Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Abbas Merali, Oliver Cooper and Andrew Scarth with the substitutes being Councillors Andrea Fraser, Ciaran Reed and Phil Williams.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Policy and Resources Committee meeting held on 13 March 2023.

The minutes of the Policy and Resources Committee meeting held on 13 March 2023 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair of the meeting.

Items of other business notified under Council Procedure Rule 30 to be announced, together with the special circumstances that justify their consideration as a matter of urgency. The Chair to rule on the admission of such items.

The Chair had ruled that the following item of business, which had not been available5 clearworking daysbefore themeeting wereof sufficienturgency tobe considered by the Committee for the following reasons:

Item 8 – Livestreaming and Virtual/Remote meetings Protocol

To enable a protocol to be agreed for the livestreaming of our meetings.

Item 9 – Substitute Members on Licensing Committee

To enable the Committee to consider details on the legality of substitute members on the licensing committee following Annual Council in May.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 12 – CIL applications – Mill End Community Centre as a member of the committee and left the meeting during the consideration of the item.

The Council is required to publish a formal statement of its responsibilities regarding managing health and safety at work.

Recommendation

That the Health and Safety Policy Statement is agreed.

The Committee received the Health and Safety Policy Statement for recommendation to Council.

On being put to the Committee the recommendation was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being unanimous.

RECOMMEND:

That the Health and Safety Policy Statement be agreed.

A new Customer Experience Strategy has been developed to continue to drive forward the council’s customer experience agenda for the next three years 2023-2026.

Recommendation:

That: Policy & Resources Committee approve and recommend to Full Council adoption of the Customer Experience Strategy 2023-2026.

The Head of Customer Experience introduced the report to the Committee which provided details on a new Customer Experience Strategy which had been developed to continue to drive forward the Council’s customer experience agenda for the next three years 2023- 2026.

The Head of Customer Experience advised that a number of live things happen during the day while responding to calls.  The team that answer calls also manage the Visitor Centre and are responsible for providing admin support across the Council.  In order to guarantee answering calls within a fixed period of time it would require significant additional staff resource with around 4-5 additional staff required who would solely focus on answering calls which would have cost implications around £145,000-£185,000 a year.  The peak times with the calls fluctuate but we know when there are peak times therefore ensure that additional staff are answering calls at those times but it is limited by the number of staff within the team.  The situation with the calls is managed live during the day all the

Sarratt Parish Council have formally submitted their draft Neighbourhood Plan to Three Rivers District Council. It is now a statutory requirement for Three Rivers to consult on the draft Neighbourhood Plan and this report seeks agreement from the Policy and Resources Committee to go out for consultation.

Recommendation:

The Policy & Resources Committee note the report and agree the Sarratt NDP for consultation.

The Head of Planning Policy and Conservation reported that Sarratt Parish Council had formally submitted their Neighbourhood Plan (NP) following their own rounds of consultation.  Officers are satisfied that the NP meets all of the legal requirements, and we now have a statutory requirement to consult on the plan for them for a period of six weeks.  Officers were seeking agreement from the Committee for the consultation to go out.  Following the consultation officers would appoint an examiner and the plan go forward for examination and we can make any modifications following that and the Parish Council can then choose whether they agree to take that plan out for referendum.  We would organise the referendum and it would then be brought back to the Committee and Full Council to be adopted and to become part of the Development Plan. 

Members raised the following points:

Don’t put the NP out with another document just do it on its own.

The entire cost of any referendum would be absorbed by TRDC rather than by the Parish Council

How long are we expecting before we will be in a position to get to the referendum as the Parish Council expectations were to have been at referendum in May 2023?

If we are ready to go out for referendum substantially before May 2024 whether TRDC will hold the referendum out of sequence with the local election.

Was concerned about the delay and the impact this would have on planning appeals for Church Street in Sarratt.

Having a NP in place would not impact on the particular applications being referred to although the emerging plan had been commented on during the process.

Need to weigh up doing the referendum during December and not in May when the other elections are taking up and weigh up the process required, and the costs involved.

The Head of Planning Policy and Conservation we are required to run the referendum and the costs within that.  The Council do get some grant funding to assist with the costs.  In terms of the timetable, it would depend on whether we get to do the referendum out of sequence or not.  Initial talks with Elections had advised it may be possible but will need to clarification on the costs.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes moved, seconded by Councillor Ciaran Reed the recommendations as set out in the officer report.

On being put to the Committee the recommendations were declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being by general assent.

RESOLVED:

Noted the report and agreed the Sarratt NDP for consultation.

This report is being presented to the Committee to consider the protocol for the livestreaming of the Council’s public meetings held in the Penn Chamber at the Council offices and virtual/remote meetings.

The report also advises that external advisors/consultants can attend meetings remotely along with officers. 

