Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Evans and McBride and Councillors Wells and Canvin attended as their alternates, respectively.

Councillor Fawthrop declared a personal interest as an employee of British Telecom, also his wife worked for the Council’s Education Department and he had a child at a Bromley school.

To hear questions to the Committee received in writing by the Legal, Democratic and Customer Services Department by 5pm on Friday 19^th February 2010 and to respond.

No questions had been received.

(To follow)

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 10^th February 2010 be confirmed.

The Committee noted outstanding matters from previous meetings.  Reference was made to the meeting on 28^th January 2010 and members commented that they were still awaiting information on any specific reasons why social workers left jobs in Bromley. The Officers would follow this up after the meeting and ensure the information was circulated to the Committee.

A copy of the latest version of the Corporate Contracts Register is being circulated as a separate document, covering (i) contracts where the alert date is still in the future and (ii) contracts where the alert date has already passed.

The Committee noted the latest version of the Corporate Contracts Register.

A copy of the Forward Plan of Key Decisions published on 12^th February 2010 is attached.

The Committee noted the latest Forward Plan of Key Decisions, published on12th February 2010.

To hear questions to the Resources Portfolio Holder received in writing by the Legal, Democratic and Customer Services Department by 5pm on Friday 19^th February 2010 and to respond.

Two oral questions had been received from Mr David Hunter and Mr Tanner Lees.  These are set out in the Appendix to these minutes.

To note decisions made by the Portfolio Holder following the Committee’s meeting on 28^th January 2010 and at his special meeting on 19^th January 2010.

The Committee noted decisions made by the Resources Portfolio Holder following the Committee’s meeting on 28^th January 2010. 

It was also noted that the Portfolio Holder had held a special meeting on 19^th January 2010 when a decision had been taken concerning the sale of certain areas of land on the Ramsden Estate.  Councillor Nicholas Bennett questioned the need for such a meeting for this item, which had not been subject to scrutiny, when there was a PDS Committee meeting scheduled for later that month.  The Portfolio Holder advised that there had been an urgency factor to complete the sale by the end of January.

The Resources Portfolio Holder to present scheduled reports for pre-decision scrutiny on matters where he is minded to make decisions.

The Committee considered the following proposed decisions by the Resources Portfolio Holder.

Report DR10027

Members noted a report highlighting changes agreed by the Executive on 3^rd February 2009 in respect of the Capital Programme for the Resources Portfolio. 

The report also contained details of the approved new capital Resources bids and Councillor Fawthrop asked for the latest position concerning the rephasing of the conversion of the former sports hall at the Civic Centre into office accommodation.  The Deputy Director of Finance briefly outlined the situation and advised that this was part of a wider programme and also linked to the future proposals for the sale of the former Town Hall site arising out of the Bromley Area Action Plan.  Whilst provision for this had been included in the capital programme for 2010/11 it would not prevent the situation being reviewed as the Council’s future plans evolved.  Councillor Fookes asked why there was no provision included against Civic Centre emergency back-up and the Deputy Director of Finance agreed to find out the details and circulate the information to Committee members.

Councillor Fawthrop requested background details to the One Way Programme which it was agreed would be sent to him after the meeting.

Biggin Hill, Darwin, Farnborough and Crofton

and Petts Wood and Knoll Wards

Report DR10034

Biggin Hill Airport Limited (BHAL) had applied for Landlord’s Consent from the Council, which was a requirement under the terms of the lease granted to BHAL, to construct an additional apron area and a replacement parking area adjacent to the existing apron in front of Hangar 503.  The area in question was covered by woodland and a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) was in place affection a large part of the surrounding land.  The Chief Planner had advised that the proposed development constituted Permitted Development under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 and did not require planning permission.  In addition BHAL as a statutory undertaker was entitled to carry out works to protected trees, including felling them, where the trees were situated on operational land and for safety reasons. 

Councillor Fawthrop questioned the Council’s position in giving consent as he was concerned that so many trees would be felled.  Members were advised by the Director of Legal, Democratic and Customer Services of the legal position in that BHAL had permitted development rights and they could legitimately override the TPO in this case.  As these were considered minor works there appeared to be no justification in refusing the request.  Councillor Bloomfield, as one of the local ward members concerned spoke at the meeting and raised two issues concerning the lack of information about the trees affected and what he viewed as a loophole in the legislation around permitted development and requested that the whole matter should be revisited with more information brought back to members.  The Director reminded members that the issue for this Committee was solely about Landlord’s consent and that questioning permitted development rights was a matter for the Development Control Committee.  Members asked if it would be possible to include in the terms of any agreement for the replacement/and or replanting of trees by BHAL.

The Committee whilst not liking the situation accepted that Landlord’s consent should be agreed in this case but also asked that the Portfolio Holder take into account including in the conditions the possibility of saving certain specific trees of worth and/or undertaking replanting of trees where appropriate

Councillor Fawthrop recorded his vote against agreeing to extend the apron area and asked to be sent case law in respect of grounds for withholding/allowing Landlord’s consent in such situations, which the Director agreed to do after the meeting.

