Cabinet Member for Assets & Investments
Minutes:
70.1 The Chair invited Councillor Busby – Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets & Investments to introduce report BC/22/43.
70.2 Councillor Busby detailed the purpose of the report and PROPOSED the recommendations contained within the report, which was SECONDED by Councillor Ward.
70.3 Councillor Lindsay asked why the three current depots couldn’t be demolished and rebuilt fit for purpose.
70.4 Councillor Busby responded that the current sites were not big enough or efficient.
70.5 Councillor Beer questioned the expenditure of the fuelling arrangements.
70.6 The Director for Operations clarified that fuelling takes place onsite.
70.7 Councillor Jamieson asked whether the merger would entail job losses, particularly office-based staff.
70.8 Councillor Busby responded that at the current stage it was too early to say, but it was possible that efficiency would increase with the existing number of staff meeting higher demands rather than cutting the workforce as waste collection complexity increases.
70.9 Councillor S. Barrett asked where the initiative arose from.
70.10 Councillor Busby confirmed it was the chosen recommendation from numerous officer proposals provided.
70.11 Councillor S. Barrett questioned whether any sites were being considered within Babergh.
70.12 Councillor Busby clarified that possible site locations would only be explored at a later if the project was approved.
70.13 Councillor S. Barrett queried whether the funds would be acquired out of current capital programs.
70.14 Councillor Busby replied that every capital project is required to stand and fall on its own, including financial viability. In addition, Councillor Busby clarified that no funds would be allocated from other current projects towards the proposal and that it would entail borrowing.
70.15 Councillor Ward added that the project succeeds a change in operational requirements.
70.16 Councillor Ayres voiced concern about moving facilities away from Babergh, particularly Sudbury, and requested if a site central to and between both districts could be considered.
70.17 Councillor Busby suggested that the arrangement could work better for Sudbury but that all options would require investigation before proposals were made.
70.18 Councillor Beer echoed the concerns of Councillor Ayres, discouraged borrowing, and questioned whether close consultation with the workforce would be employed.
70.19 Councillor Busby provided examples to refute concerns of a shift away from Sudbury and confirmed workforce consultation as noted in 5.7 of the report.
70.20 Councillor J. Osborne added an additional example of investment in Sudbury, conveyed workforce sentiment from a recent visit, and rationalised the improvement to building services through greater material capacity.
70.21 Councillor Jamieson requested clarification as to whether the £6million costs were attributed to land.
70.22 Councillor Busby clarified that it would be the total cost.
70.23 Councillors debated the matter. Concern was raised about travel distances however the proposal was also at the point of inception and dependent on investigation and viability. Current sites were acknowledged as insufficient, whilst efficiency-savings and land opportunities were highlighted.
By 16 votes for, 5 against and 1 abstention,
It was RESOLVED:
1.1 That £6m is added to the Council’s Capital Programme from 23/24 budget year to deliver improved depot facilities.
1.2 Capital receipts from the disposal of existing depot sites will be added to the capital programme in later years.
Supporting documents: