Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Cabinet
Tuesday, 30 January 2018 2.00 pm

Venue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN

Contact: Vicky Hibbert or Angela Guest  020 8541 9938 Email: angela.guest@surreycc.gov.uk

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

230/18

Apologies for Absence

231/18

Minutes of Previous Meeting:

232/18

Declarations of Interest

    All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter

    (i)            Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or

    (ii)           Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting

    NOTES:

    ·         Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest

    ·         As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)

    ·         Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    None received.

233/18

Procedural Matters

233/181

Members' Questions

234/18

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 137 KB

    The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (23 January 2018).

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    There were four questions received from members of the public. The questions and responses can be found at Appendix 1.

    Minutes:

    There were four questions received from members of the public. The questions and responses can be found at Appendix 1.

     

    Members of the public asked the following supplementary questions:

     

    Mr Beaman asked for reassurance from the Cabinet Member for Highways, that traffic from outside the county was also being considered as part of the consultation. The Cabinet Member replied that the business case would be based on the criteria set by the Department for Transport but that he was aware of the issues in Farnham and would keep these in mind.

     

    Ms Blake referred to the Secretary of State’s recent comments regarding designing a scheme to preserve the countryside with further details to be provided in a paper in the spring. She asked the Cabinet whether they agreed that they should reject the Pay and Conserve proposal until after the details of this scheme have been decided.

     

    Mr Oliver stated that he felt that the works to the car park sites in the Pay and Conserve proposal would prevent or impede access to the countryside and asked that the Cabinet review this in line with the spirit of the law. For his second supplementary question he asked how the Council would know that the scale of the car parking charges was reasonable without having seen the final business plan for the Surrey Wildlife Trust.

     

    Ms Brown referred to the consultation that had been conducted on the Pay and Conserve proposals and asked what the purpose of this had been if the views expressed within the results were not reflected in the proposals put forward. She also asked what the cost, including officer time, of running the consultation had been.

     

    The Leader stated that the points raised would be dealt with under the Pay and Conserve item on the agenda (item 14).

235/18

Petitions

236/18

Representations received on reports to be considered in private

237/18

Reports from Scrutiny Boards, Task Groups, Local Committees and other Committees of the Council pdf icon PDF 85 KB

    A report will be presented by the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee regarding Revenue and Capital Budget 2018/19 to 2020/21 and updated Corporate Strategy (Item 10).

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    A report was received from the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee relating to item 10 on the agenda. Responses can be found at Appendix 2.

    Minutes:

    A report was received from the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee relating to item 10 on the agenda. A response to this can be found at Appendix 2.

     

    The Chairman of the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee introduced the report and thanked finance officers for producing comprehensive paperwork. She went onto say that the response the Cabinet had provided only referred to the budgetary issues and that it was generic with no comments made to the work that the Select Committee had undertaken at its last meeting. She requested that in future she would like individual Cabinet Members to respond to the recommendations relating to their portfolio area and asked that a further report be provided on these in the future.

     

    The Leader responded to the comments by stating that the budget papers were the best he had ever seen and a lot of effort had gone into producing information for Members. He confirmed that his response was on behalf of the Cabinet and that the current situation was to agree a budget envelope and further work would need to be done with select committees to produce the Medium Term Financial Plan.

     

     

238/18

School Organisation Plan 2018 - 2027 pdf icon PDF 133 KB

    The School Organisation Plan sets out the policies and principles underpinning school organisation in Surrey. It highlights the likely demand for school places projected over a 10 year period, and sets out any potential changes in school organisation that may be required in order to meet the statutory duty to provide sufficient places.  Cabinet are asked to agree the School Organisation Plan 2017/18 – 2026/27 for publication.

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the School Organisation Plan 2018 - 2027 is approved for recommendation to Council to determine its publication.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    The School Organisation Plan is a key document used by schools and education stakeholders in considering long term plans. It is necessary to review the plan to ensure that the best and most up to date information is published for use in this planning process.

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Education introduced the report and set out that was asking the Cabinet to consider the Surrey School Organisation Plan covering the academic years from September 2018 - 2027 for publication.

     

    She went onto say that the School Organisation Plan set out the policies and principles underpinning school organisation in Surrey. It highlighted the likely demand for school places projected over a 10 year period and set out any potential changes in school organisation that may be required in order to meet the statutory duty to provide sufficient places.It was explained that the Council use a piece of software to undertake forecasting and that the plan is produced using historical and future data.

     

    Members were informed that the Council had created over 16,000 extra school places over the last five years and still need to provide many more and that government funding fell significantly short of the amount needed to create those places.

     

    The Deputy Leader confirmed his support for the plan and thanked officers for the work that had been done.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the School Organisation Plan 2018 - 2027 is approved for recommendation to Council to determine its publication.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    The School Organisation Plan is a key document used by schools and education stakeholders in considering long term plans. It is necessary to review the plan to ensure that the best and most up to date information is published for use in this planning process.

239/18

Admission Arrangements for Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools and Coordinated Schemes for September 2019 pdf icon PDF 224 KB

    To consider the responses to the consultation on proposed changes to Surrey’s admissions arrangements for community and voluntary controlled schools and coordinated schemes for September 2019 and to determine Surrey’s admissions arrangements and coordinated schemes for 2019.

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    It is recommended that Cabinet make the following recommendations to the County Council:

     

    Recommendation 1

    That the published admissions number for Reception at Cranmere Primary School is decreased from 90 to 60 for September 2019.

     

    Reasons for Decision

    ·        It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school, albeit they would have preferred a reduction in PAN to 30

    • There would still be sufficient places for local children if the PAN is decreased
    • It would help support other local schools in maintaining pupil numbers
    • It would help the school plan its classes and resources

    ·        It would have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school

    Recommendation 2

    That the published admissions number for Reception at William Cobbett Primary School is decreased from 40 to 30 for September 2019.

