Venue: King Edmund Chamber, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich. View directions
Contact: Committee Services
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive apologies for absence. Minutes: 27.1 Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Caston, Councillor Gibson Harries, Councillor Jewson, Councillor Storey, Cllr Whybrow and Councillor Green. |
|
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS BY COUNCILLORS Minutes: 28.1 Declarations of interest were declared by the following councillors:-
(i) Councillor Horn,being a Director of MSDC (Suffolk Holdings), declared a local non - pecuniary interest in Item 14 and 16 MC/18/14 Capital Investment Fund Company (CIFCO Capital LTD) Business Trading and Performance Report 2017/18.
(ii) Councillor Haley, being a Board Member of CIFCO, declared a local non- pecuniary interest in Item 14 and 16, MC/18/14 Capital Investment Fund Company (CIFCO Capital LTD) Business Trading and Performance Report 2017/18.
(iii) Councillor Brewster, being a Director of MSDC (Suffolk Holdings), declared a local non - pecuniary interest in Item 14 and 16 MC/18/14 Capital Investment Fund Company (CIFCO Capital LTD) Business Trading and Performance Report 2017/18.
(iv) Councillor Whitehead, being a Director of Gateway 14 LTD, declared a local non - pecuniary interest in Item 14 and 16 MC/18/14 Capital Investment Fund Company (CIFCO Capital LTD) Business Trading and Performance Report 2017/18.
(v)
|
|
MC/18/10 TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 21 JUNE 2018 PDF 422 KB Minutes: It was Resolved: -
That subject to Councillor Osborne being added to the list of apologies, Councillor Eburne’s question relating to the annual monitoring report, and the Leader’s response with regard to the Joint Local Plan timetable being added into the Leader’s announcements, the Minutes be approved as a true record. |
|
MC/18/11 CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS PDF 29 KB Minutes: 30.1 The Chairman asked Council to note his report and also reported that he was sharing more engagements with the Deputy Chairman to ensure that the Council was represented at as many events as possible.
|
|
MC/18/12 LEADER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS PDF 302 KB Minutes: 31.1 The Chairman invited the Leader to introduce his report.
31.2 Councillor Gowrley presented his report and sent his deepest sympathy and respect to the family of Maggie Staddon, an officer of the Council who had died very suddenly.
31.3 Councillor Otton reiterated his sentiments with regards to Maggie Staddon.
31.4 Commenting further Councillor Otton then asked the Leader if his recent reorganisation of the Cabinet would actually reduce the increase to Members allowances that was stated in the last Council Minutes.
31.5 In response the Leader confirmed that the Lead Member position that Councillor Morley had recently occupied had been removed, which would result in a reduction of costs.
31.6 Councillor Stringer sought clarification on which Cabinet Member was responsible for housing delivery. . 31.7 In response Councillor Gowrley stated that he needed to discuss this further with the Housing Portfolio Holder but he felt that housing delivery was a housing issue not a planning issue. However, it could fall between housing and assets and investments depending on what the housing delivery was. Once he had discussed this further he would then make that information available.
31.8 Councillor Otton also asked the Leader if the Council or any other Councils’ in Suffolk were making preparations for a Brexit “no deal”
31.9 In response the Leader confirmed that the Council was keeping a watching brief and would respond accordingly. |
|
TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, The Chief Executive will report the receipt of the following petition. There can be no debate or comment upon these matters at the Council meeting.
A petition with 68 valid signatures expressing opposition to planning permission for an event venue at Rockylls Hall. Minutes: 32.1 The Corporate Manager for Democratic Services reported that two petitions had been received. The first petition had sixty - eight valid signatures and was expressing opposition to a planning application for an event venue at Rockylls Hall in Shelland. The second petition expressed opposition for a planning application DC/18/02380 land east of Poplar Hill Stowmarket. Both petitions would be dealt with through the planning process. |
|
QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES The Chairs of Committees to answer any questions from the public of which notice has been given no later than midday three clear working days before the day of the meeting in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11. Minutes: 33.1 There were questions received from the public. |
|
QUESTIONS BY COUNCILLORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES The Chairman of the Council, the Chairs of Committees and Sub-Committees and Portfolio Holders to answer any questions on any matters in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affect the District of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Procedure Rule No. 12. Minutes: Question 1
Councillor Eburne to Councillor Horn, Cabinet Member for Planning
As per the recently released Joint Annual Monitoring Report for 2017/18, what is the Mid Suffolk District Council work plan to ensure 454 homes are completed in this financial year (2018/19) and 780 homes are completed in the next financial year (2019/2020), thus ensuring retention of a Five-Year Housing Land Supply?
Response Councillor Horn, Cabinet Member for Planning
As Councillor Eburne will be aware, there is more to ‘ensuring retention of a five-year housing land supply’ than housing completions, although I recognise that forms part of the calculations. Equally important will be to ensure that planning permissions continue to flow through the system.
The Council’s own developments will form a constituent part of the overall completions and there is a detailed work programme to ensure that these flow through in a timely way. As you’ll be aware, it is more difficult for us to stimulate private developers to bring forward completions as there are fewer tools available to us and while we are still digesting the new NPPF it does not appear to provide us with any significant new opportunities.
There is a relationship here with your second question though so I will provide more detail in response to that question.
Supplementary Question Councillor Eburne to Councillor Horn, Cabinet Member for Planning
I am aware that the key issue is that we’ve got 454 homes to deliver in this financial year, 780 in the next year, 1,150 in the year after and 1,134 the year after that and if we don’t have a plan to deliver those, then we are going to be in trouble again and the 5 year land supply will be short lived, Cllr Horn refers to the few of the tools available to us as well as those in the new NPPF Paragraph 76 refers to a tool for example that’s available which is having a shorter timescale. However, I think it is very important that we should also be having discussions with the developers. Is this something that the Council will try to bring forward and make sure that housing is happening. When will there be a plan as to how Mid Suffolk is actually going to help assist with getting these housing completions given the numbers are so much greater than any numbers we’ve achieved in the past 5 years?
Response Councillor Horn, Cabinet Member for Planning
We are still working with developers. This is not something new that we will start doing. We have been doing it for quite some time. The housing delivery test in planning terms will become a phrase that becomes very common over the next few years because that’s going to be a significant contribution to our success. What I think is a relevant and a point that has been raised is the relationship between the planning system and housing delivery. The planning system cannot be fully relied on entirely to deliver housing. It is also about relationships, ... view the full minutes text for item 34. |
|
TO RECEIVE REPORTS FROM CABINET MEMBERS PDF 474 KB CMU16 – Leader and Cabinet Member for Assets and Investment CMU17 – Cabinet Member for Communities CMU18 – Cabinet Member for Economy CMU19 – Cabinet Member for Environment CMU20 – Cabinet Member for Finance CMU21 – Cabinet Member for Housing CMU22 – Leader and Cabinet Member for Organisational Delivery CMU23 – Cabinet Member for OD (Law and Governance) CMU24 – Cabinet Member for Planning Additional documents:
Minutes: 35.1 The Leader introduced the Cabinet Member reports and invited questions from Members: -
CMU16 Councillor Gowrley, Leader and Cabinet Member for Assets and Investment
Q1. Councillor Marchant to Councillor Gowrley
Page 15 Paragraph 3.4 Councillor Marchant welcomed the plans for the new library and internet café but asked if it would be possible to include an exhibition area within the plans where local artefacts could be displayed?
Response Councillor Gowrley, Leader and Cabinet Member for Assets and Investment
There may be other plans for Needham Market where this may be more suitable but we will certainly consider this.
Q2 Councillor Eburne to Councillor Gowrley
With reference to how the Council utilises its assets – when is the Council going to utilise its assets and borrow some money to set up a housing company?
Response Councillor Gowrley, Leader and Cabinet Member for Assets and Investment
I am pleased to say that it is under consideration at the moment.
CMU17 Councillor Flatman, Cabinet Member for Communities
Councillor Flatman drew attention to two errors contained in the report, the reference to Lavenham in paragraph 4.2 should be replaced with the wording in Paragraph 3.1 and although the dates for the Parish Liaison Group were correct, the venue should read Walsham le Willows.
Q1 Councillor Welham to Councillor Flatman, Cabinet Member for Communities
With regard to paragraph 3.8 the Womens’ Cycling Tour, I understood that schools would be provided with resources so that they could work on various aspects, Members would receive some details of what these resources would be so that they could work with the schools. Freeman Primary School in Stowupland didn’t receive anything. If the event were to occur again I think the Council should make more effort to ensure that these resources are provided in a timely fashion, also does the Council have a plan for the legacy provided by this event?
