Cabinet Member for Finance.
Decision:
It was RESOLVED:-
1.1 That funds be earmarked to the schemes as detailed in Appendix A of the report.
1.2 That delegation be given to the Strategic Director, in consultation with the Finance Cabinet Member and other relevant Cabinet Members and Suffolk County Council, to change the approved projects or identify new projects for earmarked funds to a limit of £20,000 per project.
Reason for Decision: To enable the specific identified projects to be progressed and the conditions of the pilot status to be complied with.
Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:
Option 1: Earmarking of funds as set out in the report.
Option 2: Funds remain unearmarked within a reserve.
Both options above have been considered and the recommended option within the report is Option 1, to allocate funds to specific projects. The reason the other option has not been recommended is because a condition of the pilot status being awarded is that the additional retained money should be invested in further growth initiatives. Leaving the funds within a reserve will not achieve the key aim of the pilot.
Any Declarations of Interest declared: None
Any Dispensation Granted: None
Minutes:
67.1Councillor Ward introduced the report and informed Cabinet that the report presented proposals for the use of the funds that Babergh would receive from Suffolk’s 100% Business Rates Retention Pilot for 2018-19.
67.2 An estimated total of 11.2 million would be allocated across the County with Babergh getting about 1.1 million. The figures were based on an estimate of business rate collection for this year. The actual collection may differ and so the actual amount received might differ slightly as well.
67.3 Councillor Ward went on to say that there was still an estimated £90,000 to be earmarked which would be decided upon soon. One of the criteria set by Government was that the additional monies retained should be invested in growth initiatives to increase the business rates base in the district. Each project had a summary pro forma and these have been submitted to Suffolk County Council. They will be developed into full business cases and these will be submitted for approval.
67.4 Councillor Ward detailed a very brief introduction to each of the pro forma.
67.5 Firstly for Belle Vue and Hamilton Road. These 2 projects were key to the regeneration of this part of Sudbury. These schemes would be difficult to deliver but both have unique opportunities to develop the retail, leisure and cultural offering and support the growing economy through additional jobs and skills.
67.6 Secondly the Delphi site in Sudbury - the money earmarked here will go towards supporting the South Suffolk Task Force in the undertaking of work to progress opportunities for the reuse of this site following the closure of the Delphi factory. Its remit was broad, to look strategically at the whole of South Suffolk’s economy. The Task Force would determine what work needed to be done going forward and these funds would support all of this work, along with match funding opportunities and public and private sector collaborative investment. Initially Babergh has commissioned an options appraisal and viability study which would present its findings to the Task Force next month. In parallel the new Anglia LEP in partnership with Delphi and government departments had produced a marketing brochure for international circulation to market the site to potential investors interested in maintaining the existing industrial use and particularly the workforce there.
67.7 The next two schemes are being done in conjunction with Mid Suffolk District Council. The first of these is the setting up of a central Suffolk Chamber of Commerce and the funds to be earmarked there were to provide seed funding to set up a self-sustaining Chamber of Commerce in central Suffolk affiliated to the Suffolk Chamber. This is the part of the County that currently doesn’t have coverage and consequently there is a lack of business representation, lobbying and intelligence sharing in the area. There is a launch window this year, but it does need support to get started and the Council have been asked to provide £15,000 towards support costs for each of the 3 years it’s expected to take to get this up and running.
67.8 The next item in conjunction with Mid Suffolk DC is the provision of an Inclusive Growth Engagement Officer and it is to recruit 2 fixed term posts to support the inclusive growth agenda which has been challenging for communities to understand and support. The Council needs to deliver a programme of engagement to provide support, confidence and guidance to communities in relation to planning for growth, communities and well-being agendas.
67.9 Councillor Ward then MOVED the recommendations in the report which Councillor Osborne seconded.
67.10 Councillor Ridley MOVED an amendment to recommendation 3.2 to remove the last six words of the recommendation as he felt that the delegation should not be limited to £20k per project.
67.11 Councillor Davis seconded Councillor Ridley’s amendment and also informed Cabinet that Mid Suffolk had amended their contribution to the setting up of a Central Suffolk Chamber of Commerce to 10k per year for three years and suggested that Babergh should fund the same amount.
67.12 Councillor Grandon asked if the title of the Inclusive Growth officer could be changed as it did not really reflect what the officer would be doing?
67.13 Councillor Lawrenson said whilst supporting these projects he felt strongly that as the Council had a lot of opportunities with significant sums of money coming in to the Council he would like the Council to set aside this money over the next eight years so that the Council could deliver the sort of projects that would transform the landscape for places like Sudbury.
67.14 Councillor Hinton asked why further funding was needed to facilitate Angel Court and requested that the proformas were circulated to all councillors so that they could see the background to the schemes.
67.15 In response Councillor Ward stated that the funding was there to allocate money because Angel Court was a significant development in Hadleigh but it was going to be 100% affordable housing and would need some funding to kick start and to progress that development. He also agreed that the proformas should be circulated to all councillors.
67.16 The amendment to remove the last six words of recommendation 3.2 and to alter the funding to the Central Chamber of Commerce to 10k per year for three years was PUT to the meeting and CARRIED.
It was Resolved:-
(i) That funds be earmarked to the schemes as detailed in Appendix A of the report subject to the figure in Item 5 (Establishment of a Central Suffolk Chamber of Commerce) being amended to £30K.
(ii) That the Strategic Director, in consultation with the Finance Cabinet Member and other relevant Cabinet Members and Suffolk County Council be granted delegation to change the approved projects or identify new projects for earmarked funds.
Reason for Decision:
To enable the specific identified projects to be progressed and the conditions of the pilot status to be complied with.
Supporting documents: