the Education Funding Agency will build and fund), the County Council would be liable to provide these places from its own capital budget. This would be estimated to cost the Council £26 million, which was far in excess of the cost of the proposed amalgamation scheme.
The Cabinet Member informed Members that the Ofsted report for the St Nicholas special school had been ‘Good’ and that the school’s headteacher was an exceptional leader. She also confirmed that the headteacher and school governors had been fully consulted on the amalgamation proposal, as set out in the ‘Consultation’ section of the report.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the expansion set out in Part 2 of this agenda, the business case for rebuilding of this school be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This proposal will streamline Social, Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) provision in the south east of Surrey. It will allow for the more effective use of the available Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) resources. The aim is to develop outstanding provision with a larger and more sustainable single special school for SEMH in the east quadrant of Surrey. |
|
|
Re-commissioning of the Adult Social Care Home Based Care Service
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That approval be given to change the practice of commissioning HBC services to “Awarded Provider Status”.
2. That a report be taken to Cabinet for approval of any additional non-budgeted expenditure resulting from the planned implementation of the new framework, including proposals for any harmonisation of legacy rates.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing HBC provision agreements expire on 30 September 2017 and given the above factors set out in the summary ASC in conjunction with Procurement made the decision to plan to re-commission the service. By taking this opportunity ASC can update the service specification and agreements to offer residents an improved service and be able to respond more flexibly and quickly to a fluid HBC market.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Social Care Services Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: Provision of a Home Based Care (HBC) service to vulnerable adults in Surrey was a statutory requirement of the Council under the Care Act 2014. HBC services enabled and supported people to remain independent and living in their own homes for longer.
The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, Wellbeing and Independence stressed the importance of having a HBC service but said that the service was under extreme pressure in terms of an increase in demand due to an aging population with complex health and social care needs, and set against challenging financial circumstances, such as a general lack of capacity within the HBC market plus inability to recruit and retain care staff.
As a consequence of these issues Adult Social Care (ASC) was proposing to change the current practice by which HBC providers were awarded HBC work with SCC through inviting Expressions of Interest against which suitably qualified agencies would be Awarded Provider Status (APS). New and evolving providers could join or expand their services over time. This APS list would increase and widen the range of providers with which ASC were able to commission against pre-agreed terms and would, through working in partnership with these providers, enable a more flexible response to changes in demographics and the care market.
The Cabinet Member said that the Council currently delivered HBC services to 6304 people, currently amounting to 3,410,000 hours per annum. He also referred to the Equality Impact Assessment, attached to the submitted report, and was pleased to report that there would be no negative impacts as a result of changes to the practice for commissioning HBC services. He said that the Council was fully aware of the importance of safeguarding vulnerable adults.
Other Members made the following points:
· The scale of the provision delivered by the Council · Re-assured that quality assurance was in place to enable the service to be delivered well · That a significant number of Surrey residents required help through the Adult Social Care Service · The difficulty of providing a HBC service to some of Surrey’s rural areas and that the travelling distances and times between clients could be an issue · That these changes to the practice of commissioning HBC services would improve delivery.
RESOLVED:
1. That approval be given to change the practice of commissioning HBC services to “Awarded Provider Status”.
2. That a report be taken to Cabinet for approval of any additional non-budgeted expenditure resulting from the planned implementation of the new framework, including proposals for any harmonisation of legacy rates.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing HBC provision agreements expire on 30 September 2017 and given the above factors set out in the summary ASC in conjunction with Procurement made the decision to plan to re-commission the service. By taking this opportunity ASC can update the service specification and agreements to offer residents an improved service and be able to respond more flexibly and quickly to a fluid HBC market.
|
|
|
South Central Independent Fostering Agency Framework
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. Following consideration of the available options, the results of the procurement process, and commercially sensitive information provided in the Part 2 report later in the agenda, approval be given for the Council to enter into a Partnership Agreement for the South Central Independent Fostering Agency (IFA) Framework for the provision of Foster Care placements for the period 1 April 2017 – 31 March 2021.