     

    Reasons for Decision

    ·        It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school

    • There would still be sufficient places for local children if the PAN is decreased
    • It would help support other local schools in maintaining pupil numbers

    ·        It would make organisation of the school more effective

    ·        It would make appeals easier to defend under Infant Class Size legislation

    ·        It would have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school

     

    Recommendation 3

    That a feeder link is introduced to The Dawnay School from Polesden Lacey Infant School at Year 3 for September 2019, as follows:

     

    a.     Looked after and previously looked after children

    b.     Exceptional social/medical need

    c.      Siblings

    d.     Children attending Polesden Lacey Infant School

    e.     Children for whom The Dawnay School is the nearest school to their home address

    f.       Any other children

     

    Reasons for Decision

    • There was overall support for this change

    ·        It is supported by Governors at Polesden Lacey and The Dawnay schools

    ·        It would align the arrangements for The Dawnay School with Eastwick Junior Schoolso that both are seen as destination schools for children attending Polesden Lacey Infant School

    • It would provide continuity and a clearer transition for parents, children and schools and would reduce anxiety for parents
    • It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children at schools with agreed links

    ·        It is consistent with Surrey’s planning principles set out in the School Organisation Plan

    ·        Eligibility to transport is not linked to the admission criteria of a school and as such attendance at The Dawnay School would not confer an automatic right to transport to Polesden Lacey Infant School

    Recommendation 4

    That a feeder link is introduced to Reigate Priory School from Dovers Green and Holmesdale Community infant schools on a tiered basis for September 2019, as follows:

     

    a.   Looked after and previously looked after children

    b.   Exceptional social/medical need

    c.    Siblings for whom Reigate Priory School is the nearest to their home address

    d.   Children attending either Dovers Green or Holmesdale Community infant schools for whom Reigate Priory School is the nearest to their home address

    e.   Other siblings

    f.     Other children attending either Dovers Green or Holmesdale Community infant  ...  view the full decision text for item 239/18

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Education explained that each year, Surrey County Council is responsible for processing approximately 29,000 applications for a school place from Surrey residents and coordinates offers for over 350 schools. The admission arrangements for each school determine which children can be offered a place and Surrey’s coordinated admissions scheme ensures that, as far as possible, no child receives an offer at more than one school. 

     

    It was explained that Surrey County Council was responsible for setting the admission arrangements for its community and voluntary controlled schools and the coordinated admission schemes. Academies, foundation, free, trust and voluntary aided schools have responsibility for setting their own admission arrangements and therefore their admission arrangements were not covered in the report.

     

    Members were informed that there were seven recommendations within the report for endorsement and following statutory consultation on Surrey’s admission arrangements for September 2019, Cabinet was asked to consider the responses set out in Enclosure 4 and make recommendations to the County Council on admission arrangements for Surrey’s community and voluntary controlled infant, junior, primary and secondary schools and the coordinated schemes that would apply to all schools for September 2019.

     

    The report covered the following areas in relation to school admissions:

     

    ·        Cranmere Primary, Elmbridge – Recommendation 1

    ·        William Cobbett Primary, Waverley – Recommendation 2

    ·        The Dawnay School, Mole Valley – Recommendation 3

    ·        Reigate Priory School, Reigate & Banstead – Recommendation 4

    ·        Published Admission Numbers for other community and voluntary controlled schools – Recommendation 5

    ·        Admission arrangements for which no change is proposed – Recommendation 6

    ·        Primary and secondary coordinated admission schemes that will apply to all schools for 2019 – Recommendation 7

     

    Members queried what the situation was with regards to academies and how this would impact on forecast planning and were informed that this was done by negotiation and through maintaining good relationships with all the schools in the family of Surrey schools. Officers were commended for the detailed work that they had done.

     

    Cabinet Members commented on the amount of work undertaken and that the coordinated system was important for providing clarity and assurance for parents.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    It is recommended that Cabinet make the following recommendations to the County Council:

     

    Recommendation 1

    That the published admissions number for Reception at Cranmere Primary School is decreased from 90 to 60 for September 2019.

     

    Reasons for Decision

    ·        It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school, albeit they would have preferred a reduction in PAN to 30

    • There would still be sufficient places for local children if the PAN is decreased
    • It would help support other local schools in maintaining pupil numbers
    • It would help the school plan its classes and resources

    ·        It would have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school

    Recommendation 2

    That the published admissions number for Reception at William Cobbett Primary School is decreased from 40 to 30 for September 2019.

     

    Reasons for Decision

    ·        It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school

240/18

Re-commissioning Supported Accommodation for Young People in Surrey pdf icon PDF 191 KB

    The current Supported Accommodation Framework comes to an end on 31 March 2018. This paper therefore sets out the recommendation for the use of a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) to procure Supported Accommodation for young people from April 2018 until end of March 2022. In addition, the Medium Term Financial Plan (2017-2020) requires a saving of £500k per annum on external spend to be realised within this project and this will be achieved through the proposals set out in this report. This project supports the commissioning intentions set out in the Child First Commissioning Strategy and will feed into the Sustainable Futures project, helping us to manage placement costs more effectively through the implementation of a DPS.

     

    N.B. There is a Part 2 annex to this report - item 19.

     

    [The decision on this item can be called in by the Children & Education Select Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

    It was agreed that:

    1.     Cabinet approves the use of a Dynamic Purchasing System to commission and award contracts for up to £13.4 million of Supported Accommodation provision for young people in Surrey from April 2018 to March 2022.

    2.     The providers as listed in the Part 2 Annex of the submitted report are awarded a place on the new DPS as they have passed the Invitation to Tender (ITT) evaluation process, whilst recognising that further organisations will be able to apply throughout the duration of the DPS.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    A Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) under the Light Touch Regime has been selected as the most appropriate route to market because:

    ·        It enables robust control of the quality and cost of supported accommodation services for young people;

    ·        It provides flexibility: this approach attracts a larger range of suppliers and allows providers to enter / exit from the list without having to re-open frameworks, which can be legally challenging and bureaucratic;

    ·        It is responsive. It will enable us to ensure that the service providers who can meet the emergent needs of young people, especially those who are experiencing the greatest challenges, are able to join the list throughout the length of the commission;

    ·        It demonstrates that we have listened to feedback and suggestions from the market and colleagues following the last tender process which was considered to be overly complicated. The approach was also too restrictive and led to spot purchasing with organisations that were not on the Framework as it was considered that only they were able to meet the needs of vulnerable young people.