Following a three month trial a review of remote attendance will consider extending to members of the public wishing to make representation at the meetings on Part I business.

Recommendation:

To consider and agree the protocol provided at Appendix 1.

To note that external advisors/consultants and officers will be able to attend meetings remotely. 

Following 3 months trial, officers will review the remote attendance and consider extending to members of the public wishing to make representation at the meetings on Part I business.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes moved, duly seconded, some amendments to the protocol as we now have the new Committee names which will need to be included at Paragraph 2.1 of the document.  Following a discussion with the Committee it agreed with the proposer that the amendment should be “all Council public meetings held in the Penn Chamber at Three Rivers House and virtual sub-committee meetings”. 

Members made the following points:

Good see we have now implemented this but would have liked to have seen earlier. 

Raised points on the provisions for the members of the public who do not wish to be livestreamed but there needs to be transparency for the public on how decisions are made. If they don’t wish to be videoed we don’t video them but it is reasonable that their voice could still be heard. 

Sub-committees are already livestreamed and this will continue. 

Councillor Philip Hearn moved the following amendments, duly seconded, to the protocol:

At 4.1 – to replace livestream with video and to remove “for example”

At 4.2 – to replace “and we agreed this request” with “we will seek to make accommodations to allow their voice to be livestreamed but their image to be excluded” and the removal of the third sentence.

After 3 months trial details to be reported in the Members’ Information Bulletin.

Officers advised that there was no requirement to change the word livestream to video in point 4.1 and the proposer withdrew this amendment.

On being put to the Committee the amendments and the recommendations were declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being unanimous.

RESOLVED:

Agreed the protocol provided at Appendix 1 with the amendments above.

Noted that external advisors/consultants and officers will be able to attend meetings remotely. 

Following 3 months trial, officers will review the remote attendance and consider extending to members of the public wishing to make representation at the meetings on Part I business and report details in the Members’ Information Bulletin.

              At the Annual Council meeting on 23 May 2023 Members raised concern on a recommendation within the report on appointments to committee that substitute members are not allowed on the Licensing Committee or any sub-committee.

At the meeting Members voted agreement to this but then subsequently rescinded the decision under Rule 22(1a) and voted to allow substitute members on the licensing committee and sub-committee.

The report is being presented to the Committee to advise that under the Licensing Act 2003, ss.6(1), 7(1) and 9(1) substitutes are not lawfully permitted. There is recent case law that confirms substitutes are not permitted: R (Bridgerow Limited) v Cheshire West and Chester Borough Council and another (2014) and MuMu Enterprises (Weston) Limited v North Somerset District Council (2014).

Recommendation:

That this Committee recommends to full Council to rescind the decision of full Council made on 23 May 2023 which permitted substitutes to sit on Licensing Committee.

At the Annual Council meeting on 23 May 2023 Members raised concern on a recommendation within the report on appointments to committee that substitute members are not allowed on the Licensing Committee or any sub-committee.

At the meeting Members voted agreement to this but then subsequently rescinded the decision under Rule 22(1a) and voted to allow substitute members on the licensing committee and sub-committee.

The report is being presented to the Committee to advise that under the Licensing Act 2003, ss.6(1), 7(1) and 9(1) substitutes are not lawfully permitted. There is recent case law that confirms substitutes are not permitted: R (Bridgerow Limited) v Cheshire West and Chester Borough Council and another (2014) and MuMu Enterprises (Weston) Limited v North Somerset District Council (2014).

Members raised the following points:

Did we get external Counsel advice to confirm this.

At times it has been difficult to act on any licensing issues where we had to have a sub-committee meeting and wondered if there were enough Members on the Committee to sit on a sub-committee. 

Could in future more details be provided on the legal implications on substitute members.

How long had the ruling been in place regarding substitutes and how far back had we checked.

Could we consider extending the number of the members on the committee.

The Chief Executive advised that officers had looked at the legislation.  The legislation had been in place for a while but the recent case laws was in 2014 which clarified the situation.  At previous Annual Council’s we had agreed there would be no substitutes on licensing but we can check this back to 2014 that no substitutes have been on licensing.

Councillor Paul Rainbow moved, seconded by Councillor Chris Lloyd the recommendation as provided in the report.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being unanimous.

RECOMMEND:

To full Council to rescind the decision of full Council made on 23 May 2023 which permitted substitutes to sit on Licensing Committee.

The report is being presented to the Committee to re-establish the following sub-committees for 2023/24: Constitution, Local Plan and Equalities and appoint the members to the sub-committees. 

