Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of any substitute Members in accordance with the Constitution.

Apologies for absence had been received for Councillor Ritter who was substituted by Councillor Sinden; Councillor Hinton who was substituted by Councillor Harp and Councillor A King who was substituted by Councillor Absalom. Councillor Walsh would be slightly late.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 14 July 2022 were approved.

To receive any Declarations of Interest (including the existence and nature of any Party Whip).

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider the Council’s performance in Quarter 1 2022/23

Including

(i)            To note the Key Performance Indicator Performance for Q1 2022/23 as detailed in the report and Annex 1 and make any observations to the Executive;

(ii)          To note the Budget Monitoring forecasts for Q1 2022/23 as detailed in the report and at Annexes 2 and 3 and make any observations to the Executive;

(iii)         To note the update on the Financial Sustainability Programme (FSP) at Annex 4.

The Committee received reports on the Council’s performance for the first quarter of 2022/23 including Key Performance Indictor (KPI) reporting, as well as revenue and budget monitoring. The reports were due to go to the Executive on 20 October 2022.

The Portfolio Holder for Corporate Policy and Resources, Councillor Lewanski, introduced the KPI report by noting that the report outlined the performance of the Council from April to June 2022. Nine out of the ten KPIs were on target or within the agreed tolerance, the remaining red-rated KPI being recycling, which is reported one quarter in arrears. 52.4% had been achieved against a target of 60%, which had been set by the Joint Waste Management Strategy as a stretch target. However, the cumulative 21/22 performance of 55.6% was the highest recorded.

Members discussed and asked questions on the following areas:

Recycling – it was noted that the report stated that a reduction in residual waste per household continues to decrease to pre-pandemic levels, which may indicate that life is returning to normal. It was felt that this was an assumption, and the decrease could be attributed to residents’ increased awareness of recycling. It was confirmed that the report says, “may indicate” and so could possibly be due to an increased awareness of recycling and levels would be monitored and reported on in future quarters.

Street Cleaning – Members noted that the levels for street cleaning and detritus were lower than other categories of local environment quality surveys. It was confirmed that all categories were on target at Grade B, but that graffiti, fly-posting and fly-tipping were exceeding the targets and were at Grade A.

Affordable Housing – Members requested a distinction between social rent and affordable rent. It was reported that there was no reliable information on a quarterly basis splitting social rent and affordable rent, as this was reconciled at the end of the year.

Homelessness – Members asked for a KPI for the cost of living. It was confirmed that this committee has the ability to review and recommend additional KPIs to the Executive annually and that data on this issue is currently monitored. The Executive Member for Corporate Policy and Resources and Managing Director would consider reporting on the cost of living issues following the meeting.

Members asked what steps are taken to support those who do not meet the support threshold for homelessness. It was confirmed that there were categories for prioritising need for homelessness support and those that did not meet the support threshold were supported in other ways including signposting, housing plan, help into private rented accommodation and other information and assistance.

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Governance, Councillor Schofield, outlined the Revenue Budget and Capital Programme performance for Q1 2022/23. The projected full year outturn for the Revenue Budget was £19.558m against a management budget of £20.062m resulting in an underspend for the year of £504k (2.5%). Details of the more significant budget variances were set out as usual  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To receive the Environmental Sustainability Strategy Annual Progress Report and make any observations to the Executive.

The Committee received an annual update on the work towards the objectives set out in the Council’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy, adopted in July 2020.

Councillor Lewanski, Portfolio Holder for Corporate Policy and Resources, outlined the work that had taken place over the past year, challenges and next steps. In addition, the agenda pack included Annex 1 which set out the progress on Environmental Sustainability Strategy (ES Strategy) Actions and Indicators for 2021/22.