ResponseCouncillor Flatman, Cabinet Member for Communities
It is my understanding that all schools were sent a pack with what was on offer. I take your point on member involvement and will make sure that members are the first to know with any future events.
CMU18 Councillor Brewster, Cabinet Member for Economy
Q1 Councillor Norris to Councillor Brewster, Cabinet Member for Economy
Under Page 26 Paragraph 4.4 the Open for Business Team will be progressing the Needham Lake Visitor Centre priority work stream by working up a feasibility specification on commissioning the next stage of this project – will there be a timetable for the progression of this project?
Response Councillor Brewster, Cabinet Member for Economy
I am sure there will be a timetable produced and as soon as it is, it will be made available to you and other members.
Q2 Councillor Otton to Councillor Brewster, Cabinet Member for Economy
I am not sure if this is commercially sensitive information but on commissioning Nautilus Associates Development phase 1 feasibility do we have a costing for that and would that be available to members?
Response ... view the full minutes text for item 35. |
|
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE REPORT Verbal update from the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee Minutes: 36.1 The Chair of Overview and Scrutiny reported that the Overview and Scrutiny committee had agreed for this municipal year to hold alternative monthly meetings with joint meetings in between.
36.2 Commenting further the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny reported that the Committee had scrutinised two key matters at their June and July meetings.
36.3 At the June meeting Members had received a report from the Cabinet Member for Housing on the first year of trading for BMBS and had scrutinised the revised business plan for 2017 to 2023. The comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be reported to Cabinet on the 6th August 2018 along with the committee’s comments on the Corporate Compliments, Comments and Complaints Policy.
36.4 At the July Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Committee looked at the CIFCO performance for 2017/18 and scrutinised the business plan for 2018/19. Members asked a number of detailed questions and were given extensive responses and an undertaking that this information would be included in the Council report. The Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was pleased to see that all of this information including the Minutes from the meeting had been included in the Council report for debate that had been tabled this evening.
36.5 The Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee then went on to detail the future items that the Scrutiny Committee would be reviewing including: -
· The Planning pre -app fees and performance · Disabled adaptions, grants, and the locality award scheme · Health and Wellbeing particularly staff turnover and sickness and the effect of the move to Endeavour House · Council housing void times.
|
|
MC/18/13 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME UPDATE PDF 236 KB Cabinet Member for Planning Additional documents: Minutes: 37.1 Councillor Horn introduced the report and MOVED the recommendations within the report.
37.2 Commenting further Councillor Horn stated that the Local development Scheme was the work programme for the preparation of the Joint Local Plan. This version updated the adopted March 2017 version and introduced a number of amendments mainly revising the timetable to reflect a further round of public consultation to ensure the Joint local Plan was robust and so that the Council could take into account the comments made at the next round of public consultation before producing the draft Joint Local Plan for examination
37.3 The next version of the plan which is proposed to be published in November 2018 with public consultation from December 2018 to January 2019 would be known as the Regulation 18 draft and would effectively set out the Council’s prepared position in respect of planning policies and site allocations.
37.4 Comments from the public and stakeholders will be fed back to members in March 2019 and the submission draft plan known as Regulation 19 draft will be published in the spring of March 2019 with a six- week technical consultation on the soundness and legal compliance of the document. Representations made on this plan are then submitted along with the plan to the Government for public examination. The submission plan once agreed by Council will carry weight in the determination of planning applications.
37.5 Councillor Guthrie seconded the report and reserved the right to speak.
37.7 Councillor Killett asked in view of the now changed timetable what the risk and financial issues were to the Council for the late delivery of the plan.
37.8 In response the Corporate Manager for Strategic Planning stated that the financial details were already detailed in the report as effectively the evidenced based costs would remain the same. The examination costs remain the same. What the Council was trying to do was actually de-risk if from the examination process itself by ensuring the Plan was robust enough before submission so that the Council didn’t have a period of suspension at the examination.
37.9 Councillor Eburne sought reassurance that the date would not be pushed further into the future?
37.10 In response Councillor Horn stated that he would like to very much achieve that date and the Council would do what it could to stick to the timetable.