2. Approval be given to award subsequent call off contracts to providers named on the Framework.
3. That delegated approval be given to the Deputy Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing, to award new framework agreements and subsequent call off contracts during the life of the framework.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing Framework will expire on 31 March 2017. In 2016 a total of 14 local authorities came together with Southampton City Council as the lead authority and a full tender process, compliant with the European Public Procurement Regulations and Procurement Standing Order has been carried out.
A decision is needed regarding whether or not Surrey County Council continues to be named as a purchaser on the new Framework.
If the Council does not participate in a Framework, it will only be able to spot purchase IFA provision or enter into Block Contracts from 1 April 2017 which potentially places the Council in breach of current procurement law (Public Contract Regulations 2015).
The forecasted spend for foster care placements with IFAs for 2016/17 is approximately £11.5m. A decision to spot purchase could see an increase in the weekly placement cost conservatively estimated at 5% (significantly more for emergency placements) and additional Council staff may need to be recruited to undertake the increase in workload associated with negotiating individual contracts and monitoring the performance of a large number of providers.
There is the potential for further reducing or avoiding costs under the new arrangements, through the use of Lot 4 (Alternative to Residential) placements and block contracts, as outlined in the Part 2 report.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Social Care Services Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: In the absence of the Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing, the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement presented this report to Cabinet. She said that in Surrey, the Council believed that for most children and young people the best place to live was with their family of origin and where necessary parents and/or the extended family would be supported to provide an environment in which their child can grow and thrive. Unfortunately, in some circumstances the safest and most appropriate option was for the child to be taken into care. From 2015, the Surrey Corporate Parenting Board Strategy prioritised work on developing ‘Placement Choice and Stability’ to ensure that the requirements of the Council’s Sufficiency Duty are met. Wherever appropriate, looked after children are placed with local foster carers. However, sometimes in-house placements cannot be used due to matching considerations, the particular and often complex needs of the child, the carers’ circumstances or limited availability of carers. In these circumstances a placement with an Independent Fostering Agency (IFA) is considered. Out of the 895 looked after children in Surrey, 648 are currently placed in foster care provision. 433 were placed with in-house carers, and 215 were placed with IFAs (as at 31 January 2017).
The Cabinet Member made Members aware that the ongoing management of the South Central Framework would be led by Bournemouth Borough Council and would be funded from each partner local authority – Surrey’s contribution would be approximately £20,000 per annum. Also, she said that the detailed financial information was in a part 2 report, to be considered later in the agenda.
The Cabinet Associate for Children, Schools and Families Wellbeing referred to the four options considered as part of the completion of the Strategic Procurement Plan: · Option 1 – do nothing · Option 2 – take an active role in the retender process of the South Central IFA Framework · Option 3 - more block contracts instead of a framework · Option 4 – Surrey to tender for their own framework She said that after carefully considering all options, it had been agreed to recommend to Cabinet, option 2, which she also considered was the best value for money option. At a time of rising demand for Surrey County Council services, together with the upward trend of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children being looked after in Surrey (the third highest in the country), Cabinet Members strongly supported this report and endorsed the recommendations. RESOLVED:
1. Following consideration of the available options, the results of the procurement process, and commercially sensitive information provided in the Part 2 report later in the agenda, approval be given for the Council to enter into a Partnership Agreement for the South Central Independent Fostering Agency (IFA) Framework for the provision of Foster Care placements for the period 1 April 2017 – 31 March 2021.