As well as carbon emission data, the priority topics were:

• The Council’s own assets and buildings

• The Council’s vehicle fleet

• Rolling out electric vehicle charging infrastructure; and

• Domestic retrofit

Several advance questions had been received. The questions and responses can be viewed here:

Document Advance Questions OS 13 October 2022 | Reigate and Banstead Borough Council (moderngov.co.uk)

In addition, Members asked the following questions:

Natural Environment: Ecological Enhancement – Members commented that the planting of new trees was commendable but that some of these trees were dying due to lack of maintenance and watering and felt that a resource was necessary to care for the new trees. It was confirmed that residents were requested to water new trees and that the Council relied on residents’ goodwill. Members observed that this was not feasible if the trees were well away from housing, such as in parks and open spaces. It was suggested by Members that new trees planted in these areas could be smaller trees which required less watering.

The Environmental Sustainability Strategy has an action encouraging trees removed due to new developments be relocated elsewhere in the borough; Members asked whether this practice was in actively place. It was confirmed that although this had occurred on a few limited occasions it was not regularly used and that this was an aspirational target.

Energy and Carbon: Renewable Energy – Members asked how retrofitting of homes was facilitated in older homes with solid wall construction. It was confirmed that retrofitting presented challenges and could not be made mandatory by the Council. However, there were several options available to residents including government grants such as the Sustainable Warmth Grant and officers asked Members to make their constituents aware of these grants. Options were not limited to cavity wall insulation, other options for solid wall construction homes were available such as external wall insulation, internal wall insulation, loft insulation and window and door insulation.

Although noting that the number of upgraded properties was low compared to the total number of homes in the borough, Members commended officers for their work on raising awareness of and facilitating retrofitting and commented that there had been some significant successes.

Members enquired whether the Home Upgrade Grant would be applied for. It was confirmed that this grant was included in the Sustainable Warmth package.

Effective Implementation: Communications – Members asked how the Council communicates with residents regarding energy saving tips and similar information. It was reported that information is available on the Council website and through the Borough News publication regarding issues  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To consider the Local Plan Local Development Scheme and make any observations to the Executive.

The Committee received a report on the Local Plan – Local Development Scheme. Councillor Biggs. Portfolio holder for Planning Policy and Place Delivery, explained that the Local Plan Core Strategy was adopted in 2014 and, together with the 2019 Development Management Plan, is scheduled to run until July 2027, subject to a review in 2024. Beyond July 2027 it will become an out-of-date plan and therefore it is important work is started on a new Local Plan that will set out the vision and policies for development beyond 2027. It is a statutory requirement for Local Planning authorities to have an up-to-date Local Plan and will ensure that the Council remains a plan-led authority.

The first step in starting a new Local Plan is to agree a Local Development Scheme or LDS, which is the formal timetable setting out the key work programmes from evidence-gathering through to consultation, examination and then adoption.

Executive and Full Council will be asked to authorise this in the next couple of weeks, together with the anticipated budget costs over the period. A new plan takes time to prepare. Much of this time will be used to prepare the evidence, engage with stakeholders, local communities, and Members, and prepare the policies. The Local Development Scheme in Appendix 1 of the report outlines how this will be achieved, by who and when. The LDS considers the risks associated with the programme and the types of mitigation measures to minimise these. Throughout the process, all Members will be provided a variety of opportunities to engage in the process, working with officers through the different issues, consider different options and agree the draft policies. This is just the start of the process.

Members asked the following questions:

Members asked what the advantages to a one-step plan are as opposed to a two-step plan, with particular reference to the Five-Year Land Supply. It was confirmed that the Council could choose either a one-step plan or a two-step plan. The detailed planning policies contained in the part two plan or Development Management Plan, such as the environmental policies, sustainability policies and biodiversity policies are those which set out how development should be carried out and would all be reviewed to consider up to date national policy, guidance, and legislation. This part of the two-step plan would take a similar amount of time to develop as a single plan and earlier implementation of such policies was an advantage of a single plan. The single stage plan would be less expensive than a two-step plan. With respect to the number of houses to be built, the Council could retain a number that it was comfortable with; the current number of 460 houses would remain until 2027.

Members felt that the contingency amount should only be used if absolutely necessary.