It was Resolved:-
(i) That the revised timetable for the preparation of the Joint Local Plan be approved and that the revised Local Development Scheme be brought into effect by 31st July 2018.
|
|
COUNCILLOR APPOINTMENTS Appointment of Chair of the Joint Audit and Standards Committee
Following her appointment to the Cabinet, Cllr Morley has resigned from the position of Chair for the Joint Audit and Standards Committee on the advice of the Monitoring Officer. The Council is required to appoint a new Chair for the remainder of the municipal year.
Minutes: It was Resolved:-
(i) That Councillor Muller be appointed Chair of the Joint Audit and Standards Committee for the remainder of the municipal year. (ii) That Councillor Hadingham be appointed temporary vice chair of the Strategic Overview and Scrutiny until the return of Councillor Osborne from a period of absence. (iii) That Councillor Burke be appointed Vice Chair of the Joint Audit and Standards Committee for the remainder of the municipal year.
|
|
MOTIONS ON NOTICE To consider the Motion on Notice received from Councillor Matthissen:
This Council notes that
Accordingly, Council calls on Suffolk County Council and the West Suffolk councils to join Mid Suffolk in approaching Greater Anglia to propose that work begins to launch a Mid Anglia CRP next Spring.
Proposed John Matthissen Seconded Sarah Mansel
Minutes: 39.1 On the proposal of Councillor Matthissen and seconded by Councillor Mansel It was MOVED that: -
This Council notes that:-
· Community Rail Partnerships (CRP) are a useful way of promoting tourism without generating road traffic. · Abellio Greater Anglia offers start-up grants of £20,000 and continuing financial and practical support · Greater Anglia supports 8 CRP’s at present, and 4 of its 8 intermediate stations are in Mid Suffolk
Accordingly, Council calls on Suffolk County Council and the West Suffolk councils to join Mid Suffolk in approaching Greater Anglia to propose that work begins to launch a Mid Anglia CRP next spring.
39.2 Councillor Matthissen briefly explained that CRP’s were a good way of promoting tourism and therefore bringing money into the economy without increasing road traffic. Secondly Abellio Anglia did offer start up grants to help with this. There were already eight of these community rail partnerships who were already a long way through the process of setting them up and Councillor Matthissen were concerned that Mid Suffolk would be left behind. He suggested that there were three potential CRP’s that remain and looking at the railway line of the intermediate stations between Ipswich and Cambridge out of the eight stations four were actually in Mid Suffolk. Councillor Matthissen went on to say that he would like the Council to call on the County Council the lead authority on transport matters and also the West Suffolk Council to approach Greater Anglia to suggest this.
39.3 The Chairman invited Mr Feeney, an expert witness to speak on the motion.
39.4 Mr Feeney informed Council that a Community Rail Partnership (CRP) was an association between a public transport operator primarily the train operator Greater Anglia, the local authorities covered by the area and the local communities, Councillor Matthissen had mentioned the potential impact on tourism and Mr Feeny, thought it was also right to mention a wider impact on local business through businesses having the opportunity to use some railway resources in terms of developing small businesses in railway linked properties along the line. The other value of a CRP was the fact that it actually promoted public transport. Not something for tourism but for commuting further forms of travel. So from that point of view it was really about time the Mid Anglia line had a Community Rail Partnership. Mr Feeny thought this was long overdue as there was between 90 to a 100 of them throughout the country already. The line from Cambridge to Ipswich which goes through Mid Suffolk was one of a minority routes served by Greater Anglia which it had not yet got the Community Rail Partnership. The Community Rail Partnership in East Suffolk serving Felixstowe and communities through to Lowestoft had been an immense success. It was a model of what can be done with public transport both in terms of increasing passenger numbers, in terms of promoting tourism, in terms of using redundant station buildings for cafes and other businesses so there was a ... view the full minutes text for item 39. |
|
Cllr Gerard Brewster – Chair of MSDC (Suffolk Holdings) Ltd Additional documents:
Minutes: 40.1 Councillor Brewster introduced the report and MOVED the recommendations within the report.
40.2 Commenting further Councillor Brewster informed Council that the report provided the Council as a 50% shareholder with an oversight of CIFCO’s Capital LTD’s performance and activity in its first year of trading and its proposed investment strategy for the 2018/19 year forming the basis of trading in year 2. The report had been scrutinised by the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee and their recommendations and the Minutes from that meeting were also included in the report.
40.3 Councillor Brewster then went on to welcome and introduce Mr Ian Winslet a consultant working for the Board of CIFCO to present the report.
