Venue: Council Chamber, Arun Civic Centre, Maltravers Road, Littlehampton, BN17 5LF. View directions
Contact: Carley Lavender (Extn 37457)
Note: This meeting will now be webcast.
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillor Pendleton, who was substituted by Councillor Alison Cooper. |
|
Declarations of Interest Members and Officers are invited to make any declaration of pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this agenda, and are reminded that they should re-declare their interest before consideration of the items or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.
Members and Officers should make their declaration by stating:
a) the item they have the interest in b) whether it is a pecuniary/personal interest and/or prejudicial interest c) the nature of the interest
Minutes: Councillor Alison Cooper declared a Personal Interest in agenda items 6 [Additional Beach Hut Consultation] and Item 13 [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as a Rustington Parish and west Sussex County Councillor.
Councillor Andy Cooper declared a Personal Interest in agenda items 6 [Additional Beach Hut Consultation] and Item 13 [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as Vice-Chair of Rustington Parish Council.
Councillor Gunner declared a Personal Interest in agenda item 13 [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as he had family members living in the surrounding roads.
Councillor Northeast declared a Personal Interest as a member of Littlehampton Town Council.
|
|
Minutes: The minutes of the previous Special meeting of the committee held on 12 September 2024, were approved by the Committee and signed by the Chair. |
|
ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE MEETING IS OF THE OPINION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A MATTER OF URGENCY BY REASON OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES Minutes: There were no urgent items presented at the meeting. |
|
Public Question Time PDF 158 KB To receive questions from the public (for a period of up to 15 minutes)
Minutes: The Chair invited questions from the member of the public who had submitted their questions in advance of the meeting in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.
(A schedule of the full questions asked, and the responses provided can be found on the meeting’s webpage at: Arun District Council)
The Chair confirmed that thirteen questions had been submitted for this meeting.
The Chair then drew Public Question Time to a close. |
|
Additional Beach Hut Consultations PDF 127 KB This report presents feedback following consultation with Ward & Division Councillors, Town Councils, and Parish Councils regarding the ten previously identified potential additional beach hut sites in accordance with resolution of Minute 771 of the Economy Committee 16 April 2024. And seeks approval to progress investigations and public consultation on selected sites.
Additional documents: Minutes: (Councillor Alison Cooper redeclared a Personal Interest in this agenda item [Additional Beach Hut Consultation] as a Rustington Parish and West Sussex County Councillor.
Councillor Andy Cooper declared a Personal Interest in this agenda item 6 [Additional Beach Hut Consultation] as Vice-Chair of Rustington Parish Council.)
The Chair invited the Property, Estates and Facilities Manager to present the report to the Committee which set out options for potential sites for new Beach Huts to be built. The report followed a previous report submitted to the April 2024 meeting of the Committee where members instructed Officers to undertake consultation with Parishes and Town Councils and Ward Members and report its findings back to the Committee. The requested consultation was now complete, and the responses had been reported factually within the report. He confirmed that all consultation responses had been considered and had highlighted several matters which would be investigated further for any sites that were to be considered for further progression. However, at this stage, there was no change to the known barriers to practical delivery at any of the considered sites, as legal due diligence, scheme design, and business case testing was yet to be undertaken. The Officer recommended list of proceedable sites had therefore remained unchanged. It was expected that the Committee may debate the merits and impact of the representations which had been made, and potentially amend the selection of sites for further consideration. He explained that regardless of which sites Committee resolved should proceed, the Officer recommendation would undertake full legal due diligence and public consultation simultaneously as the next stage to progress this piece of work. The reporting back to the Committee with the findings of that public consultation and legal due diligence, where draft scheme layouts and outline business cases for those sites considered viable would be presented. He then drew members attention to the supplementary agenda item that had been provided, which had originally been published as exempt but was now available with a small redaction. He confirmed that the redacted words would prejudice the Council’s position with a separate potential land transaction, and it would therefore not be appropriate to discuss that element in open session.
Before inviting members to debate the Chair requested for members to propose and second the officer recommendations detailed in the report. The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Stanley and seconded by Councillor Northeast.
The Chair then suggested to members that at the end of debate, the committee took a separate vote on each site recommended. He then invited members who had indicated that they wanted to speak. The first member was Councillor Gunner, who started his speech by thanking all members of the public who had turned out to attend the meeting. He stated that when the report was first reported to committee in April 2024 he’d argued strongly against the proposal and since then, his view had harden. He did not understand why the council wanted to complete consultation on the sites as all of ... view the full minutes text for item 214. |
|
Budget Monitoring report to 30 June 2024 PDF 114 KB This report is to appraise the Economy Committee of its forecast out-turn against the 2024/25 budgets, which were approved by Full Council at its meeting of the 21 February 2024.