The Chair pointed out that other Surrey councils have taken a far longer time to develop their plans and would urge the Executive to ensure that the Council’s plan was completed within  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

To consider the Partner and Shareholder Actions and make any observations to the Executive.

The Committee received a report on Partner and Shareholder Actions. This report was due to go to the Executive on 20 October 2022.

This report was exempt and was excluded from the webcast. This item was scrutinised more fully under part 2 due to the confidential nature of the discussion held.

RESOLVED that the Committee:

Considered the Partnership and Shareholder Actions report and made its observations to the Executive.

To consider and agree the membership and scope of work of the Budget Scrutiny Review Panel taking place on 29 November 2022.

Members noted the timetable and scope of the Budget Scrutiny Panel due to take place on 29 November 2022 to consider and respond to the draft Budget proposals for 2023/24 due to come to Executive on 15 November 2022.

The Committee agreed membership of the Budget Scrutiny Panel as Councillors Avery, Blacker, Elbourne, Essex, Harrison, A. King and Parnall.

All Members were welcome to attend the meeting.

RESOLVED that the Committee:

1. Agreed the membership of the Budget Scrutiny Review Panel and the

timetable for scrutiny of the Budget for 2023/24 as set out in the report.

2. Agreed the scope of the Budget Scrutiny Panel’s work.

To consider and agree any changes to the schedule for Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Forward Work Programme 2022/23 and to consider the Action Tracker from the previous meeting.

Members considered the Forward Work Programme 2022/23 for the Committee.

An additional meeting had been added for 9 November to accommodate items which had been scheduled for 13 October but had to be postponed due to carrying forward the business from the cancelled meeting on 8 September. These items were the presentation on the Work of the Banstead Common Conservators and the presentation from the Organisation Portfolio Holders. 

RESOLVED that the Committee:

Noted its proposed Forward Work Programme 2022/23 and the action tracker.

To receive an update from the Leader of the Council, Cllr Mark Brunt.

Members received an update from the Leader, Councillor Brunt about the ongoing activities and key work ahead for the Council.

Points to note included:

·         The Financial Sustainability Plan would reduce expenditure by approximately £2 million, ensuring that the Council makes best use of its assets and maximises income both inside and outside the Borough.

·         Marketfield Way in Redhill continues to develop, with tenants beginning to move in from November. Most units had rental agreements in place.

·         Cromwell Road housing development of 32 new homes would help to reduce the housing waiting list.

·         A £4 million investment would be coming to the next Executive meeting to develop emergency and short-term accommodation locally, saving on costs for accommodating residents in temporary accommodation outside the Borough.

·         CIL strategic funding applications had been submitted from organisations across the Borough, such as the YMCA, charities and East Surrey Hospital which would diversify the infrastructure delivered by CIL.

·         Green spaces – work was underway for winter maintenance and Green Flag status had been retained by Memorial Park and Priory Park.

·         A Leisure and Culture Strategy is being developed.

·         The Refugee Support Team has been working to support Ukranian refugees and continues to support Syrian refugees.

·         Cost of living support is in place for residents through food clubs, food banks, the Community Development Group and partnership work with East Surrey Place.

·         Work continues on environmental sustainability and work will be taking place with local businesses to assist them to improve their environmental sustainability.

Members noted that strategic CIL is generated successfully from development due to the Local Plan and commended the Council on its good relationships with local charities and other local organisations.

Members asked whether there would be an investment zone in RBBC. It was confirmed that the Council had been approached regarding this issue but that it was not in a position to bid currently. However, the Council would continue to attract funding for projects which would benefit residents.

RESOLVED that the Committee noted the Leader’s update.

To consider any items arising from the Executive which might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution.

It was reported that there were no items arising from the Executive that might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules.

To consider any item(s) which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be considered as a matter of urgency - Local Government Act 1972, Section 100B(4)(b).

(NOTE: Under the Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution, items of urgent business must be submitted in writing but may be supplemented by an oral report.)

There was no urgent business.