2. Approval be given to award subsequent call off contracts to providers named on the Framework.
3. That delegated approval be given to the Deputy Chief Executive, ... view the full minutes text for item 31/17 |
|
|
Proposed Consultation On Externally Commissioned Young People's Early Help Services
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That an immediate eight-week public consultation, involving young people who use services, families, providers and partners, about proposals to change Surrey’s externally commissioned young people’s early help services be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This is recommended so that:
i. The Council fulfils its duty to consult about proposed changes to services, through a proportionate eight-week consultation period now, given the urgent need to realise savings during 2017/18 and allowing three-months of notice to current providers about any changes to services; ii. Young people, families, providers and partners who are affected by proposed changes have an opportunity to share their views about the proposed options and possible alternatives; iii. Appropriate action can be taken, as far as is reasonably possible, to mitigate the impact of any changes on providers, young people, families and communities; and iv. Cabinet is supported to make a fully informed decision about proposed changes to current grants and contracts.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Social Care Services Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: Surrey County Council is transforming its early help offer for children, young people and families, increasing integration to provide holistic support to the whole family, securing the best possible value for money for residents and realising lasting improvements in outcomes for the most vulnerable. This change is being delivered at a time when unprecedented financial pressures are being faced, stemming from decreasing funding from central government and underlying growth in demand for Council services. It is therefore vital to continue investing in early help services that realise not only the best outcomes but also offer the best value for money. The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement said that in light of this approach, this report sought agreement to launch a public consultation exercise about proposals to change Surrey County Council’s externally commissioned young people’s early help services. These changes would need to achieve a saving of £0.25 million during 2017/18 and at least a further £0.2 million in 2018/19. A report, setting out the consultation response, would be brought back to Cabinet on 30 May 2017 for a final decision. She informed Members that there were five options set out within the report, including preferred option 1 and the reasons for the preferred option, namely, that it had the least degree of detrimental impact on both outcomes for the most vulnerable young people and the Council’s approach to transforming early help in Surrey. She confirmed that there had been a typo in the ‘What happens next’ section of the report and that it was an eight (not six) week consultation period, as stated in the recommendation of the report. RESOLVED:
That an immediate eight-week public consultation, involving young people who use services, families, providers and partners, about proposals to change Surrey’s externally commissioned young people’s early help services be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This is recommended so that:
i. The Council fulfils its duty to consult about proposed changes to services, through a proportionate eight-week consultation period now, given the urgent need to realise savings during 2017/18 and allowing three-months of notice to current providers about any changes to services; ii. Young people, families, providers and partners who are affected by proposed changes have an opportunity to share their views about the proposed options and possible alternatives; iii. Appropriate action can be taken, as far as is reasonably possible, to mitigate the impact of any changes on providers, young people, families and communities; and iv. Cabinet is supported to make a fully informed decision about proposed changes to current grants and contracts.
|
|
|
FINANCE AND BUDGET MONITORING REPORT TO 31 JANUARY 2017
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That the report be noted, including the following: 1. That the forecast revenue budget outturn for 2016/17 was a £3.5m underspend, an improvement from £1.1m overspend last month, as set out in paragraph 1 of the Annex to the submitted report. 2. That forecast efficiencies and service reductions for 2016/17 were £66.3m, up from £65.1m last month as set out in paragraph 51 of the Annex to the submitted report. 3. The Section 151 Officer’s commentary and the Monitoring Officer’s legal implications commentary, as detailed in paragraphs 16 to 23 of the covering report. 4. That the 2016/17 capital budget be reduced by £0.3m in relation to superfast broadband, as set out in paragraph 62 of the Annex to the submitted report.
Reasons for Decisions:
This report is presented to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval and action as necessary. [The decision on this item may be called in by the Council Overview Board]
Minutes: The Leader of the Council presented the budget monitoring report covering the period up to 31 January 2017. He began by saying that in September, several significant financial risks crystallised resulting in an unprecedented forecast outturn of a £22.4m overspend for this financial year and that Cabinet had required officers to take effective measures to bring the 2016/17 budget back into balance. He confirmed that the measures taken over the past four months by the Chief Executive and the Director of Finance, with the support of Strategic Directors, and by Cabinet in avoiding further spending commitments, wherever possible, had resulted in such improvement as to bring the Council’s forecast outturn position to a £3.5m underspend. However, the measures to bring 2016/17 back into balance included one-off measures and spending delays and did not address the fundamental issue of service overspends, especially in social care. These service overspends were driven by more people needing services for more complex needs and at increased cost. This, plus the scale of savings the Council had already achieved, plus the continuing loss of Government funding made the Council’s long term financial resilience a serious challenge. He said that progress had been made, but there was still some way to go before a sustainable Medium Term Financial Plan was achieved. He referred to the Section 151 Officer’s and the Monitoring Officer’s commentaries to this budget monitoring report, which stated that it was a requirement of the Local Government Finance Act to ensure that Council spending did not exceed its resources. He informed Members that cost, demand and funding pressures meant that overspends in Adult Social Care and Children’s Services amounted to £26m and that many of these pressures were preventing the Council from implementing its savings plans and contributed to the £17m shortfall against the £83m savings target for 2016/17. He said that this underlying overspend would continue into 2017/18 and these service pressures would continue to have a detrimental impact on the Council’s medium term financial position, which was not yet sustainable. Finally, he said that given the gravity of the situation, it was vital members and officers continued their actions to identify and implement ways to reduce the overspend in 2016/17 and to address the ongoing issues affecting the council’s financial sustainability for 2017/18 and subsequent years. He reiterated that Cabinet and other leading Members should continue to bring the Council’s budget issues to the attention and understanding of Surrey’s MPs. Other Cabinet Members were given the opportunity to highlight key points and issues from their portfolios.