Minutes: The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer introduced the report, that covered the Quarter 1 outturn for financial year 2024/25 and advised members the forecast showed a £30,000 overspend against the committee budget, he confirmed that the variance was due to a £43,000 overspend on property and estates management for a project officer role to undertake the office accommodation review, which was slightly offset by income received from office space that had been leased in the Civic Centre. The table on paragraph 3.2 detailed the savings approved by the committee in 2024/25 budget setting process. Finally, he drew members attention to paragraphs 3.5 and 3.6 on page 18 Table 3, which showed estimated capital slippage on the Bognor Regis Arcade.
The Chair thanked the officer and then invited members to make comment on the report. It was asked why there had been slippage on the Bognor Regis Arcade project, the Director of Growth advised that this was due to a range of factors including resource, development of the scheme and alternatives being considered. He confirmed that the team had spent a lot of time working on the budget but there had been significant financial challenges to continue to overcome. In response to the answer provided it was asked if the council had budgeted incorrectly or what had specifically changed to cause the slippage being reported. The Director of Growth confirmed that when developing a project, officers try to understand the expenditure of the project over multiple years. For this project we haven’t incurred all of the expenditure as forecast for this financial year, and therefore that spending would move to the following financial year. It was then asked if the project would still be delivered on time or would this be dependent on where the spending fell, it was advised that a written answer would be provided for this question, it was then requested if that written answer could also include if there were concerns regarding team resourcing that would impact the remainder of the project.
As there were no other questions, members noted the report.
|
|
Draft Final Out-Turn - 2023/24 PDF 120 KB This report is to appraise the Economy Committee of its draft final out-turn against the 2023/24 budgets which were approved by Full Council at its meeting of 9 March 2023, subject to external audit.
Minutes: The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer provided members with an overview of the report advising the figures were still subject to final external audit. He referred members to Table 1 at paragraph 4.1 of the report where it outlined the Economy Committee's draft revenue final out-turn position for 2023/24, revealing an underspend of £494,000, advising that this marked a positive shift of £612,000 from the £118,000 overspend reported in Quarter 3. Main variances were outlined in paragraphs 4,3 to 4.4, drawing members attention to the economic regeneration slippage which was due to a budget provision that was made and was not required for 2023/24 relating to external funding from West Sussex County Council. This had been carried forward into 2024/25. Paragraph 4.3 included further details. The Capital programme showed further slippage, as detailed in paragraph 4.6. and paragraph 4.9 cross referred to Bognor Regis Arcade issue explained in the previous report. Referring to earlier questions raised on project spending slippage he explained that slippage was not the same as a project underspend and the council was developing how it reported capital project budgets and their ‘whole life project’.
The Chair invited questions from members where Councillor Gunner stated that in a previous Committee meeting, he had raised that the council had large amounts of slippage across many of its projects, which had led to delays, however he was told that this was not true. He went on to ask for clarity regarding if this amount of capital slippage that had been reported was to be expected every year or did the council need to change to stop this. The Director of Growth stated that the council did need to do better for its timings of its programme of projects as it often took an overly positive view on delivery. Councillor Northeast then asked questions relating to Table 1 where it detailed the £69,000 overspend on administrative buildings and facilities management what specifically caused this and in paragraph 4.3 there was a documented that £8,000 in delay computer software spend and that the housing management system would not go live until May 2024, is that correct or has it already gone live. It was confirmed that the £8,000 referred to the property and estates team use of the system as their asset management system, the delays seen with the project had caused an impact therefore on the committee’s expenditure. Regarding the overspend on administrative buildings and facilities management a written answer would be provided.
Members then noted the report.
|
|
Budget 2025/26 Process PDF 100 KB This report informs Members of the budget process for 2025/26 as required by Part 6, Section 2 of the Council’s Constitution.
Minutes: The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer advised members that the report outlined the process to be followed for the upcoming Budget 2025/26 and that members were being asked to note the report and provide any comment.
During debate it was asked if the budget process to be followed would include member consultation, it was advised that member briefings would take place, however it was important that members noted there would not be a list of savings presented as was seen in last year’s process and that the main document that members should familiarise themselves with was the Financial Strategy that had been agreed by Policy & Finance Committee on the 8 January 2024. Members were also reminded that reports would be taken to each service committee. Councillor Stanley stated that he was pleased to hear that briefings would take place again this year and supported the officer response on member consultation taking place as each committee received its report, advising that it was members choice to take part in each meeting for that consultation.
The Chair then obtained permission from the committee to invite non-committee member Councillor Elkins to address the committee, where he referred to financing for work to be undertaken for Ferring Rofe Car Park, he asked if there would be provision within the budget to move this process along. Officers advised a written answer would be provided.
The Committee noted the report.
|
|
This report details an approach to initiate the asset review approved within the Council’s Financial Strategy, and sets out proposals for establishing an Asset Review Working Party.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair invited the Group Head of Technical Services to present the report to members, where he advised that earlier in the year the council adopted its Financial Strategy to address its structural budget deficit, one of the strands of the strategy was a commitment to undertake a review of the council’s land and property assets. The purpose was to identify opportunities to save money, generate additional revenue and identify capital receipts where retention of the asset was no longer appropriate. The report sought approval to set up a task and finish Working Party as part of the review to identify those opportunity within the general fund assets. The review would also inform the first element of the review update of the council’s asset management strategy. The working party was intended to form a structured means of engaging members in order to provide recommendations to the Economy Committee for decision-making. He confirmed that the Terms of Reference for adoption had also been attached to the report.