The report also proposes that the Members appointed to them be proportional based on the number of seats each Group has on the Council with the proportionality details provided in Paragraph 2.2 of the report with the Members appointed being:

Constitution (x9): Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Tony Humphreys, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Chris Whately-Smith, Stephen Cox, Oliver Cooper, Debbie Morris, Ciaran Reed

Local Plan (x11): Matthew Bedford, Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Phil Williams, one member to be advised at the meeting, Stephen Cox, Chris Mitchell, Oliver Cooper, Rue Grewal, Philip Hearn

Equalities (x9): Raj Khiroya, Khalid Hussain, Anne Winter, Kevin Raeburn, Louise Price, Stephen Cox, Rue Grewal, Lisa Hudson, Reena Ranger OBE

Any Member of the Council is able to be appointed as a Member of a sub-committee and any Member can be a substitute.

It is proposed that the Covid-19 Response sub-committee is not re-established. 

Recommendation:

That Members appointed to all the sub-committees be proportional based on the number of seats each Group has following the election on 4 May.

The proportionality to be as provided in Paragraph 2.2 of the report with the Members appointed being:

Constitution (x9): Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Tony Humphreys, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Chris Whately-Smith, Stephen Cox, Oliver Cooper, Debbie Morris, Ciaran Reed

Local Plan (x11): Matthew Bedford, Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Phil Williams, one member to be advised at the meeting, Stephen Cox, Chris Mitchell, Oliver Cooper, Rue Grewal, Philip Hearn

Equalities (x9): Raj Khiroya, Khalid Hussain, Anne Winter, Kevin Raeburn, Louise Price, Stephen Cox, Rue Grewal, Lisa Hudson, Reena Ranger OBE That no decision-making powers be delegated to the sub-committees;

That any Member of the Council can be appointed a Member of the sub-committees and all Members can be substitute Members.

To not re-establish the Covid-19 Response sub-committee.

The report also proposes that the Members appointed to them be proportional based on the number of seats each Group has on the Council with the proportionality details provided in Paragraph 2.2 of the report with the Members appointed being:

Constitution (x9): Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Tony Humphreys, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Chris Whately-Smith, Stephen Cox, Oliver Cooper, Debbie Morris, Ciaran Reed

Local Plan (x11): Matthew Bedford, Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Phil Williams, one member to be advised at the meeting, Stephen Cox, Chris Mitchell, Oliver Cooper, Rue Grewal, Philip Hearn

Equalities (x9): Raj Khiroya, Khalid Hussain, Anne Winter, Kevin Raeburn, Louise Price, Stephen Cox, Rue Grewal, Lisa Hudson, Reena Ranger OBE

Any Member of the Council is able to be appointed as a Member of a sub-committee and any Member can be a substitute.

It is proposed that the Covid-19 Response sub-committee is not re-established. 

The Chair advised the name to be advised at the meeting was Councillor Steve Drury onto the Local Plan sub-committee.

Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst moved the recommendations, duly seconded, and explained the increased in size for the Local Plan sub-committee.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED the voting being unanimous.

RESOLVED:

That Members appointed to all the sub-committees be proportional based on the number of seats each Group has following the election on 4 May.

The proportionality to be as provided in Paragraph 2.2 of the report with the Members appointed being:

Constitution (x9): Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Tony Humphreys, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Chris Whately-Smith, Stephen Cox, Oliver Cooper, Debbie Morris, Ciaran Reed

Local Plan (x11): Matthew Bedford, Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Chris Lloyd, Sarah Nelmes, Phil Williams, Steve Drury, Stephen Cox, Chris Mitchell, Oliver Cooper, Rue Grewal, Philip Hearn

Equalities (x9): Raj Khiroya, Khalid Hussain, Anne Winter, Kevin Raeburn, Louise Price, Stephen Cox, Rue Grewal, Lisa Hudson, Reena Ranger OBE

That no decision-making powers be delegated to the sub-committees;

That any Member of the Council can be appointed a Member of the sub-committees and all Members can be substitute Members.

To not re-establish the Covid-19 Response sub-committee.

The report seeks to allocate a total of £320,524 of CIL funding to local infrastructure projects to support growth in Three Rivers.  The application is for CIL funds towards the costs of replacing the bridge connecting Riverside Drive, Rickmansworth and the Aquadrome, Rickmansworth.

Recommendation:

That Members approve CIL funding for the following schemes detailed in Table 1 of this report and summarised in the table below for 2023/2024:

The report sought to allocate a total of £320,524 of CIL funding to local infrastructure projects to support growth in Three Rivers.  The application is for CIL funds towards the costs of replacing the bridge connecting Riverside Drive, Rickmansworth and the Aquadrome, Rickmansworth.

The Head of Regulatory Services reported that the report had been submitted following a review of the condition of the bridge which had concluded it would need to be replaced in the next 5 years.  An opportunity had become available to seek external funding towards the cost of that bridge (£1.3m being the cost) to the Department of Transport and can seek up to 75% of the funding and put in an application later this summer.  A planning application is due to be submitted for a replacement bridge as Sustran (Part of the Department of Transport) will not consider applications for funding unless the planning application had received permission.  Previously we had asked that the decision be delegated so that additional funds (10%-15%) can be considered for the project and would like to with this application to have that delegation in place and have that added so that the project does not get delayed. 