    [The decisions on this item are subject to call in by the Children and Education Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Children informed Members that the purpose of the Supported Accommodation commission was to ensure that sufficient high quality accommodation with support is available for young people that meets their needs, enable them to be safe and to achieve positive outcomes in relation to independent living, health, social wellbeing, education and employment. She said that the Council was committed to supporting young people at every stage in their lives and provide safe and secure homes. She went on to outline the groups of young people that this commission sought to help.

    It was explained that this enabled Surrey County Council to fulfil its statutory duties in this area and was seeking to ensure that young people are able to remain in county and live near to their support networks.

    Cabinet Members were informed that the Council had not had to place any young people in bed and breakfast accommodation for over a year and this was seen as a significant achievement.

     

    The current supported accommodation framework would end on 31 March 2018 and work has been undertaken in partnership to look at the needs of young people and work with them to plan for their future. The Cabinet Member referred Members to the Equalities Impact Assessment and stated that there were no negative factors identified in having a commissioned service.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Health said that she was very moved by the report and that she had reviewed the needs analysis and felt that it was very important to speak money in this area to support children through difficult times.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Education referred to looked after children and the importance of giving them the best start to adult life.

     

    The Leader summarised by saying that he was extremely pleased that bed and breakfast accommodation had not been used and that this was a credit to the service and the officer involved. He went onto say that there were a significant number of young people in Surrey that required this support and the Council was committed to doing everything it can to help them.  

     

    RESOLVED:

    It was agreed that:

    1.     Cabinet approves the use of a Dynamic Purchasing System to commission and award contracts for up to £13.4 million of Supported Accommodation provision for young people in Surrey from April 2018 to March 2022.

    2.     The providers as listed in the Part 2 Annex of the submitted report are awarded a place on the new DPS as they have passed the Invitation to Tender (ITT) evaluation process, whilst recognising that further organisations will be able to apply throughout the duration of the DPS.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    A Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) under the Light Touch Regime has been selected as the most appropriate route to market because:

    ·        It enables robust control of the quality and cost of supported accommodation services for young people;

    ·        It provides flexibility: this approach attracts a larger range of suppliers and allows providers to enter / exit from the list  ...  view the full minutes text for item 240/18

241/18

Chertsey High School, Runnymede - All-Weather Pitch pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    Chertsey High School is a new 4 form of entry (120 places per year 600 places in total) Secondary School opened as part of the Free School Programme. The Council has provided the site of the former Runnymede Centre for the new school, with the Department of Education (DFE) providing the capital build costs. The school has the potential to rise to 900 places over time in line with demographic need. The School opened in September 2017 for 120 year 7 pupils and is supporting the basic need school places programme in Runnymede through the provision of these additional school places.

     

    In order to establish the school the Council has undertaken detailed conversations with the current occupier of the sports ground at the site. To achieve joint use of the area for the new school and the existing community sports club the Council has proposed to joint fund with the DFE the installation of an all weather sports pitch. This paper provides the Business Case for the relevant contribution towards that facility for Community and School use.

     

    The provision and potential future expansion of the School is enabling Surrey County Council to meet the existing and forecast demand for secondary school places in Runnymede borough.

     

    N.B. There is a Part 2 annex to this report - item 20.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Services Select Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information of the scheme as set out in Part 2 of the submitted report, the Cabinet approves the business case for the contribution of relevant sums towards the construction of an all weather sports pitch at Chertsey High School.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in Runnymede Borough enabling the provision of Year 7 places when and where they are needed.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Corporate Services Select Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Education informed Members that Chertsey High School was a new 4 form of entry (120 places per year 600 places in total) Secondary School opened as part of the Free School Programme. She went on to say that the Council had provided the site of the former Runnymede Centre for the new school, with the Department of Education (DFE) providing the capital build costs and that an all-weather pitch was tied to the whole project.

     

    Members were told that the school had the potential to rise to 900 places over time in line with demographic need and that the school opened in September 2017 for 120 year 7 pupils.

     

    In order to establish the school the Council had undertaken detailed conversations with the current occupier of the sports ground at the site, Abby Rangers Football Club. To achieve joint use of the area for the new school and the existing community sports club the Council had proposed to joint fund with the DFE the installation of an all-weather sports pitch. This paper provided the Business Case for the relevant contribution towards that facility for Community and School use.

     

    She summarised by saying that the provision and potential future expansion of the school was enabling Surrey County Council to meet the existing and forecast demand for secondary school places in Runnymede borough.

     

    Cabinet Members commented that they felt that the business case that was good value for money and an excellent example of partnership working.

     

    The Leader concluded the discussion on this item by informing Cabinet Members that the Ride London-Surrey event had also contributed towards the project.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information of the scheme as set out in Part 2 of the submitted report, the Cabinet approves the business case for the contribution of relevant sums towards the construction of an all weather sports pitch at Chertsey High School.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in Runnymede Borough enabling the provision of Year 7 places when and where they are needed.

     

242/18

Revenue and Capital Budget 2018/19 to 2020/21, Corporate Strategy and Key Financial Strategies pdf icon PDF 556 KB

    This report is to enable Cabinet to make recommendations to the Full County Council on:

    ·        council tax precept for 2018/19

    ·        revenue budget for 2018/19 and medium term financial plan to 2020/21

    ·        capital programme quantum and principles

    ·        key corporate and financial strategies.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

    That Cabinet makes the following recommendations to the Full County Council on 6 February 2018:

    Cabinet recommendations to Full County Council to note the following important features of the revenue and capital budget

    1.           The Director of Finance’s statutory conclusions that the council’s budget is balanced for 2018/19 and is developing a major transformation programme to be able to set a balanced budget for 2019/20 and become sustainable over the medium to long term (Annex 1 of the submitted report).

