To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Elissa Swinglehurst, Councillor Ivan Powell, Councillor Nick Mason, Councillor Toni Fagan and Councillor Stark

To receive declarations of interests in respect of Schedule 1, Schedule 2 or Other Interests from members of the committee in respect of items on the agenda.

None.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2023.

Resolved:      That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2023 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairperson.

To receive questions from members of the public.

Questions received and responses given are attached as appendix 1 to the minutes.

To receive questions from councillors.

Questions received and responses given are attached as appendix 2 to the minutes.

To receive reports from the Council’s scrutiny committees on any recommendations to the Cabinet arising from recent scrutiny committee meetings.

Feedback from the Connected Communities Scrutiny Committee (CCSC) that took place on 23 October on the Review and Comparison of the Full Business Case for both the Shirehall and Maylord Orchards as locations for the future Hereford City Library. The Leader thanked the CCSC for their work in forming the recommendations and confirmed that all Cabinet members have read the recommendations provided, it was advised that the responses will form part of the debate on item 7.  

The principle points were presented by the chairperson of the CCSC:

There were 12 recommendations and it was requested for Cabinet to respond to all of these before making its decision. It was noted that questions were raised about the strategic, economic, financial, commercial and management aspects of the business case and requested that the recommendations be considered before Cabinet can make an informed decision. 

The full table of recommendations and the responses given in Cabinet are listed as an appendix.

There were no other reports from scrutiny committees for consideration at this meeting. 

To present the full business case for the Shirehall as a location for the Hereford Library and Learning Centre (HLLC) and compare against the full business case for the HLLC at Maylord Orchards.

The Cabinet member for Community Services and Assets introduced the report and highlighted that Hereford library needs a new home as the museum is being redeveloped to make it a World class museum in heritage.  A review took place in June 2023 to find potential locations for the library and learning centre and identified two preferred sites, Maylord Orchards and the Shirehall.  In July 2023 Cabinet agreed a full business case to be considered against the existing plans for Maylord Orchards. 

In October 2023 capital funding was sought subject to Council approval and Stronger Towns Board subject to agreement. It was noted that revenue uplift would be required to meet the increased staffing to manage a larger library. 

It was noted that locating to the Shirehall would bring a valuable heritage asset back into continued community use.  It would provide a bigger floor, library and learning centre space than Maylord Orchards and bring together the library, adult learning, health and wellbeing and community services. It would also provide residents with access to sensory learning, digital skills and business development advice. 

Cabinet Members discussed the report and it was noted that:

The cost of renovating the Shirehall is a consideration but does not form part of the business case, which is focused on the best location of the library. 

The two buildings, Shirehall and Maylord Orchards, cannot be compared as they were built in different times (1817 and 1987).  Queried if the decision was taken not to place the library in the Shirehall, what would become of the building.  It was discussed that a key consideration is ‘where is the best place to put the library’. Noted that the Shirehall is an iconic building.  It is a civic building and by putting the library in the civic centre of Hereford, would provide lots of learning resource space and provides that building a long term purpose. If it was decided that the Shirehall was not the best location for the library then the Council would continue to act as custodian for the building. 

Noted that if the library was located in Maylord Orchards it may not be a long term option due to changing situations in terms of future retail and commerce opportunities.  Whereas the Shirehall is a civic building, which will always be used for a civic purpose and that correlates with the library having a permanent home. 

Noted that the Shirehall is an iconic building, and we now have the opportunity to use it to provide a valuable service to the public.  Commented that the BCR was positive and obtained through the correct processes. 

Noted the cost of moving the library service from Broad Street to either Maylord Orchards or Shirehall will require an increase in revenue budget, as the footprint of the library in both locations will be greater and the provision of the Learning Centre is a new provision. The revenue cost for Maylord Orchards is estimated at £515,973, and for the Shirehall, £390,077.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

To provide information in respect of the council’s contractual arrangements with Balfour Beatty Living Places and update Cabinet on progress made following recommendations made by its external auditors in the Auditor’s Annual Report for the year ended 31 March 2022.

Cabinet members considered a report to provide information in respect of the Council’s contractual arrangements with Balfour Beatty Living Places and update Cabinet on progress made following recommendations made by its external auditor in the Auditor’s annual report for the year ending 31 March 2022. 

The Cabinet member for Roads and Regulatory Services introduced the report, the principal points were raised.

The external auditors recommended that the Council establish the validity and contractual trading of BBLP.  External legal advice confirmed that the Council were not exposed and the contract was not invalidated by BBLP arrangements. 

BBLP company secretary has confirmed that BBLP has an active company status and makes returns as a dormant company under the Companies Act.  Further legal advice confirmed that the dormant company status was not unusual.

Confirmed that the parent company guarantee is in place within the public realm contract, the risks are recorded and monitored through the department risk register and reviewed monthly.

The Council have undertaken a fundamental review of the arrangements and confirmed these are legally compliant. 

There were no points raised by Cabinet members regarding the report.  