Members raised the following points:

How had it come about that we now needed to replace the bridge following the recent repairs and the cost implications.

There were no climate risks included particularly around flood.

Clarify the additional funds and contingencies and the delegation for this.

The bridge is very crucial and integral for the use of the Aquadrome.

When we review our Governance arrangements for CIL we look at the point systems and how many points each project is given.

It was advised there is no project overspend what was being asked for was contingency funding.

The Head of Regulatory Services advised that the project was being run by the property and leisure team and works had been undertaken recently but we need to have a longer term plan.  The team went out to consultants, through a full procurement exercise, to get a report underway. The planning application will have the level detail associated with having a replacement bridge.  The engineering consultants, who are independent of the Department of Transport, will provide feedback on taking this forward and had looked at a business plan on how you replace the bridge and what you need to do.  To get the funding it has been a certain width to accommodate active travel.  If we don’t get the funding agreed, we will need to consider if this is still the right bridge or can we narrow it although it would still be a significant cost.  The additional funding would depend on how much grant funding would be received, high inflation and having some contingency funding due to any work not taking place until next year.  The delegation was being provided to not delay the project.

Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst moved, seconded by Councillor Sarah Nelmes, with the amendment on the delegation and contingency funding of (10-15%)  ...  view the full minutes text for item PR11/23

The report seeks to allocate a total of £9,000 of CIL funding from Rickmansworth Unparished area funds for a local infrastructure project.

Recommendation:

(i)         approve CIL funding for the following schemes detailed in Table 1 of this report and summarised in the table below:

Table 1.

And

(ii)        any changes to the scheme proposals or variation of the financial requirements by up to 25% of the agreed commitment to be delegated to the Associate Director to determine in consultation with the Lead Member.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes left the meeting.

Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst Vice-Chair in the Chair

The Head of Regulatory Services advised that the report seeks to allocate a total of £9,000 of CIL funding from Rickmansworth Unparished area funds for a local infrastructure project to provide a replacement roof.

Councillor Chris Lloyd moved, duly seconded, the recommendation as set out in the report.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Vice-Chair in the Chair the voting being unanimous.

RECOMMEND:

approve CIL funding for the following schemes detailed in Table 1 of this report and summarised in the table below:

Table 1.

And any changes to the scheme proposals or variation of the financial requirements by up to 25% of the agreed commitment to be delegated to the Associate Director to determine in consultation with the Lead Member.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes returned to the meeting.

This report sets out the financial position for the year ending 31 March 2023 for the Council’s revenue and capital budgets.  The following recommendations are included in the report:

·           to carry forward to 2023/24 certain unspent revenue budgets and;

·           to rephase those capital budgets that require completion in 2023/24

Recommendation:

The Policy and Resources Committee recommend to Council:

9.1 That the favourable revenue year end variance after carry forwards of £138,356 to be noted.

9.2 That the capital year end position as summarised in paragraph 2.6 and Appendix 3 be noted.

9.3 To approve to carry forward the unspent service budgets from 2022/23 to 2023/24 which total £490,772 to enable completion of projects as detailed at Appendix 2.

9.4 To approve the rephasing of capital projects from 2022/23 to 2023/24 which total £10,885,484 as detailed at Appendix 4.

9.5 To approve the creation of a new Commercial Risk earmarked reserve to manage financial risk associated with commercial ventures.

Councillor Sarah Nelmes proposed, seconded by Councillor Keith Martin, the recommendations as set out in the report. 

The Lead Member for Resources went through each of the recommendations to the Committee.

Members made the following comments:

Rationale for the monies to be carried forward and not put into general reserves?

The Head of Finance advised that we know that plans are in place to spend the money and it is simpler to do it through a carry forward mechanism.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being 10 For, 0 Against and 3 Abstentions.

RECOMMEND:

That the favourable revenue year end variance after carry forwards of £138,356 to be noted.

That the capital year end position as summarised in paragraph 2.6 and Appendix 3 be noted.

To approve to carry forward the unspent service budgets from 2022/23 to 2023/24 which total £490,772 to enable completion of projects as detailed at Appendix 2.

To approve the rephasing of capital projects from 2022/23 to 2023/24 which total £10,885,484 as detailed at Appendix 4.

To approve the creation of a new Commercial Risk earmarked reserve to manage financial risk associated with commercial ventures.

To receive and make any comments on the Committee’s work programme

The Committee consider the work programme.

It was agreed to add into the work programme an application for CIL funding from Sarratt Parish Council for the July meeting.

RESOLVED:

That subject to the amendment above the work programme be agreed.