    Proposed budget: Cabinet recommendations to Full County Council for the revenue and capital budgets

     

    2.           Increase the level of the general council tax by 2.99% (paragraphs 101 and 102 of the submitted report).

    3.           Increase council tax by a further 3% for the adult social care precept, which will provide a further £20m to support the growth in demand for services (paragraph 102 of the submitted report).

    4.           Set the County Council precept for band D council tax at £1,411.29 which represents a 5.99% up-lift. This is a rise of £1.53 a week from 2017/18’s precept of £1,331.55.

    5.           Approve the County Council’s £1,705m gross revenue expenditure budget for 2018/19 (Table 9 of the submitted report).

    6.           Approve the application of up to £15m capital receipts to fund the revenue costs associated with transformation projects (paragraphs 34 to 37 and Appendix 3 of the submitted report)

    7.           Approve use of up to £24m of earmarked reserves to support the revenue budget (paragraph 109 of the submitted report).

    8.           Approve £316m three year capital programme, with £139m capital investment in 2018/19 (paragraph 124 and Appendix 7 of the submitted report).

    9.           Agree to support only capital schemes that do not require borrowing, unless the scheme has a compelling business case developed that demonstrates best value and a sustainable basis for funding borrowing costs (paragraph 135 of the submitted report).

    10.        Note that the detailed programme of schemes will be agreed ahead of implementation of the detailed budget (if necessary).

    11.        Require a robust business case to be prepared (and taken to the Investment Panel for review) before committing expenditure for the use of:

    ·      all revenue ‘invest to save’ proposals, and

    ·      capital schemes (paragraph 120 of the submitted report).

    12.        To help ensure the council achieves its savings programme, require the Chief Executive and the Director of Finance to:

    ·      continue to ensure delivery of existing MTFP efficiencies and service reductions for the remaining years of the MTFP 2018?21; and

    ·      continue to ensure services monitor their demand and cost pressures and develop plans to mitigate the impact of those pressures (paragraph 95 of the submitted report).

    13.        Require the Chief Executive and the Director of Finance to lead the development of a transformation programme to move the council to a sustainable position in 2019/20. 

    Corporate and key financial strategies: Cabinet recommendations to Full County Council on the revenue and capital budgets

     

    14.        Approve the refreshed Corporate Strategy for 2018/19 that Cabinet has endorsed (paragraphs 18 to 24 and Appendix 1 of  ...  view the full decision text for item 242/18

    Minutes:

    The Leader introduced the report and began by saying that it contained some good news and some disappointments. He went on to say that the Council was very pleased to be selected to be a part of the business rates pilot and this demonstrated the good work undertaken between the districts and boroughs and the county council. Members were informed that the change in the way that the council can use its capital receipts was also positive as these can now be used for transformation.

     

    It was felt that linking social care to health care was a very positive move and it would be important for local government to contribute to the green paper on this when it was available.

     

    The review of fairer funding was discussed and it was felt that this could take another two years. This meant that the funding gap needed to be plugged and Members were disappointed that transition funding would not be continuing.

     

    The Leader informed the Cabinet that in the next year Surrey residents would pay £26m to subsidise services in other areas of the country and that he would continue to lobby the Secretary of State for fairer funding for Surrey.

     

    He highlighted that Surrey had over 1000 adults with learning disabilities and that the government had reduced the funding provided to support them. He also said that Surrey also has the third highest number of unaccompanied asylum seeking children in the country.    

     

    Members were told that since 2010 the Government had taken £200m and that since that time the Council had saved £540m annually.

     

    The Leader went on to say that it was with deep regret that there was no choice but to put up council tax and therefore the proposal would be to increase it by 3% for adult social care and for 3% for core funding. This would equate to an additional £1.53 per week for a band D property in 2018/19.

     

    The Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee addressed the Cabinet to confirm his support for the revised Treasury Management Strategy following an in depth review of this at the previous Audit and Governance Committee meeting and that he was happy to recommend this to council for approval on 6 February.

     

    Cabinet Members confirmed their support for the paper and provided comments on demand increases and pressure on services outstripping the income that the council could raise. They thanked officers for providing a clear and understandable report.

     

    It was agreed that paragraph 104 of the submitted report regarding Local Highways Funding and Member Allocations should be a formal recommendation to be agreed by the Cabinet and this then became recommendation 21.

     

    After the debate the Chairman called the recommendations, which included the council tax precept proposals, and the vote was taken.

     

    The following members voted for:

    Mr David Hodge CBE, Mr John Furey, Mrs Helyn Clack, Mrs Clare Curran, Mr Mel Few, Mr Mike Goodman, Mr Colin Kemp, Mrs Mary Lewis, Mr Tim Oliver and Ms Denise  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242/18

243/18

Monthly Budget Monitoring Report pdf icon PDF 139 KB

    Surrey County Council takes a multiyear approach to its budget planning and monitoring, recognising the two are inextricably linked. This report presents the Council’s financial position as at 31 December 2017 (month nine).

     

    The Section 151 Officer stated in her report of February 2017 to Full Council on the 2017/18 to 2019/20 budget and Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) that the financial challenges facing the council have become even more serious in the last year. During 2017/18, the council must deliver already stretching service reduction plans of £104m to balance the 2017/18 budget, in the context of increasing demand pressures, and move towards a sustainable budget for future years. This total includes £9m savings it has yet to identify.

     

    Please note that the Annex to this report will be circulated separately prior to the Cabinet meeting.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Cabinet noted the following:

     

    1.           The forecast revenue budget outturn for 2017/18 was £11m overspend (Annex 1, paragraphs 1 and 8 to 43 of the submitted report). This included:
    £9m savings to be identified,
    £16m savings considered unachievable in 2017/18,
    £13m service demand and cost pressures
    less
    £27m underspends, additional savings and income.

    2.           Significant risks to the revenue budget (Annex 1, paragraphs 44 to 46 of the submitted report) could add £8m to the forecast overspend, including: £7m in Children, Schools & Families and £1m in Adult Social Care.

    3.           Forecast planned savings for 2017/18 total £79m against £95m agreed savings and £104m target (Annex 1, paragraph 47 of the submitted report).

