Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor Tary, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Support, attended virtually so did not vote, move or second a motion.

To approve the Minutes of the last Executive meeting on 12 December 2024.

The Minutes of the last meeting on 12 December 2024 were approved.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

The Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, Councillor Avery, to respond to the petition referred from Full Council on 28 November 2024.

Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, Councillor Avery, gave a response to a petition on the Public Space Protection Order on dog walking that came to Full Council on 28 November 2024.  Under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policy Act 2014, Dog Control Orders converted to Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) in October 2017. 

By law, PSPOs must be reviewed every three years. The most recent review and public consultation had taken place between 29 August 2023 to 3 October 2023. The Council had received 561 survey responses and 1 formal response from the Dogs Trust. Feedback from the consultation was published on the Council’s website. The consultation took place at a time when there was an increased national focus on dog attacks, including a fatal attack on a resident by their American Bully XL dog in Caterham in January 2023.

The Full Council petition last November had asked RBBC to reconsider the current PSPO which applies a blanket 4 dogs per person rule across the borough and to reintroduce the 6 dog limit.

Councillor Avery confirmed that the PSPO consultation had been promoted widely, such as through the borough e-newsletter, on the Council’s website and via a news release and posters such as in local vet clinics and on noticeboards in the Council’s parks. The decision to reduce the number of dogs being reduced to 4 dogs being walked was in response to local concerns being raised. It was in line with the maximum limit introduced by other local authorities and recommendations by the RSPCA and the Dogs Trust.

The Petitioner, Jenny Clarkson, who attended the Executive meeting and the previous Full Council meeting, called again for the number of dogs allowed to be walked to increase to 6 dogs at one time across the borough, rather than the current 4 dogs as set out in the PSPO. She commented on:

·       A dog walking code of conduct that had been prepared by Surrey County Council in response to the Coroner’s report into the sad death of the Caterham dog walker.

·       DEFRA guidance on the number of dog walkers

·       Professional dog walking insurance.

·       The Kennel Club advice on walking 6 dogs at once.

·       Anti-social behaviour issues with walking 6 dogs.

A Visiting Member commented on the weight and breed of dogs that were being walked and commented that a large dog could be more of a danger to the public than 6 smaller dogs. Visiting Members noted the Council debate on the petition as set out in the Council Minutes from 28 November 2024 (Minute 45). They were disappointed there had not been a written report.

The Leader, Councillor Biggs, requested that Members use their networks to ask as many of the public as possible to respond to public consultations, such as PSPOs. Members and the petitioner’s observations as set out in the Council and Executive Minutes of the meeting could be included in future responses. The next PSPO review is due to take place in 2026.

Councillor Avery stated at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

The Executive Member for Sustainability and Leisure, Councillor Moses

The Executive received a report on the Harlequin, Redhill – Harlequin Options Analysis and Next Steps. This report provided an update on the multiple strands of work that have progressed over the past six months. It followed the Executive meeting on 15 August 2024 which had agreed to focus on interim service delivery options for the Harlequin theatre and arts venue.

Councillor Moses, Executive Member for Sustainability and Leisure, gave an overview of the Harlequin options report which set out the extensive work that had been carried out so far. Eight recommendations were set out in the report relating to previous community hirers, arts development, the Harlequin in the Warwick Quadrant and the proposal to create a new arts and cultural facility in Redhill.

Councillor Moses acknowledged the continuing strength of public and political interest in re-opening the Harlequin in Redhill. This was demonstrated by last October’s public engagement exercise and the number of members of the public attending Council meetings where the Harlequin was discussed, including the Extraordinary Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 9 January 2025. Councillor Moses thanked O&S Members for their contributions and the Harlequin Support Group for their proposals for a temporary theatre and for their feedback on the Executive report published as part of the agenda pack.