RESOLVED:
That the report be noted, including the following: 1. That the forecast revenue budget outturn for 2016/17 was a £3.5m underspend, an improvement from £1.1m overspend last month, as set out in paragraph 1 of the Annex to the submitted report. 2. That forecast efficiencies and service reductions for 2016/17 were £66.3m, up from £65.1m last month as set out in paragraph 51 of the Annex to the submitted report. |
|
|
Provision Of The Selection and Supply Of Library Stock
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That a call off contract for the provision and supply of library resources be awarded to Askews and Holts Library Services Ltd. This call off contract would be under the CBC Framework for the provision of Library Books and Audio Visual Materials.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing contract will expire on 31 March 2017. Access to an existing framework, in compliance with the requirement of Public Contract Regulations and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Resident Experience Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: Following the representation by Mrs Watson that some information contained in the part 2 report could be considered in public, a revised report was tabled at the meeting, which included three additional paragraphs in the ‘Background and Options Considered’ section.
The Cabinet Member for Localities and Community Wellbeing began his introduction of the report by quoting the numbers of current members that Surrey libraries had across its 52 libraries. He said that after a full and detailed options analysis, it was decided to award a call off contract under the Central Buying Consortium (CBC). He also informed Members that the library supply market was now limited to just three book suppliers and two audio visual suppliers.
He also highlighted the risk management and implications section of the report, which stated that the contract could be terminated, without penalties after 30 days. Finally, he was pleased to report that an Equality Impact Assessment had been undertaken and drew attention to key points within it, including the 12 recommendations at the end of this assessment.
Other Members made the following points:
· The library service was ‘much loved’ by Surrey residents · That an impressive amount of work had been undertaken in the service to contain and reduce costs · That Surrey libraries were the hub of the community and much more than a ‘book borrowing’ place. They were the place to go for information and connectivity · Equality Impact Assessment and the reference to the work done to meet the requirements of the Public Libraries and Museum Act 1964 – this was a good reminder of the duties of every library authority · The large number of Surrey residents that used libraries · The need to continue to maximise the use of all library premises.
RESOLVED:
That a call off contract for the provision and supply of library resources be awarded to Askews and Holts Library Services Ltd. This call off contract would be under the CBC Framework for the provision of Library Books and Audio Visual Materials.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing contract will expire on 31 March 2017. Access to an existing framework, in compliance with the requirement of Public Contract Regulations and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
|
|
|
Leader / Deputy Leader / Cabinet Member Decisions Taken Since the Last Cabinet Meeting
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting, as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members under delegated authority.
Minutes: This Annex set out the decisions taken by individual Cabinet Members since the last meeting of the Cabinet. Members were given the opportunity to comment on them.
RESOLVED:
That the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting, as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members under delegated authority.
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Minutes: RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
|
|
|
St Bede's Secondary School - Redhill
Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the expansion of St. Bede’s School at a total cost, as set out in the part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council, be approved.
Reason for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Reigate and Redhill area by providing Year 7 places when and where they are needed.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement said that this report contained the confidential, financial and value for money information relating to item 6. She said that the re-building project was included in the Medium Term Financial Plan 2016 – 2021. However, the funding allocation was originally based on a smaller expansion but that a larger expansion was now required to meet the demand for secondary school places in the Redhill area.