The recommendations were then proposed by Councillor Stanley and seconded by Councillor Northeast.
Before inviting members to comment during debate the Chair stated that this review was an important as it was part of the council’s Financial Strategy and was important to highlight assets that would create an income for the council or to sell. He confirmed the previous review was completed in 2010 and was therefore now very outdated and he would be in favour of creating the Working Party to allow for this work to be completed.
The Chair then invited Councillor Gunner to address the committee where he confirmed that he was not in favour of creating another Working Party, he believed that the committee had the remit to complete the work required and as the council had already agreed to set up at least 3 other working parties for other reviews he felt it was creating unnecessary work. Councillor Stanley agreed that the work required to be undertaken for the review was important but reminded members that the committee has a full work programme agenda, so he felt it made sense to move the work outside of the committee, he was also in favour of allowing the working parties membership to be comprised of members from outside of the economy committee. He also highlighted that Working Parties meet in private and that allows for any private conversations to take place. In response Councillor Gunner stated that he didn’t disagree with private conversations needing to be had, however the committee could also have these conversations privately. Councillor Northeast added that he was happy to support the recommendations and was also supportive of the working party being formed with membership from the wider council membership.
The Committee
RESOLVED
2.2. that it approved the establishment of a task and finish Working Party entitled “Asset Review Working Party”, to review the Council’s General Fund Asset Portfolio, with a view to identifying opportunities for generating improved revenues, savings and/or capital receipts, with agreed terms of ... view the full minutes text for item 218. |
|
Corporate Cleaning Contract PDF 113 KB This report details the Council’s corporate cleaning arrangements and provides a recommendation for renewal of the corporate cleaning contract.
Minutes: The Property, Estates and Facilities Manager presented the report to members where he outlined that the report sought approval to enter into a new corporate cleaning contract under the ESPO Framework 263_20 with officers recommending award of contract to contractor B. He confirmed that the contract had been written on the basis of a performance specification in line with industry best practice and included the supply of necessary cleaning materials and consumables.
The recommendation was then proposed by Councillor Northeast and seconded by Councillor Stanley.
As there were no questions from members, the Chair proceeded straight to the vote.
The Committee
RESOLVED
2.2. to delegate authority to the Group Head of Technical Services to enter into a new Corporate Cleaning Contract under the ESPO Framework 263_20 with contractor B as set out in the body of this report.
|
|
Outside Bodies Update Minutes: The Chair confirmed that there had been no written updates received. |
|
For information purposes only. Minutes: It was confirmed by the Committee Manager that members had an updated Work Programme circulated to them at the start of the meeting.
Councillor Gunner asked for an update on previously agreed resolutions made by the Littlehampton Regeneration Sub-Committee, specifically relating to north of Littlehampton Art Project and the Officer proposals on St Martins Car Park and was there an update provided to members on these items. The Director of Growth advised that updates relating to the Art Project would be fed into the North Littlehampton Steering Group, but if Councillor Gunner could share the minute numbers with him, he would provide a written update on those for members.
|
|
Exempt Information The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution: -
That under Section 100a (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and accredited representatives of newspapers be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act by virtue of the paragraph specified against the item.
Minutes: The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Cooper and seconded by Councillor Lawrence.
The Committee
RESOLVED
That under Section 100a (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and accredited representatives of newspapers be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 3 of Schedule 12A of the Act by virtue of the paragraph specified against the item.
|
|
Little Stars Nursery, Ascot Way - Lease renewal proposal A request to permit the grant of a new lease to the existing tenant of ‘Land at Ascot Way’ with additional demise. Additional documents:
Minutes: (Councillor Alison Cooper redeclared a Personal Interest in this agenda item [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as a Rustington Parish and West Sussex County Councillor.
Councillor Andy Cooper redeclared a Personal Interest in this agenda item [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as Vice-Chair of Rustington Parish Council.
Councillor Gunner redeclared a Personal Interest in this agenda item [Little Stars Nursery Ascot Way Lease Renewal Proposal] as he had family members living in the surrounding roads.)
The Group Head of Technical Services presented the report.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Stanley and seconded by Councillor Northeast.
Members took part in a full debate on the proposed recommendations where all concerns raised were discussed in detail. Some of the concerns raised were, Rustington Parish having insufficient amounts of public open space, parking concerns and traffic build up during peak times, was the valuation of the land commercially fair and had other sites been considered. All points raised and questions asked were answered by officers.
The Committee
RESOLVED
2.1. Not to permit the council to enter a lease with Kirstie Louise Smith (t/a Little Stars Nursery) for a period for 15 years commencing 4 November 2024 to include the existing demise and an additional 17m x 14.5 m within the public open space known as ‘Ascot Way’.
|