The Committee received monitoring reports on the ICT support and operations, Housing and Council Tax Benefit and Revenue Services contracts with Liberata.  Representatives of Liberata attended the meeting to present the reports.

Report DR10026

The ICT contract monitoring report covered the period August – December 2009, and Liberata representatives pointed out that whilst at the beginning of the period the performance levels had been at a lower level for various reasons in both November and December they had achieved maximum score levels.  Members were also informed that based on the latest figures this improvement had been maintained during January and February 2010.

Councillor Wells asked whether the problems that occurred over the Christmas 2009 period with the software package used by the Children’s Safeguarding team had been fully dealt with.  Part of the difficulties he thought had been because of the number of different parties involved and establishing who was responsible for what area.  The representative from Liberata assured members that a good working relationship had been established between all those involved to enable the immediate problem to be resolved within 24 hours.  All sides were clear about their roles and responsibilities and whilst there were underlying problems these were being worked on jointly to overcome any issues.

In response to a question on password issues, the Head of IT advised that there was an automated password reset system now operating but people had to register first to be able to access this.  She confirmed that the system was open to Councillors and officers and was available through Citrix. 

Report DR10022

Consideration was given to a report covering the level of performance for this service during the period 1^st August to 31^st December 2009 and Liberata accepted that during the year standards had been disappointing on occasion.  However, Liberata had signed up to an Action Plan to address these issues and considered they were now on track with improved performance and would meet their targets.  Particular efforts had been made to reduce the number of claims that had taken over 50 days to deal with and the error rate had improved with the figures for January 2010 showing below 4%.

Attention was also drawn to the recent refurbishment of the Customer Service Centre at Exchequer House which had made a significant difference to the service provided to customers.

Report DR10025

This report monitored the performance of the revenue services for the period August to December 2009.  Members were informed that it had been a challenging year in view of the recession and figures in the report had shown the in-year collection performance as being behind previous years.  However, the latest figures for this year on Council Tax collection showed a 0.11% increase compared to the same time last year and this was also the trend on Business rates. 

Liberata advised that they had also recently been promoting their services with stands in The Glades and photographs of the event were on display at the meeting.

A member drew attention to Appendix 3 of the report concerning an analysis of invoices and referring to some of the older debts from April 2009 asked whether interest was charged on these debts.  The representative agreed to find out the answer and report back to members.  Councillor Fawthrop referring to page 4 of the officer report in respect of Council Tax asked whether the percentage was based on value or volume and was advised that it was volume.  He commented that it would be useful to have both in future reports to see if they were consistent.

RESOLVED that the monitoring reports be noted, and reports continue to be submitted on a six-monthly basis.

Members of the Committee are requested to bring their copy of the agenda for the Executive meeting on 3^rd March 2010.

Report LDCS1035

Executive meeting on 3^rd March 2010

The Committee had no comments on the Part 1 reports before the Executive meeting on 3^rd March 2010.

The Committee received updates on the work of the other PDS Committees as follows:

(A)  CYP PDS Committee

Councillor Wells attending on behalf of the Chairman advised that there had been no meeting during this period and therefore nothing to report.

(B)  Environment PDS Committee

Councillor William Huntington-Thresher advised that they had held one meeting and among the issues considered was the Environment budget. Whilst it was pleasing to hear of a settlement with Thames Water the funds would go back into the contingency towards reducing the effects of the winter weather costs so far.

He also informed members that an updating report had been received on the success of the Borough’s Parks Friends Groups and Street Friends initiative. Nearly £300,000 had been received via external funding towards this project, with £30,000 from the PCT to promote Healthy Lifestyles.

(C)  Adult and Community PDS Committee

Councillor Judi Ellis reported on her PDS Committee meetings.  A special meeting had been held on the outcome of the Care Quality Commission Inspection and a further inspection of the Council’s actions in response to the Inspectors finding would be carried out in six months’ time.

At her Committee meeting the previous evening there had been an up date on Supporting independence in the Community and giving people more choices as to how their care would be provided.

Members were advised of the response to the letter sent to the Department of Health by Councillor Ellis concerning the Domiciliary Care Survey which just noted the concerns of this Committee.  A copy would be circulated to members after the meeting.

(D)  Public Protection and Safety

Councillor Tim Stevens advised that his Committee had not had a meeting during this period but that he and Councillor Judi Ellis would be visiting Bethlem Hospital prior to the meeting in March.  At that meeting representatives from the Health Authority would be attending to answer questions on the recent incidents of patients absconding from the Hospital. He expected both the Chairman of the Health Authority and/or the Chief Executive to attend.

(E)  Renewal and Recreation

Councillor Tunnicliffe had nothing to report as no PDS Committee meeting had been held during this period.

Report LDCS10036

The Committee reviewed its Work Programme and progress with Working Groups.  It was noted that three updating reports for the Data, Property and Section 106 Working Groups would be submitted to the meeting on 24^th March 2010.