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the expansion of St. Bede’s School at a total cost, as set out in the part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council, be approved.
Reason for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Reigate and Redhill area by providing Year 7 places when and where they are needed. |
|
|
EWELL GROVE INFANT AND NURSERY SCHOOL, WEST EWELL INFANT AND NURSERY SCHOOL AND DANETREE JUNIOR SCHOOL
Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the expansion of Ewell Grove School at a total cost, as set out in the Part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Epsom and Ewell area by providing 240 junior places when and where they are needed.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement said that this report contained the confidential, financial and value for money information relating to item 7 and that the expansion of Ewell Grove Infant School was the last of three interdependent expansion projects in the area. She said that it had proved challenging in terms of access, ground levels and drainage and was also in a planning conservation area.
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the expansion of Ewell Grove School at a total cost, as set out in the Part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Epsom and Ewell area by providing 240 junior places when and where they are needed. |
|
|
CHART WOOD SCHOOL DORKING, PROPOSED RATIONALISATION ONTO ONE SITE - FORMER STARHURST SCHOOL, DORKING AND FORMER ST NICHOLAS SCHOOL, REDHILL
Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the business case to rebuild Chart Wood School on its Dorking site (ex Starhurst) at a total cost, as set out in the Part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This proposal will streamline SEMH provision in the south east of Surrey. It will allow for the more effective use of the available Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) resources. The aim is to develop outstanding provision with a larger and more sustainable single special school for SEMH in the east quadrant of Surrey.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Education and Skills Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement said that this report contained the confidential, financial and value for money information relating to item 8. She confirmed that re-locating St Nicholas school on the Dorking site and merging with Starhurst school to form a new special school, Chartwood would enable the St Nicholas site to be released for the building of a new primary and secondary school, that would be funded by the Education Funding Agency.
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case to rebuild Chart Wood School on its Dorking site (ex Starhurst) at a total cost, as set out in the Part 2 report, be approved. 2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Children, Schools and Families, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement, the Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience and the Leader of the Council be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
This proposal will streamline SEMH provision in the south east of Surrey. It will allow for the more effective use of the available Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) resources. The aim is to develop outstanding provision with a larger and more sustainable single special school for SEMH in the east quadrant of Surrey.
|
|
|
South Central Independent Fostering Agency Framework
Decision: RESOLVED:
That the commercially sensitive information set out in this report be noted alongside the background information and recommendations made in the Part 1 report.
Reasons for Decisions:
As set out in the Part 1 report.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Social Care Services Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: In the absence of the Cabinet Member for Children and Families Wellbeing, the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement presented the report, which set out the financial and value for money information for the South Central Independent Fostering Agency Framework. She was pleased to report that the new framework would enable children who had complex needs to be placed with families rather than in residential care.
RESOLVED:
That the commercially sensitive information set out in this report be noted alongside the background information and recommendations made in the Part 1 report.
Reasons for Decisions:
As set out in the Part 1 report. |
|
|
Provision Of The Selection and Supply Of Library Stock
Decision: RESOLVED:
That a call off contract for the provision of the selection and supply of library resources be awarded to Askews and Holts Library Services Ltd to commence on 1 April 2017, for a maximum four years, for the total value as set out in the part 2 report. This call off contract would be under the CBC Framework for which West Sussex County Council is Lead Authority.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing contract will expire on 31 March 2017. Access to an existing framework, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
[The decision on this item may be called in by either the Council Overview Board or the Resident Experience Scrutiny Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Localities and Community Wellbeing introduced the report and informed Cabinet that this report contained the financial and value for money information relating to item 13.
He also confirmed that this call off contract would be under the CBC Framework for which West Sussex County Council is the Lead Authority.
RESOLVED:
That a call off contract for the provision of the selection and supply of library resources be awarded to Askews and Holts Library Services Ltd to commence on 1 April 2017, for a maximum four years, for the total value as set out in the part 2 report. This call off contract would be under the CBC Framework for which West Sussex County Council is Lead Authority.