    4.           All services continue to take all appropriate action to keep costs down and optimise income (e.g. minimising spending, managing vacancies wherever possible etc.).

    5.           The Section 151 Officer’s commentary and the Monitoring Officer’s Legal Implications commentary in paragraphs 16 to 19 of the submitted report, state that the council has a duty to ensure its expenditure does not exceed resources available and move towards a sustainable budget for future years.

    That the Cabinet approved the following:

     

    6.           Reprofiling of £356,000 capital underspends on Superfast Broadband project from 2017/18 across 2018/19 to 2020/21 (Annex 1, paragraph 63 of 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.

    Minutes:

    The Leader of the Council presented the budget monitoring report for period 31December 2017 (month nine of 2017/18).

     

    He stated that in February the council would set its budget for 2018/19 in the face of significant rising demand pressures, particularly in social care; falling Government funding and continuing restraint on the ability to raise funds locally. To balance 2017/18’s budget the council had to make plans to deliver an unprecedented £104m of savings and that this significant challenge for the council came on top of already making over £450m savings since 2010.

     

    Members were informed that within the £104m savings target, the council had agreed plans for £95m savings, with £9m savings yet to be identified and that after nine months of the financial year, services had already achieved £65m of savings with another £13m on track for delivery, and £1m faced potential barriers.


    The Leader went on to state that at this stage, £16m savings were now thought to be unachievable in this year. The council’s 2017/18 budget included significant demand and cost pressures, mostly in social care and in the first nine months of the year, demand had increased above that forecast even a short time ago.  

     

    He said that the combined impact of delivering lower savings than planned and demand rising faster than anticipated forecast a year end overspend of £11m for 2017/18. This was an £8m improvement on last month’s forecast position mainly due to specific actions Orbis had taken to stop or reschedule work to deliver savings in 2017/18 and from identifying further reductions in interest payable.  

     

    This action in reducing the overall spending in 2017/18 was important because the Council would need to meet any overspends from its reserves. He referred Members to the 2018/19 budget report and stated that the Council plans to use £24m reserves to balance next year’s budget which left the reserves at minimum safe levels.

     

    It was reported that services had already taken action as part of the recovery plan to reduce costs and bring the forecast overspend down. However, all services needed to continue to take all appropriate action to manage spending within available resources by keeping costs down, managing vacancies, optimising income and   being aware of the current financial position before committing additional future expenditure.

     

    Other Cabinet Members were given the opportunity to highlight key points and issues from their portfolios.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Cabinet noted the following:

     

    1.           The forecast revenue budget outturn for 2017/18 was £11m overspend (Annex 1, paragraphs 1 and 8 to 43 of the submitted report). This included:
    £9m savings to be identified,
    £16m savings considered unachievable in 2017/18,
    £13m service demand and cost pressures
    less
    £27m underspends, additional savings and income.

    2.           Significant risks to the revenue budget (Annex 1, paragraphs 44 to 46 of the submitted report) could add £8m to the forecast overspend, including: £7m in Children, Schools & Families and £1m in Adult Social Care.

    3.           Forecast planned savings for 2017/18 total £79m against £95m agreed savings and £104m  ...  view the full minutes text for item 243/18

244/18

Leadership Risk Register pdf icon PDF 141 KB

    The Surrey County Council Leadership risk register is presented to Cabinet each quarter and this report presents the Leadership risk register as at 10 January 2018.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the content of the Surrey County Council Leadership risk register (Annex 1 of the submitted report) be noted and the control actions put in place by the Statutory Responsibilities Network be endorsed by the Cabinet.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To enable the Cabinet to keep Surrey County Council’s strategic risks under review and to ensure that appropriate action is being taken to mitigate risks to a tolerable level in the most effective way.

     

    [This decision can be called in by the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services introduced the report and informed Members that this was a quarterly update and presented the Leadership risk register as at 10 January 2018. He confirmed that the register was reviewed monthly and explained that there had been a few minor changes this month relating to safeguarding and new ways of working.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport stated that he felt that the document has improved over the years and that it was a good example of a working document.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the content of the Surrey County Council Leadership risk register (Annex 1 of the submitted report) be noted and the control actions put in place by the Statutory Responsibilities Network be endorsed by the Cabinet.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To enable the Cabinet to keep Surrey County Council’s strategic risks under review and to ensure that appropriate action is being taken to mitigate risks to a tolerable level in the most effective way.

245/18

Converting Street Lights to LED pdf icon PDF 217 KB

    The Council currently spends £3.5 million each year on energy for street lighting.  Recent projections indicate energy costs for street lighting will rise by between 5% and 14% over the next 10 years which could mean the annual cost increasing to nearly £15 million in that time and as high as £55 million per year in 20 years if prices rose by 14% each year.  The streetlights are currently dimmed by 25%-50% power from 2200 to 0530 and approximately 45,000 lights in residential areas are switched off between 0100 and 0500 each night.  Extending dimming or part night lighting to further reduce costs have previously been explored are not viable.

     

    By investing approximately £18.5 million to converting the council’s 89,000 street lights to LED it would reduce their consumption by around 60% saving approximately £2 million per year (at today’s prices).

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment & Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Cabinet:

     

    1.     Approves in principal the conversion of the Council’s street lighting assets to LED and delegates to the Head of Highways and Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, the authority to issue a change notice under the Street Lighting PFI contract to enable the development of a detailed proposal. 

    2.     Take a decision on whether to proceed based on a final detailed business case, including a technical solution and implementation programme, in Autumn 2018.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    Energy price inflation is increasing at a significant rate (5%-14%) and to ensure lights are operational when needed, there is little opportunity for the Council to control or reduce its energy costs.

     

    LED technology in street lighting has matured significantly in recent years while the costs have reduced. Many Highway Authorities have either embarked on an LED conversion programme or are in the process of planning to commence one within the next 2-3 years.

     

    Converting to LED will reduce energy consumption by 60% delivering £2 million per year energy savings at today’s prices as well as reducing carbon impact by 6200 tonnes and avoiding the Carbon Reduction Commitment tax otherwise payable on the avoided consumption.