Councillor Nicholas Bennett confirmed that a report back on the Communications Working Group would be going to the meeting on 11^th March 2010.

The Chairman to move that the Press and public be excluded during consideration of the items of business listed below as it is likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that if members of the Press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.

RESOLVED that the Press and public be excluded during the consideration of the items of business referred to below as it is likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that if members of the Press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.

The following summaries

refer to matters

involving exempt information

The Committee noted the decision taken by the Resources Portfolio Holder at a special meeting held on 19^th January 2010 to approve the sale of certain amenity areas on the Ramsden Estate, Orpington to Broomleigh Housing Association (Affinity Sutton).

(See report at agenda item 12)

The Committee commented on the following exempt report before the Executive on 3^rd March 2010 –

12.  Highways Maintenance (Major and Reactive) Contract Acceptance

PRE-SCRUTINY OF EXEMPT RESOURCES PORTFOLIO REPORT

The Committee carried out pre-decision scrutiny of the above report concerning proposals to extend the period and vary the Fraud Services arrangements in respect of the LB Bromley Partnership with LB Greenwich.

Key to Actions Column

MB    = Mark Bowen, (Director of Legal, Democratic & Customer Services)

LH     = Lynn Hill (Democratic Services)

JP   = Jane Pocknall (Head of Valuation & Estates)

PT   = Peter Turner (Deputy Director of Finance)

ORAL QUESTIONS FOR THE RESOURCES PORTFOLIO HOLDER FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

1)  From Mr David Hunter:

It is now one year on since my wife and I were shown around the Studio.  We were shocked then to see the appalling state of the building. Conditions now, especially with the severe winter we are experiencing, must be a complete nightmare.

I am specifically asking for the council's proposals since I suspect that any tender(s) would be unlikely in the current economic climate to shoulder the huge and what must be, rapidly rising costs single-handed!

What are the Council's current proposals for the protection, repair and preservation of the Studio?

Reply:

Terms have been agreed with Citygate Church for the building to be refurbished. The lessee will also be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the building with the exception of the main structure (walls, foundations and roof) for which the Council will continue to be responsible.  In the meantime the Council has been undertaking essential maintenance, in particular roof repairs, repair of sump pump, clearance of vegetation, repairs to rain water goods, renewal of lightning conductor and window repairs.

When the property was retendered, viewings took place in November/December 2008. At that time the building was in a poor condition because it had suffered extensive water penetration following the theft of lead work from the roof, which occurred when the Herbert Justice Academy was in possession under the terms of an Agreement to Lease. This Agreement was subsequently terminated by the Council in July 2008 and the roof repairs immediately undertaken by the Council prior to retendering. At the time of viewing, the building was wind and water tight and was in the process of drying out. As far as the Council is aware, there has been no further deterioration.

The re-tendering process resulted in the Council accepting a proposal from Citygate Church to refurbish the property and take a 25 year lease. Having worked up its detailed proposals, the outcome of a planning application and consent for listed building consent was currently awaited. It was anticipated refurbishment work should commence in the spring.

Supplementary question:

Mr Hunter said he was concerned about the costs as this was important information and wanted to know what the actual costs were.

Reply:

The Portfolio Holder explained that he did not have that information to hand but would ask the officers to make the figures public, so far as possible. 

2)  From Mr Tanner Lees:

At the meeting of the 28^th of January, in answer to a question about the building referred to as ‘The Studio’, in Beckenham, the Chairman explained that the company, ACAVA’s proposals had been turned down because they were insufficiently socially inclusive. However he was unable to answer any supplementary questions because he stated that he had no personal knowledge of the subject. I would like, therefore, to raise the matter of the supplementary question that was asked at that meeting.

Bearing in mind that ‘The Studio’ is a listed building and covenanted as a cultural facility, why were the proposals from ACAVA- a charitable organisation dedicated to the advancement of culture, with meaningful experience of restoring listed buildings- deemed to be inferior to Citygate- a fundamentalist religious sect, with no meaningful track record in community arts or conservation matters?

Reply:

The covenants allow this Grade 2 Listed Building to be used for educational, community and arts purposes. ACAVA’s proposal involved the subdivision of the building into artists’ studios. Whilst this would benefit the artists themselves, benefit to the wider community would be limited. ACAVA’s proposed budget for the project was insufficient for restoring the building to the necessary level. Citygate’s proposal includes a wide range of community activities and facilities aimed at people from all walks of life, ages and abilities. It is already providing some of these activities, but has limited space. Citygate also has experience of building refurbishment having converted and restored the former post office sorting office in Beckenham to establish its church building and it was able to establish that it has sufficient funds to refurbish this building to a good standard.

Supplementary question:

Mr Tanner Lees asked what sort of powers the Council would have to ensure the company kept to the contract and in particular the continuing provision of a wide range of activities for all sorts of people.

Reply:

The Portfolio Holder advised that the Council would still be the Freeholder and would have representation on the Managing Company responsible for the building.