Reasons for Decisions:
The existing contract will expire on 31 March 2017. Access to an existing framework, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
|
|
|
Property Transactions - Acquisition 1
Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That equity investment and a long-term loan, both as detailed in the submitted report, be provided to Surrey County Council’s wholly owned property company, Halsey Garton Property Ltd, as outlined in paragraphs 10 to 12 of the submitted report. 2. That Legal Services be authorised to agree appropriate contractual arrangements for the provision of financing on behalf of the Council with funds to be released upon the completion of appropriate due-diligence in relation to the property acquisition. 3. That Halsey Garton Property Ltd be authorised to acquire the freehold and long leasehold interest in the property detailed in the submitted report for a purchase cost, including associated costs of purchase, as set out in the submitted report.
Reasons for Decisions: The provision of financing to the Council’s property company to facilitate the proposed investment acquisition is in accordance with the Council’s Investment Strategy and provides an asset that will contribute to the creation of a diversified portfolio over time to spread risk.
The investment will deliver an ongoing income to the Council, enhancing financial resilience in the longer term.
[The decision on this item may be called in by the Council Overview Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience commended this acquisition, which had been through the Investment Advisory Board, to Cabinet.
RESOLVED:
1. That equity investment and a long-term loan, both as detailed in the submitted report, be provided to Surrey County Council’s wholly owned property company, Halsey Garton Property Ltd, as outlined in paragraphs 10 to 12 of the submitted report. 2. That Legal Services be authorised to agree appropriate contractual arrangements for the provision of financing on behalf of the Council with funds to be released upon the completion of appropriate due-diligence in relation to the property acquisition. 3. That Halsey Garton Property Ltd be authorised to acquire the freehold and long leasehold interest in the property detailed in the submitted report for a purchase cost, including associated costs of purchase, as set out in the submitted report.
Reasons for Decisions: The provision of financing to the Council’s property company to facilitate the proposed investment acquisition is in accordance with the Council’s Investment Strategy and provides an asset that will contribute to the creation of a diversified portfolio over time to spread risk.
The investment will deliver an ongoing income to the Council, enhancing financial resilience in the longer term.
|
|
|
Property Transaction - Acquisition 2
Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Surrey County Council provides equity investment and a long-term loan, both as detailed in the submitted report, to its wholly owned property company, Halsey Garton Property Ltd, as outlined in paragraphs 15 to 18 of the submitted report. 2. That Legal Services be authorised to agree appropriate contractual arrangements for the provision of financing on behalf of the Council with funds to be released in accordance with the agreed payment structure and upon the completion of appropriate due-diligence in relation to the forward funding agreement and property acquisition. 3. That Halsey Garton Property Group be authorised to acquire the long leasehold interest in the property detailed in the submitted report and to enter into a forward funding agreement with the developer. Reasons for Decisions: The provision of financing to the Council’s property company to facilitate the proposed investment acquisition is in accordance with the Council’s Investment Strategy and provides an asset that will contribute to the creation of a diversified portfolio over time to spread risk.
The investment will deliver an ongoing income to the Council, enhancing financial resilience in the longer term.
[The decision on this item may be called in by the Council Overview Board]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Business Services and Resident Experience also commended this second acquisition, which had been through the Investment Advisory Board, to Cabinet.
RESOLVED:
1. That Surrey County Council provides equity investment and a long-term loan, both as detailed in the submitted report, to its wholly owned property company, Halsey Garton Property Ltd, as outlined in paragraphs 15 to 18 of the submitted report. 2. That Legal Services be authorised to agree appropriate contractual arrangements for the provision of financing on behalf of the Council with funds to be released in accordance with the agreed payment structure and upon the completion of appropriate due-diligence in relation to the forward funding agreement and property acquisition. 3. That Halsey Garton Property Group be authorised to acquire the long leasehold interest in the property detailed in the submitted report and to enter into a forward funding agreement with the developer. Reasons for Decisions: The provision of financing to the Council’s property company to facilitate the proposed investment acquisition is in accordance with the Council’s Investment Strategy and provides an asset that will contribute to the creation of a diversified portfolio over time to spread risk.
The investment will deliver an ongoing income to the Council, enhancing financial resilience in the longer term.
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
Additional documents: Minutes: It was agreed that non-exempt information may be made available to the press and public, where appropriate. |