Agenda and minutes

The Leader announced that there were two urgent items for consideration at the meeting: Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Reform Prospectus (agenda item 13) and Public Spending Reductions (agenda item 14).

Apologies were received from Councillors Janice Bamber (Customer First and Corporate Services) and Howard Doe (Housing and Community Services). 

The record of the meeting held on 8 June 2010 was agreed and signed by the Leader as correct.  

There were none. 

This report provided details of the Council’s draft Statement of Accounts for 2009/2010. The Council is required under the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2003 (as amended) to produce an annual statement of accounts that is subject to scrutiny by the external auditors.  The auditor will give an opinion on the accounts, and additionally interested parties have the right to inspect the accounts and make representations to the auditor.

It was reported that the final accounts showed a revenue surplus of £2.2 million. It was noted that the final position was a significant achievement and a reflection both of the successful efforts to maintain services at minimum cost and the robustness of the budgets that were originally set.

It was noted that the draft Statement of Accounts would be considered by the Audit Committee on 30 June 2010 for approval.

This report provided an overview of treasury management activity during 2009/2010. The report covered a number of issues including the Council’s treasury position as at 31 March 2010, performance measurement, the strategy for 2009/2010, borrowing and investment rates, the borrowing outturn, compliance with treasury limits and prudential indicators, investment outturn and debt rescheduling.

It was noted that this report would be referred to Audit Committee on 30 June 2010 for consideration and approval.

This report provided details of the outcome of the detailed assessment of air quality in Medway produced in August 2009 and the outcome of the 12-week statutory consultation which ended on 26 March 2010 on the declaration of three Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) (including the revocation of the existing six AQMAs).

The report set out the background to the assessment and included the responses to the consultation in paragraph 4 of the report. The report had been discussed by the Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 1 June 2010 and its comments and recommendations were set out in paragraph 4 of the report.

A Diversity Impact Assessment (DIA) screening exercise had been completed and it was noted that no adverse impact had been identified.

This report provided details of the draft Amherst Hill Design Brief which had been produced by the Council to satisfy a Local Plan requirement that a design brief must guide the development of the site and ensure that the site be developed in a manner appropriate to its sensitive setting and prominent location. It was intended that the brief be subject to consultation and subsequently adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). 

The report gave details of the site, which was located at the Chatham Lines, and owned by Defence Estates, and had been allocated for residential use in the Local Plan. The proposed public consultation would last for 6 weeks, exceeding the minimum level of public involvement, to ensure a level of engagement that was adequate to fully address the concerns of local residents. It would include a leaflet drop in the local area and a public exhibition.

This report provided details of a proposal to redesignate Rivermead School from a Hospital School to a Community Special School catering for statemented SEN pupils with complex needs aged 11-19.

The School currently provided education in three distinct ways: for children at the Medway Maritime Hospital; for children who needed home tuition as they were too ill to attend school and for children attending the school site at Forge Lane, Gillingham.

The report noted that some informal discussions had taken place with the school’s Headteacher and Governing Body and that they were fully supportive of the proposals.

This report provided details of the Council’s performance for 2009/2010 with particular reference to performance against indicators and actions agreed in the Council Plan 2009/2012. This included performance against the six priorities and two core values in the Council Plan and performance achieved against individual detailed actions and performance indicators relating to those priorities.

It was noted that of 116 key performance indicators, 64 had achieved or outperformed the annual target, 17 were below target but within acceptable variance limits and 35 had performed below target.

The report had been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committees and this was summarised in paragraph 4 of the report.

This report presented information on vacancies that officers had requested approval to commence recruitment for, following the process agreed by Cabinet on 7 January 2003 (decision number 9/2003).

Appendix 1 to the report provided details of the posts and included supporting Portfolio Holder comments.

This report set out the details of the Council’s contract for the Decent Homes Programme 2010/2011. An exempt appendix provided the anticipated value of works. The Council was required to ensure that 100% of its housing stock met decent homes standards (set by government) by December 2010. Awarding the 2010-11 Decent Homes works as recommended would ensure that this target would be achieved.

It was noted that the Procurement Board had considered the report on 9 June 2010 and supported the recommendations as set out in the report.

Reasons:

·               To ensure Decent Homes target is achieved by the December 2010 deadline.

·               To maintain continuity of works and maximise value for money using the existing tendered contract.

·               To continue to build the trust and confidence of tenants now that the decent homes programme has recommenced.

·               To retain a high performing principal Contractor and project team.

·               To mitigate risk issues in relation to the existing Mears Contract.

This report provided details of the Council’s proposed response to the Government’s proposals for the reform of the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) subsidy system. This would include the dismantling of the current system, to give each authority a one-off adjustment of debt and to allow rents and right to buy receipts to be retained locally. The Council’s proposed response was set out in appendix 2 to the report.

The Cabinet accepted this as an urgent item as Communities and Local Government (CLG) required a response by 6 July 2010.

The Mayor, in the absence of the Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee, agreed that the taking of these decisions could not be reasonably deferred, in accordance with Rule 16 (Special Urgency) of the Access to Information Rules (Part 2 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution).

The Vice-Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee, in the absence of the Chairman, agreed to waive call in on this report on the basis that this matter is reasonable in all the circumstances and to it being treated as a matter of urgency in accordance with Rule 16.11 of the Overview and Scrutiny Rules (Part 5 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution).

Reasons:

That the consultation response in appendix 2 to the report be submitted to CLG to ensure that Medway Council’s views are taken into account.

This report provided details of the recent announcements made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer concerning the emergency reductions of £6.2 billion in public spending and the further announcements in the emergency budget presented to Parliament on 22 June 2010 and provided details of the Council’s proposals in relation to the implications for Medway’s budgets.

The Cabinet considered this as an urgent item as the immediate reductions applied to the current budget and any delay in implementing recommendations increased the pro rata impact for the remainder of the year, and made achievement more difficult.

The Mayor, in the absence of the Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee, agreed that the taking of these decisions could not be reasonably deferred, in accordance with Rule 16 (Special Urgency) of the Access to Information Rules (Part 2 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution).

The Vice-Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee, in the absence of the Chairman, agreed to waive call in on recommendation 7.2 in the report on the basis that this matter is reasonable in all the circumstances and to it being treated as a matter of urgency in accordance with Rule 16.11 of the Overview and Scrutiny Rules (Part 5 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution).

Reasons:

The budget reductions announced by the Government require changes to the budgets agreed by Council so as to avert an overspend occurring and bring the planned expenditure for the Council back in line with the funding available.