40.4 Mr Winslet informed Council that the report reflected the financial targets that were set by the Councils in the original agreement, and that they were on target. The report also showed that six assets were acquired, with one other being acquired since the report had been written, another one had been exchanged so the Company was getting close to the full investment of £50m.
40.5 Councillor Ekpenyong seconded the report and reserved the right to speak.
40.6 Councillor Otton stated that her party and others had been unhappy about some of the investments that had been put forward and were progressing. They were particularly concerned about the reliance on the retail sector at a time when hearing of organisations in the retail business not reaching their profit targets. The other issue that they were concerned about was that the sites that had been acquired were not in the district or the county.
40.7 Councillor Stringer raised concerns relating to the diversity of the Board of Directors.
40.8 Councillor Eburne asked why only one aspect of Lord Oakeshott’s report was included as several aspects of his report related to commercial property including treasury guidance changes, The PWLB changes, and reference to a Private Members Bill entitled Local Authority (Borrowing and Investment) Bill. She also asked about acquiring investments related to renewable energy, and why aspects from other reports were not included.
40.9 In response to the query relating to the diversity of the Board, Councillor Horn confirmed that a wide reaching and open recruitment process had been undertaken. The people were appointed due to their ability to deliver the strategic priorities that the holding companies had set them.
40.10 Mr Winslet in response to the question relating to the Lord Oakeshott report stated that the reason that Lord Oakeshott was mentioned in Paragraph 4.3 of the report was in response to a specific question that was asked prior to the scrutiny meeting, hence why it was felt appropriate to add it to the report.
It was Resolved:- That the CIFCO Capital Ltd trading activity and performance for the year to end April 2018 be noted.
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC WHICH TERM INCLUDES THE PRESS To consider whether, pursuant to Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public should be excluded from the meeting for the business specified below on the grounds that if the public were present during these items, it is likely that there would be the disclosure to them of exempt information as indicated against each item.
The author(s) of the report(s) proposed to be considered in Part 2 of the Agenda are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Minutes:
It was Resolved:-
That pursuant to Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the business specified in the Minutes on the grounds that if the public were present during discussion of this item, it is likely that there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as indicated in the report.
|
|
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX - CIFCO CAPITAL LTD BUSINESS PLAN 2018/19 (Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 of Part 1)
Cllr Gerard Brewster – Chair of MSDC (Suffolk Holdings) Ltd Minutes: 42.1 Councillor Brewster introduced the confidential report and MOVED the recommendations in the report.
42.2 Councillor Field queried the figures in the Scrutiny Minutes under paragraph 6.9 relating to commercial investment market.
42.3 Mr Winslet, Development Consultant stated that the correct figures were illustrated in paragraph 4.3 of the report and confirmed that the local authority investment since 2016 amounted to £2.31 billion of total commercial property of £883 billion.
42.4 Councillor Eburne asked if the Board had looked at any opportunities for renewable energy investments such as solar farms?
42.5 In response Mr Winslet stated that the Board had not looked at this type of opportunity, as up to now the Board, rightly, in line with their business plan and the KPI’s set by both Councils, had been concentrating their investment efforts on core assets and core plus assets which the type of asset described fell outside of both of these.
42.6 Councillor Stringer asked when the Board thought they would get a balanced set of investments and risk and also queried whether the Board had run a risk profile on what may or may not happen next March.
42.7 In response Mr Winslet stated that the asset allocation by sector illustrated in diagram 3 on page 85 of the confidential papers is where the Board expect the final balance to be at the end of the investment period. If the right assets come on the market then the Board expect to be fully invested by the end of this calendar year. At the moment the Board did not have a balance as they had wanted to target the core assets first. However the balance in the portfolio would exist at the time of full investment. On the Brexit discussion, JAL provide a quarterly report to the Board and within that report there is a section on Brexit and the implications, or potential implications for the commercial property sector. At the moment what we are seeing is some particular hot spots on the property sector, especially industrial assets which the Board is particularly targeting at the moment. Retail assets are the weakest which is why we will be under invested in that particular segment by the end of the investment period given the concerns that have been raised.
It was Resolved: -
That the CIFCO’s Capital Ltd business plan 2018/19 be approved. |
|
MC/18/15 TO CONFIRM THE CONFIDENTIAL MINUTE OF 21 JUNE 2018 MEETING Minutes:
It was Resolved:-
That the confidential Minutes of the meeting held on the 21st June 2018 be approved as a true record. |