Executive Members noted that officers had worked with the head leaseholder of the Warwick Quadrant, Redhill to establish the severity of the Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete or RAAC. The intrusive RAAC survey and the building conditions survey were received in full during December 2024. The survey identified significant RAAC throughout the Harlequin and categorised much of the RAAC at a Red status level – highest risk of failure. These  findings, and the work that will be required to remove or remediate the RAAC, means that the planned maintenance programme for the building will need to be brought forward, with an expected overall cost of around £10 million. The report recommended a commitment to this funding allocation. Executive Members heard that it would take significant time to plan, procure and implement the building works which Reigate and Banstead Borough Council must do in conjunction with the Head Leaseholder.

The report also set out the Council’s proposals (Options Analysis, Option 2, paragraph 50 of the report) to progress an approximately 200 seater interim performance venue in The Rise, Redhill. This could be opened sooner than the estimated time of five years to complete the works to bring the Harlequin back into use in the Warwick Quadrant. It also has the potential to be retained as a second Redhill venue once the Harlequin has reopened.

Councillor Moses reported that external funding was being investigated, for example via the Arts Council and other public bodies. The Council has recently engaged with the Theatres Trust. The approach to seeking external funding will be informed by the Theatres Trust’s expertise in this area.

The Leader, Councillor Biggs, invited the Chair of Overview & Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Harrison, to speak. The Draft Minutes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

The Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski.

Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski, gave an overview of the Council Tax 2025/2026 report which was due to go to Full Council (on 13 February) to debate. The provisional Local Government Settlement announced on 18 December 2024, gave district and borough councils the option to raise Council Tax levels by up to 2.99% without referendum, as detailed in the Budget Report.

The reasons for Reigate and Banstead Borough Council’s recommended annual increase of 2.99% (£7.69 for Band D Council Tax) for the Borough Council’s element of the Council Tax in 2025/26 which were set out in the report.

Surrey County Council (SCC) was due to meet on 4 February 2025 and it was expected that the SCC share of the Council Tax will rise by 4.99%, which includes the adult social care precept. Any variations would be reported to Full Council. The Police and Crime Commissioner was due to meet on 3 February 2025 with a recommended 43.30% (£14).

Overall, Reigate & Banstead’s part of the Council tax was expected to be just under 11% of the combined Band D Council Tax (including precepts) – an increase of £111.61 or 4.60% in April. In addition, sums would charged, where applicable, for the parish and town councils, as detailed in the report.

A Visiting Member had a question about the three Band D Council Tax rates set out in paragraph 8 and 9 of the report; and the table showing the Reigate & Banstead and Parish/Town Councils basic amounts of tax (p337). The Chief Finance Officer undertook to clarify this in a written answer.

RECOMMENDED to Forward to Full Council

(i)             It be noted that on 28 November 2024 the Council calculated:

a) the Council Tax base 2025/26 for the whole Council as 64,564.30 [Item T in the formula in Section 31B(3) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as amended (the “Act”)] and,

b) for dwellings in those parts of its area to which a Parish precept relates: • Horley Town Council 11,286.60 • Salfords & Sidlow Parish Council 1,482.20 The ‘tax base’ is the number of Band D equivalent dwellings in a local authority area. Detailed calculations of the Council Tax are set out in Annexes 1, 2 & 3.

(ii)           Calculate that the Council Tax requirements for the Council’s own purposes for 2025/26 (excluding Parish precepts) is £17,101,146

(iii)        That the following amounts be calculated for the year 2025/26 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Act:

a) £69,546,145 – being the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(2) of the Act taking into account all precepts issued to it by Parish Councils

b) £51,772,854 – being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(3) of the Act.

c) £17,773,291 – being the amount which the aggregate at 3(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 3(b) above, calculated by the Council in accordance with Section 32(4) of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.

The Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski.

Executive Members received the report and annexes on the Budget 2025/26 and Capital Programme 2024/25 to 2028/29.

Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski, presented the final revenue and capital budget proposals for 2025/26 as set out in the report. Overall, this was a net revenue budget requirement of £22.354 million, along with a recommended Council Tax increase of 2.99% for an average Band D property in Reigate and Banstead.

Reigate & Banstead Borough Council (RBBC) had set a balanced revenue budget for 2025/26 without any requirement to use its General Fund Balances. This was a positive outcome compared to those local authorities in England who had received Section 114 notices and were in financial difficulties.

It was reported that the net General Fund revenue budget for 2025/26 of £22.354 million was lower than the previous year’s budget of £23.167 million. This demonstrated the commitment to reduce costs and find efficiency savings and income, where possible, to protect funding for front-line services.

The Council was also closer to its Core Spending Power assessment of £22.188m for 2025/26 – the Government’s assessment of how much Reigate & Banstead should be spending. However, the cost of living crisis alongside housing shortages and significant temporary accommodation pressures, all had an impact on the Council’s budget.

CPI inflation had reduced to 2.5%. This had helped reduce the pressure on overall prices. However, interest rates still remained high at around 4.75% which had an impact on the cost of borrowing and UK debt. There were also increased National Insurance costs for employers. RBBC’s share of the Council Tax bill was due to rise by 2.99% compounded by reduced levels of Business Rate income due to government formulae which determine how much of the rates can be retained locally.

In terms of Government grant funding, for 2025/26, RBBC was due to receive £0.747m million less than in 2024/25. These grants were announced in the Provisional Local Government Settlement published on the 18 December 2024. The Final Local Government Settlement was due to be published in early February. The Final Budget report would be adjusted, if needed, when it came to Full Council on 13 February, if RBBC received additional funding to cover increased National Insurance (NI) costs. The English Devolution White Paper was published by Central Government in December 2024. The proposals for Local Government Reorganisation were outlined in the Budget report as a “service risk and issue”. Updates to Executive would follow.

The Budget report also recommended the retention of the existing Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme for 2025/26 onwards, which provides means-tested reliefs to those Council taxpayers facing hardship. The scheme continues to benefit 1,900 households who will again qualify for the full 100% reduction award.

The Deputy Leader highlighted that RBBC has continued to maximise its capital financing strategy to reduce external borrowing costs and reduce MRP. It has achieved this by carrying out a detailed Capital review in 2024 which has allowed us to remove slippage from the programme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

The Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski.

Executive Members received a progress report on the Commercial Strategy during 2024. The report also recommended that the Executive approve the conclusion of the Commercial Strategy which had been adopted in two parts – Part 1 in November 2020 and Part 2 in December 2021. This set out two objectives in the 2020-2025 Corporate Plan – to be a financially self-sustaining Council and generate additional income to sustain services through responsible and sustainable commercial activities.

Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski, noted that work set out in the Commercial Strategy were now substantially complete or had become part of the Council’s business as usual. Also the updated CIPFA Prudential Code and PWLB lending terms meant that local authorities are no longer able to undertake new commercial activity to generate income.

The report was discussed at Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 23 January. Councillor Lewanski supported the idea of a working group to report on asset values and yields. He noted that the Committee’s views that the conclusion of the Commercial Strategy should be subject to the approval of the Council’s new Development Strategy to prevent any gaps in the Council’s strategic direction. The Executive also continue to receive quarterly property performance and budget monitoring reports.

The new Development Strategy was on the Council’s Forward Plan for March Executive. Cllr Lewanski provided clarification that this was not intended to take the place of the Commercial Strategy as development can no longer be undertaken by the Council solely for commercial purposes – it will therefore focus on other opportunities.

Councillor Harrison, Chair of Overview & Scrutiny Committee, noted that O&S had considered the progress report and the reports to the Executive and its Sub-Committee – the Partner, Shareholder and Trustee Executive Sub-Committee. There were O&S Member questions about managing commercial properties effectively. O&S had recommended that the Development Strategy (on the Corporate Forward Plan for March 2025) should be in place before the Commercial Strategy concluded.