     

    In addition to converting to LED street lighting and upgrading the Central Management System, Officers will be able to explore additional innovations now being used or being developed for use with street lighting such as:

    ·        Motion sensor controls to turn lights on in residential areas when people or vehicles approach and, off once they have passed

    ·        Providing real-time traffic movement data to help understand and ease congestion

    ·        Environmental sensors to detect and monitor air quality

    The potential for these innovations may be in direct relation to street lighting (e.g. motion sensor controls) or in providing a communications network for other areas of the Council (and extending to partners in District and Borough Councils) to connect equipment to improve the services and outcomes they deliver. 

     

    Furthermore, these innovations may present grant funding opportunities through central Government departments and the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) which would reduce the borrowing requirement for the Council.

     

    The PFI contract allows for changes to the specification and service.  As explained in paragraphs 18-22, once a change notice is issued the process of identifying an appropriate solution to meet the Council’s needs begins which is expected to take 6-8 months to explore and agree before being presented back to Cabinet for approval, hence the reason for the 2 stage Cabinet approval.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Highways informed Members that the Council currently spent £3.5 million each year on energy for street lighting.  Recent projections indicated energy costs for street lighting would rise by between 5% and 14% over the next 10 years which could mean the annual cost increasing to nearly £15 million in that time and as high as £55 million per year in 20 years if prices rose by 14% each year. He went onto say that the Council had been looking into LED options for the 89,000 streetlights across the county and would be considering what new technologies are available. Members were informed that a 25 year agreement had been put in place in 2010 and that this would need to be revised in order to replace the street lights.

     

    It was explained that by investing approximately £18.5 million over 3 years to convert the council’s 89,000 street lights to LED it would reduce their consumption by around 60% saving approximately £2 million per year (at today’s prices).

     

    The Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services commended the report and stated that it was a very good idea with new and improved technology and stressed the importance of being innovative in order to attract funding to support the project and work with the PFI partner to ensure that the solution was right.

     

    Members commented on how this would contribute to a reduction in emissions and this was welcomed.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Cabinet:

     

    1.     Approves in principal the conversion of the Council’s street lighting assets to LED and delegates to the Head of Highways and Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, the authority to issue a change notice under the Street Lighting PFI contract to enable the development of a detailed proposal. 

    2.     Take a decision on whether to proceed based on a final detailed business case, including a technical solution and implementation programme, in Autumn 2018.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    Energy price inflation is increasing at a significant rate (5%-14%) and to ensure lights are operational when needed, there is little opportunity for the Council to control or reduce its energy costs.

     

    LED technology in street lighting has matured significantly in recent years while the costs have reduced. Many Highway Authorities have either embarked on an LED conversion programme or are in the process of planning to commence one within the next 2-3 years.

     

    Converting to LED will reduce energy consumption by 60% delivering £2 million per year energy savings at today’s prices as well as reducing carbon impact by 6200 tonnes and avoiding the Carbon Reduction Commitment tax otherwise payable on the avoided consumption.

     

    In addition to converting to LED street lighting and upgrading the Central Management System, Officers will be able to explore additional innovations now being used or being developed for use with street lighting such as:

    ·        Motion sensor controls to turn lights on in residential areas when people or vehicles approach and, off once they have passed

    ·        Providing real-time traffic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 245/18

246/18

Pay & Conserve, Car Park Charging on the Countryside Estate pdf icon PDF 224 KB

    The Surrey County Council Countryside Estate comprises 10,000 acres of the Surrey countryside, all of which is open to the public. The County Council’s vision is for a financially sustainable Estate which is protected and enhanced for future generations.  

     

    In line with a strategy pursued by many other landowners, the option of charging for car parking has been investigated as a potential source of income to support the county council’s vision.  This paper sets out a proposed approach to introduce car park charging at the five busiest countryside sites. This would mean charges at 15 out of over 30 car parks across the County Council’s Countryside Estate.  The proposal is based on public consultation carried out during autumn 2017.

     

    [The decision on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Cabinet agreed that:

     

    1.     Charging is introduced at 15 car parks across the 5 busiest sites as set out in Option 5 in paragraph 35 of the submitted report.

    2.     Income from car park charging is ring-fenced for the benefit of the Surrey Countryside Estate.

    3.     The tariffs are agreed as set out in paragraph 21 of the submitted report and thereafter forms part of the annual review process for fees and charges.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    In order to ensure a secure future for the Countryside Estate in the stewardship of the County Council and Surrey Wildlife Trust, a steady revenue stream is critical.  SWT are working with the County Council to develop a range of opportunities to produce that income and help to protect and enhance the Countryside Estate.

     

    The Countryside Estate is greatly valued by the public, however it is coming under increasing pressure from reducing budgets. The best way to protect and enhance the countryside for the future is to make the Estate self-funding and better protected against declining public sector budgets.  Paying for parking is an accepted cost of going to the countryside, demonstrated by the many sites that charge and are still very busy.

     

    Without funding, the countryside will become more inaccessible, overgrown and littered.  All car parks on the countryside estate need regular litter collection, management of trees and other vegetation, upkeep of signs and surfacing and car park resurfacing.  Income from car park charges can help meet these costs and improve the biodiversity, landscape and access to this valuable asset.

     

    The results of the consultation show us that the public would prefer not to pay to use the car parks however there is recognition that without a reliable income stream the result would be a deterioration in the quality of the estate and in access to the estate.   Of the payment options available, cash would be the most acceptable to the public.  However there are high operational costs and risks, for example theft and vandalism are more common where cash is collected in meters on remote sites. The National Trust are already reviewing their method of charging as a result of repeated vandalism.  The next most popular payment option was by card (some 95% of adults in the UK now have bank cards).

     

    Many countryside car parks in Surrey and other rural areas make charges.  Following financial assessment, the analysis of the Pay and Conserve Public Consultation and recommendations from the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee, it is felt that the most appropriate way of generating the necessary income is to introduce charging at the 5 busiest sites with card-only Pay and Display machines plus the option to pay by mobile phone or to purchase an annual parking permit.  The cost of an annual permit is £60 this equates to a daily cost of 16p.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport began by addressing the comments made under the public questions item in relation to comments made by the Secretary of State regarding a 25 year study of the countryside. He informed Members that the council had now responded to over 400 questions in relation to Newlands Corner and the Pay and Conserve proposal.