Group leaders gave the views of their groups. Noted this is a legal point and concerns over the BBLP contract will be covered in the next item.  It was noted as frustrating that it took Auditors some time to notice this point and requested that the reports for Cabinet follow the same format. 

In response to queries it was confirmed that clarification would be obtained from officers as to why the report does not include the environmental impact section. 

It was unanimously resolved that;

(a)        Notes the contractual arrangements in respect of the council’s public realm contract with Balfour Beatty Living Places Limited and its agency company status; and

(b)        Notes the recommendations made by external auditors in respect of this arrangement and the actions taken by the council in response.

To approve an extension of the public realm service contract with Balfour Beatty Living Places in line with contract terms and conditions and provide an update on contract management arrangements.

Cabinet members considered a report to approve an extension of the public realm service contract with BBLP in line with contract terms and conditions and provide an update on contract management arrangements. 

The Cabinet member for Roads and Regulatory Services introduced the report, the principal points were raised.

The contract came in 2013 for an initial ten years and a decision was made in 2018 to extend the contract by one year until 31 August 2024. Consideration of further extending the contract is now due.

There are a number of commercial and financial performance issues. The future operating model project is in progress and scheduled for a report in March 2024, these issues are being actively looked at. 

The contract contains the facility for the Council to issue a two year no fault termination. 

Cabinet members discussed the report and it was noted that:

Issues with BBLP were noted and it was queried if the current KPI’s would be reviewed.  In response it was confirmed that the KPI’s are agreed with BBLP and are not reviewed as frequently as they could be.  BBLP have been issued a warning that the KPI’s for next year need to reflect where the Council is now, not where the Council was 5 years ago.  BBLP may not agree to this and the Council would have to revert to the KPI’s set in 2021.  Confirmed this is a contractual decision and both parties have to agree to change the KPI’s.  However, it was confirmed that the Council would then look at other options if the performance received was not as expected. 

Group leaders expressed that the contract with BBLP was not satisfactory.  It was expressed that the BBLP contract has been mismanaged, not managed robustly and should be heavily scrutinised going forward. It was noted that it is important for the KPI’s to be reviewed regularly and updated with the view that new KPI’s should be agreed now.  It was noted that the Council should have more power to run the contract and there should be better preparation in place when a new contract is signed with a provider.  It was queried why there are no KPI’s for 2022/2023, why there was a reason for the decline in performance between 2020 and 2021 and why the minimum performance level is 9 and not higher. 

 In response to queries it was noted that:

• The performance data for 2022/2023 will be available in November 2023. 
• Performance dropped between 2020 and 2021 as a result of the method of calculation year on year. Confirmed further clarification regarding this will be obtained. 
• Regarding the performance level of 9, this was the key target for contract extensions and it is unclear why level 9 was set.  It was confirmed that BBLP have been achieving and above this base line. Confirmed this should have been reviewed and this target should have been made more robust.  
• Regarding being able to direct the contract, it was confirmed that it is a good contract  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

To establish required arrangements to transition functions from the Marches Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to commence from April 2024, following government’s announcement in August 2023 that they will no longer provide funding to LEPs with functions to be alternatively led by Local Authorities.

Cabinet members considered a report to establish required arrangements to transition functions from the Marches Local Partnership (LEP) to commence from April 2024, following the Government’s announcement in August 2023 that they will no longer provide funding to LEPs with functions to be alternatively led by Local Authorities. 

The Cabinet member for Economy and Growth introduced the report, the principal points were raised.

The Government communicated on 4 August their decision to longer fund Local Enterprise Partnerships and functions to transfer to Local Authorities from April 2024. The recommendation proposes establishing a joint committee of the Local Authorities made up of the leaders of the three Councils to provide the government structure required by the Government to oversee the transition arrangement. 

Shropshire Council remain the accountable body for now and going forward through the transition period.  It was confirmed there are no financial implications for the creation of a joint committee. 

It was noted that this is an opportunity to ensure the future services are locally focused in meeting the needs of the county’s heritage business.

There were no comments from Cabinet members. 

Group leaders gave the views of their groups. The transfer of central government funding to Local Authorities was welcomed.  It was raised that there was no long term funding to Local Authorities and it results in a competition, with only a small number receive the funding. Fairer funding should be achieved between Local Authorities and also within Herefordshire, with more areas of the County benefitting from funds being returned to the Local Authority. It was requested for the Leader to lobby central Government for more direct transfer of funding to Local Authorities and for a more transparent allocation of funding.  It was also expressed that consistency of funding streams is required from central Government. 

 In response to queries it was noted that:

• The comments have been taken on board and agree in the past, it has been set up for Local Authorities to compete against each other.  It is right to ask central Government for a framework regarding funding arrangements. 

It was unanimously resolved that;

a)     A Joint Committee is established with Shropshire Council and Telford & Wrekin Council to (i) oversee, manage and distribute the assets, functions and responsibilities of the Marches Enterprise Partnership during the transition period and (ii) exercise executive functions as required to enable the transition of LEP functions.

b)     Delegate to the Corporate Director for Economy and Environment, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, authority to agree the final Terms of Reference with partner councils.