RESOLVED – that the Executive AGREED an amended recommendation to:

(i)             Note the annual update on the Commercial Strategy and the observations and recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee

(ii)           Following a recommendation from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, approve an amended Executive Recommendation to conclude the Commercial Strategy as of 31 March 2025.

The Executive Member for Place, Planning and Regulatory Services, Councillor Michalowski.

The Executive received a report on the updated Reigate & Banstead Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in Planning (Annex 1).

Portfolio Holder for Place, Planning and Regulatory Services, Councillor Michalowski, introduced the report. The SCI is a statutory document that sets out how the Council will involve the public and planners who may have an interest in the planning and development process and decisions. The current SCI was adopted at Executive in March 2024.

Since then, planning officers (with Members input on the Local Plan Advisory Group), have reviewed the processes involved in publishing names and addresses of people making comments on planning applications online. Due to the increasing need to protect personal data and in line with national planning guidance, it was decided to stop displaying full names and addresses online and to publish the postcode only. It was also decided to withhold names and addresses from FOI or EIR requests.

As a further update to the SCI and for budget savings, it was agreed to cease notifying neighbours by post, applications for permitted development (known as lawful development certificates). Though not specified in the SCI, the report also suggested changes to internal processes relating to notifications on advertisements and tree works applications. It was noted that residents can sign up to email alerts on their postcode area via the online planning portal.

The SCI also updated legislative references such as the 2024 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

A Visiting Member and Chair of the Planning Committee, Councillor Parnall, noted that Members had been consulted and they were supportive of the changes.

The following observations were made by Visiting Members:

·       There was still the option for printed site notices. These could be more effective, such as in a town or local centre, where a printed notice can sometimes have better reach than direct mail such as to residents living above shops. The Head of Planning and Regulatory Services, Andrew Benson, confirmed that there was no proposal to reduce the number of site notices.

·       Organisations and businesses would still have their addresses listed. Local societies would be consultees. Only residents’ full details would not be published.

·       There was support for ceasing notifications relating to tree works but concern about extending this to advertisement applications.

RESOLVED – that the Executive AGREED:

(i)             That the updated Reigate & Banstead Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in Planning (Annex 1) be approved and adopted.

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Assets, Councillor Lewanski.

The Calendar of Meetings 2025/26 for the next Municipal Year was received by Executive. Annex 1 set out schedule of meetings which would go to Full Council for final approval on 13 February. Papers included a meeting time survey of Members and Officers on recommended start times.

Following feedback from Overview & Scrutiny Committee. Annex 1 reflected 7:30 pm start times for O&S and Planning Committees. Full Council and Executive meetings to start at 7.30pm; Executive Sub-Committee meetings (Partner, Shareholder and Trustee Executive Sub-Committee) to start at 6.30pm before the Executive meeting.

It was agreed that all other Committee meetings would start at 7pm.

Following a question from an Executive Member, it was noted that smaller individual Committees, such as Employment Committee, may agree different start times at the beginning of the Municipal Year in May should they prefer.

RESOLVED – that the Executive Agreed to Recommend to Council:

·       The draft Calendar of Meetings for the 2025/26 Municipal Year with amendment to Annex 1 to reflect 7:30 pm start times for O&S and Planning. Full Council and Executive start at 7.30pm; 7pm start times for other meetings.

Smaller Committees may agree different start times at the beginning of the Municipal Year should they wish.

To receive any statements from the Leader of the Council, Members of the Executive or the Chief Executive.

There were no Statements from the Leader, Executive Members or the Chief Executive.  The Leader noted that there had not been any further information as yet on Local Government Reorganisation as at end of January.

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:  Urgent business must be submitted in writing but may be supplemented by an oral report).

There was no urgent business.

RECOMMENDED that members of the Press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that:

(i)            it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act; and

(ii)          the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

It had been agreed by Executive earlier in the meeting that under Agenda Item 5 – the Harlequin (Minute 72 – see above) that the meeting would go into Part 2 and that the press and the public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that:

(i)             It involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act; and

(ii)            The public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.