     

    He explained that the proposals to introduce car parking charges was necessary to ensure that income was coming into the council to protect and enhance the countryside. He went onto say that Kent, Hampshire, Essex and the National Trust introduced car parking charges many years ago.

     

    He thanked those that had responded to the consultation that had been held as it had helped officers understand the estate. He confirmed that any income that would come out of the car parking charges would be ring fenced for the countryside and that this was covered under the relevant Local Government Acts.

     

    The Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee were also thanked for the work that they had done to contribute to the proposals and as a result officers were looking at putting in cycle racks at the sites.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Children confirmed that she had visited two of the car parks scheduled to have charging implemented and stated that as a motorist, she expected to have to pay to park wherever she travels both in her own division and in other areas of the country. She said that 87% of Surrey residents lived in urban areas and all of these people were currently having to pay for the upkeep of the countryside estate and that charging would be in line with organisations such as the National Trust.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Education queried how much the annual parking permit would be and where this would be obtainable. She commented that it was important for the car parks to be maintained so that access was easy, particularly for those in wheelchairs. Members were informed that the annual cost would be £60 and that this equated to 16p per day. The hourly cost was £1.30 and blue badge holders could park for free.

     

    Members stated that due to financial pressures and increases in the number of vulnerable people in Surrey that required support there were difficult decisions to be made and that this proposal was a sustainable method to ensure that the countryside was maintained.

     

    The Cabinet Member summarised by confirming that the council had the legal powers to impose car parking. He informed Members that there were ongoing discussions with districts and boroughs regarding enforcement of parking charges and that as a result of the charging proposals there would be further work to do to ensure potential vehicle displacement was addressed.

     

    It was confirmed that the paragraph referencing in recommendation 3 was incorrect in the submitted report and this was revised to say paragraph 21 and then agreed.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Cabinet agreed that:

     

    1.     Charging is introduced at 15 car parks across  ...  view the full minutes text for item 246/18

247/18

Highway Environmental Maintenance Agency Agreements pdf icon PDF 144 KB

    The County Council has operated agency agreements with ten of the Surrey District / Borough Councils and one consortium of Parish Councils, to undertake environmental maintenance.  This includes the management and maintenance of highway grass verges, routine weed control and some hedges.  For Woking only this also includes highway trees. 

     

    Due to the financial pressures facing the County Council, there is the need to reduce expenditure for highway environmental maintenance.  Discussions have been held with the Districts and Boroughs as to the best method of achieving this.

     

    Authorisation is sought to enter into agency agreements as detailed within this report, which will reflect the lower level of funding and associated service provision. 

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment & Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Cabinet agreed that:

     

    1.     Authority be given for the Head of Highways & Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways to enter into formal agency agreements with the District and Borough Councils to undertake highway environmental maintenance works.

    2.     Funding levels, at the reduced rates be maintained for the duration of the initial four year agency agreements, with annual adjustment for inflation.

    3.     Where no agreement can be made with a District or Borough, the County Council will directly manage highways environmental maintenance for that area.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    Agency agreements need to be established to ensure that the County Council can continue working with Districts and Boroughs so they can provide highway environmental maintenance activities on behalf of the County Council. 

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Highways stated that the County Council had operated agency agreements with ten of the Surrey District / Borough Councils and one consortium of Parish Councils, to undertake environmental maintenance.  This included the management and maintenance of highway grass verges, routine weed control and some hedges and for Woking only this had also included highway trees. 

     

    Due to the financial pressures facing the County Council, there was a need to reduce expenditure for highway environmental maintenance and discussions had been held with the Districts and Boroughs as to the best method of achieving this.

     

    It was explained that authorisation was sought to enter into agency agreements as detailed within this report, which would reflect the lower level of funding and associated service provision. 

     

    The Cabinet Member for Communities commended the report and said that it was a good example of collaboration and partnership working.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Cabinet agreed that:

     

    1.     Authority be given for the Head of Highways & Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways to enter into formal agency agreements with the District and Borough Councils to undertake highway environmental maintenance works.

    2.     Funding levels, at the reduced rates be maintained for the duration of the initial four year agency agreements, with annual adjustment for inflation.

    3.     Where no agreement can be made with a District or Borough, the County Council will directly manage highways environmental maintenance for that area.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    Agency agreements need to be established to ensure that the County Council can continue working with Districts and Boroughs so they can provide highway environmental maintenance activities on behalf of the County Council. 

248/18

Operation of On-Street Civil Parking Enforcement pdf icon PDF 421 KB

    This report considers how the County Council will manage the future enforcement and administration of Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) within Surrey, and recommends reducing the number of parking enforcement agencies from nine to four, with boroughs and districts grouped into clusters in the South-West, North-West, East and North East of the County.

     

    It recommends entering into five-year on-street parking enforcement agency agreements with lead District and Borough authorities who will manage these clusters. In the event that any cluster is not ready to start operating from April 2018, it recommends entering into two-year agreements to allow time for any problems to be resolved, or for alternative arrangements to be put in place.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment & Infrastructure Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the County Council enters into new Civil Parking Enforcement arrangements from 1 April 2018 as follows:

     

    1.            either;

    a.   Five-year agency agreements be introduced with each identified lead authority where a cluster is ready to be implemented,

    b.   Two-year agency agreements be introduced with individual borough/district councils where a cluster is not ready to be implemented,

    in line with the terms specified within this report, including the split of any surplus as detailed in paragraph 18 of the submitted report.

     

    2.            the Head of Highways and Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways, be authorised to finalise details, including any necessary temporary arrangements, and implement agreements.

    3.            Local or Joint Committees continue to have an oversight and monitoring role for on-street parking enforcement within their area.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To ensure the County Council effectively, efficiently and consistently manages on-street parking in Surrey, so that the economy of our town centres is enhanced and congestion is reduced, to the benefit of our residents and businesses.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Highways introduced the report by explaining that the Council currently discharged the responsibility for parking enforcement to the district and borough councils. He went onto say that work had been undertaken with the 11 district and boroughs to set out how the County Council would manage the future enforcement and administration of Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) within Surrey. He went onto say that the report recommended reducing the number of parking enforcement agencies from nine to four, with boroughs and districts grouped into clusters in the South-West, North-West, East and North East of the County. It was explained that three of the four clusters had developed viable operations which were set out in the report however the North-East cluster was yet to develop a proposal.

     

    He summarised by stating that the report recommended entering into five-year on-street parking enforcement agency agreements with lead District and Borough authorities who would manage these clusters. In the event that any cluster was not ready to start operating from April 2018, it recommended entering into two-year agreements to allow time for any problems to be resolved, or for alternative arrangements to be put in place.

     

    Members confirmed their support for the proposal and stated that they thanked officers and the districts and boroughs for the work that had been undertaken and they urged the Cabinet Member and officers to resolve the issue in the North-East cluster.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the County Council enters into new Civil Parking Enforcement arrangements from 1 April 2018 as follows:

     

    1.            either;

    a.   Five-year agency agreements be introduced with each identified lead authority where a cluster is ready to be implemented,

    b.   Two-year agency agreements be introduced with individual borough/district councils where a cluster is not ready to be implemented,

    in line with the terms specified within this report, including the split of any surplus as detailed in paragraph 18 of the submitted report.

     

    2.            the Head of Highways and Transport, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways, be authorised to finalise details, including any necessary temporary arrangements, and implement agreements.

    3.            Local or Joint Committees continue to have an oversight and monitoring role for on-street parking enforcement within their area.

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To ensure the County Council effectively, efficiently and consistently manages on-street parking in Surrey, so that the economy of our town centres is enhanced and congestion is reduced, to the benefit of our residents and businesses.

249/18

Leader / Deputy Leader / Cabinet member Decisions taken since the last Cabinet meeting pdf icon PDF 83 KB

    To note any delegated decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader, Cabinet Members and Investment Board since the last meeting of the Cabinet.

     

    The annex to this report will be circulated separately prior to the Cabinet meeting,

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Cabinet note the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members / Investment Board under delegated authority.

     

    Minutes:

    The 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 Cabinet note the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members / Investment Board under delegated authority.

     

250/18

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

    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.

    Additional documents:

    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.

     

251/18

Re-commissioning Supported Accommodation for Young People in Surrey

    This Part 2 annex contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

     

    N.B. This is the Part 2 annex to item 8.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Education Select Committee]

     

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the 16 providers as set out in the submitted report, be awarded a place on the DPS commencing 1 April 2018 because they met the required threshold (50%) in the ITT evaluation process.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    This will enable Surrey County Council to purchase services on a spot basis from these organisations. Providers accepted onto the DPS will be invited to bid for block contracts through mini-competitions in February 2018.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Education Select Committee]

    Minutes:

    The Part 2 report contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

     

    The information contained in this report may not be published or circulated beyond this report and will remain sensitive for the length of the contract.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the 16 providers as set out in the submitted report, be awarded a place on the DPS commencing 1 April 2018 because they met the required threshold (50%) in the ITT evaluation process.

     

    Reasons for Decisions

     

    This will enable Surrey County Council to purchase services on a spot basis from these organisations. Providers accepted onto the DPS will be invited to bid for block contracts through mini-competitions in February 2018.

252/18

Chertsey High School, Runnymede - All-Weather Pitch

    This Part 2 report contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

     

    N.B. This is the Part 2 annex to item 9.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Services Select Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]

     

Decision:

RESOLVED:

 

It was agreed that:

 

1.       The business case for the project to contribute towards the cost of an all-weather pitch at this new secondary free school that will provide 600 additional school places, at a total cost as set out in the submitted report be approved.

2.       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 Education, the Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services and the Leader of the Council be agreed.

3.       That the authority to approve the award of contracts for works be delegated to the Chief Property Officer in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Education, Head of Procurement and Section 151 Officer when a competitive tender is procured through the new Orbis Construction Framework.

Reasons for Decisions

 

The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide necessary school places to meet the needs of the population in Runnymede Borough.

 

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Services Select Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]

Minutes:

This Part 2 report contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

 

The information contained within may not be published or circulated beyond this report and will remain sensitive until the contract has been awarded.

 

RESOLVED:

 

It was agreed that:

 

1.       The business case for the project to contribute towards the cost of an all-weather pitch at this new secondary free school that will provide 600 additional school places, at a total cost as set out in the submitted report be approved.

2.       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 Education, the Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services and the Leader of the Council be agreed.

3.       That the authority to approve the award of contracts for works be delegated to the Chief Property Officer in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Member for Education, Head of Procurement and Section 151 Officer when a competitive tender is procured through the new Orbis Construction Framework.

Reasons for Decisions

 

The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide necessary school places to meet the needs of the population in Runnymede Borough.

253/18

Property Transactions - disposal

Decision:

RESOLVED:

 

That, following a marketing exercise, a property no longer considered suited to ongoing service delivery nor capable of generating significant income be disposed of.

 

Reasons for Decisions

 

The property is no longer considered suited to ongoing service delivery, nor capable of generating significant income. The capital receipt from the sale will contribute to the funding sources available to the council in support of its delivery of services to its residents.

 

[The decision on this item can be called in by the Corporate Services Select Committee]

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services outlined the disposal plans and confirmed that a full consultation had been undertaken with all council services to confirm that this site is not required for use by the Council.

 

The Part 2 report contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

 

RESOLVED:

 

That, following a marketing exercise, a property no longer considered suited to ongoing service delivery nor capable of generating significant income be disposed of.

 

Reasons for Decisions

 

The property is no longer considered suited to ongoing service delivery, nor capable of generating significant income. The capital receipt from the sale will contribute to the funding sources available to the council in support of its delivery of services to its residents.

254/18

PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS