Meeting Details

The Chair announced that he had agreed to consider the recommendation made by the Scrutiny Panel at its meeting on 25 January 2022 in respect of the Youth Zone as an urgent item.  The urgency arose from the need to consider the recommendations before the next meeting of the Cabinet on 9 March 2022.

Councillor Laws, Portfolio Holder for Economy, Business and Heritage, explained the process by which projects had been selected for funding through the Town Deal by the Town Deal Board.  This had led to a set of viable schemes being brought forward for funding which met the criteria set by government. 

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, explained that Cabinet supported the principle of a Youth Zone but that a site and a realistic funding stream needed to be identified. He noted that the Scrutiny Panel had effectively reached the same conclusion.

The Cabinet was supportive of the recommendations pf the  Scrutiny Panel and thanked the Panel for its work. It considered that they should be expanded and further detail added to give greater clarity.


RESOLVED that:-

• Cabinet thanks the Scrutiny Panel for their work in respect of a potential Youth Zone.
• Cabinet notes that there appears to be agreement a Youth Zone cannot proceed at this time.  The opportunity for a Youth Zone was explored extensively but the Youth Zone was removed from the Town Deal Fund bid in early 2021 due to a lack of clarity around identifying a suitable site, the capital financing shortfall and the annual running costs.
• The recommendation from Cabinet on 13 October 2021 asked for a broad consensus on future funding, an agreed site, and a solution to incorporating the £400,000 or above annual cost in the budget to be identified.  The lack of specific recommendations on these leads Cabinet to deduce that the Panel agrees that there is no current acceptable way of incorporating a Youth Zone in the budget’s Medium Term Financial Forecast.
• Cabinet fully agrees with the recommendation that, in the short to medium-term, the Council cooperates with Essex County Council to boost youth services  throughout the Borough, such as those at the Town House, supporting these and an increase in outreach activities.
• Cabinet notes and agrees that the aspiration for a Youth Zone had cross-party support in principle.  Cabinet accepts the Panel’s recommendation that an ambition be maintained for a Youth Zone to be completed in Colchester Borough by 2027. However, to achieve this target a suitable site will need to be identified quickly and gain wide cross-party Councillor support as due to the nature of long term planning and master-planning the necessary land will need to be reserved.
• Cabinet accepts the recommendation that the Council continue to engage with Onside to outline the Council’s ambitions and expectations, and to understand Onside’s criteria for optimum site selection and critical issues  for inclusion in a business case for a Youth Zone serving Colchester Borough. However Cabinet is disappointed that the Scrutiny Panel have failed to suggest any specific potential sites.
• Cabinet accepts the recommendation that the Council engages with One Colchester Partnership to take the ambition of a Youth Zone from principle to reality, including ways to gain contributions from partners but it should be noted One Colchester does not have the necessary financial resources itself for a project of this magnitude.
• Cabinet agrees with the Panel’s comment that, for a Youth Zone to successfully serve the whole Borough, the concomitant public or project-specific transport plan for the proposed location must be comprehended, costed and funded to guarantee that a future Youth Zone in the Borough is accessible to all.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 17 November 2021 be confirmed as a correct record.  

Councillor Lissimore (as Chair of the North Essex Parking Partnership) declared a non-pecuniary interest in the following item pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 7(5).

Mr Orton addressed the Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) to express his concern about the condition of the Town Centre.  He had been a resident of Colchester for thirty years and cared about the town.  He had been raising his concerns with the Council since 2015. The bid for City Status would fail unless this was addressed.  The Council should form a small team dedicated to addressing these issues. 

Councillor Crow, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Sustainability, explained that he recently undertaken a walk round the town centre with Councillor Scott, the Portfolio Holder from Essex County Council, and had highlighted a number of issues which he knew were of concern to Mr Orton.  This would lead to some of the problems being addressed. The Town Centre manager was also addressing a number of particular problem sites. 

Councillor Laws, Portfolio for Economy, Business and Heritage, stressed that the political groups and various levels of government had never been more united on how to improve the public realm in the town centre, and Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, stressed the importance of enforcement action.

Councillor Harris attended remotely and with the consent of the Chair addressed Cabinet.  The ward Councillors from Berechurch and Old Heath and the Hythe had jointly written to the Prime Minister asking him to act on the principles set out in his speech in October 2021 on preventing development on greenfield sites by stopping the development on the Middlewick Ranges. He also sought an update on whether there had been any progress on developing a nature reserve or country park on the Middlewick site.

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, explained that he was writing in similar terms following a request from the Local Plan Committee.  Budget had been allocated for the creation of a nature reserve or country park at Middlewick. Councillor Ellis, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning, explained that the Council was awaiting the final Inspector’s report on section 2 of the Local Plan before committing the funding.  

Councillor Lissimore, Portfolio Holder for Resources, highlighted that Middlewick had been allocated as a site in the Local Plan by the previous administration and the suggestion for a nature reserve or country park had been raised through an amendment brought forward by the Conservative group.

Councillor Lilley attended remotely and with the consent of the Chair addressed the Cabinet.  Whilst the new electric charging points in Priory Street were welcomed, he noted that users had to pay for parking and for the electricity, which might deter use. Obstructive parking on pavements remained an issue throughout Colchester.  It was appreciated that legislation was needed to enable the Parking Partnership to address this, but could the Portfolio Holder lobby the government on this issue.

Councillor Crow, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Sustainability, explained that he felt paying for parking and electricity to use the charging points was reasonable but he would raise the issue with officers.  Councillor Laws, Portfolio Holder for Economy, Business and Heritage, highlighted that officers were looking into a number of environmental schemes designed to encourage alternative methods of transport and were seeking to increase the use of cycles by the delivery sector. Councillor Lissimore, Portfolio Holder for Resources, explained that the North Essex Parking Partnership was doing what it could to address obstructive parking but was awaiting legislation.  Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, explained that it would be useful if guidance on the issue could be circulated to all Councillors.

Councillor King attended remotely and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the Cabinet. In view of  cost of living crisis, would the Cabinet make representations to government that they should intervene and provide more help for the vulnerable.  Some residents would be choosing between heating and paying Council Tax.  Had the Cabinet considered this in setting the budget and could it publish any analysis it had undertaken?  What was the Leader’s view of issues surrounding the Prime Minister in respect of compliance with Covid regulations?

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, explained that the Council did much valuable work supporting vulnerable residents.  Extra funding had been provided which residents in need could claim and there had been changes to the taper. There had been a small increase in enquiries to the Council following the end of the Universal Credit uplift, but no long term impact.  In terms of the issues around compliance with Covid regulations by senior politicians, he had made it clear he was disappointed by what appeared to have happened, but it was important that the facts were estabilshed before reaching conclusions.

Councillor Lissimore, Portfolio Holder for Resources, highlighted the work undertaken by the Council’s officers to support residents.  As well as providing help through the Council, they signposted residents to other sources of help.  A dedicated area of the website contained very clear advice on what help was available.  The Community Hub set up Colchester 360 provided help for those without access to digital services. Whilst there was much concern about the impact of inflation and e cost of living crisis, the Council had the necessary polices and arrangements in place to ensure residents were given the necessary help.

Councillor Scordis attended and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the Cabinet.  In respect of Middlewick, the root cause of the problem was that the Ministry of Defence had decided to sell the site. Concern was expressed about the impact of graffiti in many areas of Colchester. This was a particular problem in New Town and the Hythe.  Despite being cleaned, graffiti reappeared quickly.  The Council should consider a strategy to deal with graffiti based on the following:-
• The use of professional street artists;
• The introduction of light sensors in particular problem areas;
• Better liaison with Greater Anglia to lobby for more ticketing checks and other measures at Colchester Town station.
Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, Councillor Laws, Portfolio Holder for Economy Business and Heritage and Councillor Crow, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Sustainability, responded and indicated their support for elements of the proposed Strategy, in particular the greater liaison with Greater Anglia, which it was felt could have wider benefits.

The Chief Operating Officer submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member. 

Councillor Lissimore, Portfolio Holder, presented the report and thanked officers for their hard work in bringing forward a balanced budget in what had been a very difficult year, with challenges of Covid 19 and inflation.  Thanks were also extended to the Scrutiny Panel for its work in scrutinising the budget proposals. 

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The 2022/23 Revenue Budget and revised Medium Term Financial Forecast as set out in Appendix A of the Chief Operating Officer’s report be approved.

(b) The budget resilience statement and forecast level of balances set out in Appendix B of the Chief Operating Officer’s report be noted.
 
(c) The Treasury Management Strategy Statement 2022/23 to 2025/26 set out in Appendix C of the Chief Operating Officer’s report be approved.

RECOMMENDED to COUNCIL

(a) The 2022/23 revenue budget requirement of £21.875m;

(b) Colchester’s element of the Council Tax at £205.47 per Band D property being an increase of £4.95.

REASONS

To balance the 2022/23 budget and revise the Medium Term Financial Forecast.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

Councillor Dundas (as a member of Stanway Parish Council) declared a non-pecuniary interest in the following item pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 7(5).

The Chief Operating Officer submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member. 

Councillor T. Young attended and with the consent of the Chair, addressed Cabinet in respect of the Heart of Greenstead project.  It was vital that funding was allocated to this project which would improve and enhance facilities in Greenstead.   This was a once on a lifetime opportunity.  It was important that as the project went forward that the views of residents were listened to.

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, stressed that he fully supported the Heart of Greenstead project and that he appreciated the need for residents’ views to be heard and acted on.  The Capital Programme overall was a very ambitious programme which would a very real difference to Colchester in the long term.

RECOMMENDED to COUNCIL 

(a) The Capital Strategy set out in Appendix A of the Chief Operating Officer’s report.

(b) The reset capital programme 2022/23 to 2025/26 as set out in Appendices B and C of the Chief Operating Officer’s report subject to resolutions (a) and (b) below.

RESOLVED that:-

(a) Approval of the Town Deal schemes in the Reset Capital Programme be conditional on project business cases being approved by Cabinet, and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

(b) Further advances to Council companies be reviewed in the light of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities consultation on minimum revenue provision as set out in Section 6 of the Chief Operating Officer’s report.

REASONS

To take forward continuing investment in Colchester, in the interests of regeneration and the health, social and economic wellbeing of residents and how they are housed, local businesses and the local economy and the attractiveness of Colchester as a destination. 

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

A reduced Capital Programme would reduce the benefits investments will provide in the health and wellbeing of Colchester, impacting regeneration, the quality of services, the accessibility of housing and the state of the public realm, regeneration and economic recovery.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and Improvement Services submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that authority to award the contract to the preferred supplier for Microsoft Licensing, under the CCS Microsoft Cloud Services Aggregation opportunity, be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Resources, in consultation with the Assistant Director Corporate and Improvement Services. 

REASONS

The existing contract period is coming to an end and a new licensing contract must be in place to continue to use the business tools and services the Council, CBH, and CCHL rely upon.

Utilising the aggregation opportunity outlined ensures that the procurement is compliant and provides best value through maximising our volume-based buying power; 

Delegating authority to the Portfolio Holder and Assistant Director for Corporate and Improvement enables the Council to agree the new contract within required timescales following the procurement exercise.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

Consideration was given to seek approval from Cabinet at the point of award of contract under the aggregated procurement but the timeline for this means that we would not have sufficient time at the point the award of contract is required. 

The decision could be taken to run a separate procurement process to contract for licences separately and not take part in this aggregation. This is likely to lead to higher pricing and increase the costs to the Council of running the procurement exercise.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and Improvement Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that authority to award the contract to the Preferred Supplier, under the CCS Framework RM3808 – Network Services 2, be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Resources in consultation with the Assistant Director Corporate and Improvement Services.

REASONS

The existing contract period is coming to an end and the Council must undertake a procurement exercise.

Utilising the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) Framework, agreement RM3808 ensures that the procurement is compliant and that all major suppliers of a Microsoft Teams based service are engaged and provided with the opportunity to submit a tender; helping ensure best value and deliver the best solution.

Delegating authority to the Portfolio Holder and Assistant Director for Corporate and Improvement enables the Council to agree the new contract within required timescales following the procurement exercise.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

Consideration was given to seek approval from Cabinet at the point of award of contract under the aggregated procurement but the timeline for this means that we would not have sufficient time at the point the award of contract is required.

The decision could be taken to conduct a full OJEU compliant tender process. This would be highly unlikely to provide any added value in terms of options or price and would significantly increase the timescales for delivery and the cost to the council of running the procurement exercise.

Cabinet considered minute 33 from the meeting of the Policy Panel of 24 November 2021, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor T. Young attended and with the consent of the Chair addressed the Cabinet to explain that his casework had increased very significantly as a consequence of the loss of the Universal Credit Uplift, combined with the impact of Christmas.  This was resulting in hunger and desperation.  Whilst it was acknowledged that the Council did great work in addressing these issues, more needed to be done as the extremes of poverty were getting worse and returning to levels seen before the introduction of the minimum wage. These issues also had an impact on the mental health of residents.  Consideration should be given to putting greater resources into the teams who addressed these issues. 

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, stressed that he was very proud of the work the Council undertook to help residents in need.  He would be willing to consider requests for more resources where this was highlighted by the relevant teams. 

Councillor Lissimore, Portfolio Holder for Resources, thanked Councillor Young for his comments and highlighted the very quick decision making by officers which enabled help to be given to residents at the earliest point.  The introduction of a dedicated area of the website providing clear advice on the help and benefits available was highlighted, as was the Community Hub which provided drop in advice.  A member briefing session had been provisionally scheduled for 1 March 2022.

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The report and appendix submitted to the Policy Panel be circulated to all elected members of the Council;
(b) An all-member briefing be held in February or March 2022 to provide further information on Council mitigations and outcome data;
(c) Cabinet considered the report and the comments and deliberations of the Policy Panel.

REASONS

Cabinet supported the recommendations of the Policy Panel.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

It was open to the Cabinet not to agree the Policy Panel recommendations or to agree them subject to amendment.

The Assistant Director, Place and Client Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Ellis, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning introduced the report, which was the culmination of considerable high quality work by officers from the Council and Colchester Borough Homes.  The HRA Business Plan set spending priorities for the Housing Revenue Account in line with local demand and need.  Whilst the scale of the borrowing on the HRA was large it was offset against the housing stock.  The Business Plan provided for investment in the housing stock, improving the living conditions of tenants, improving energy efficiency and increasing the stock of new homes.  This Business Plan would replace the previous Business Plan published in 2013.  It provided short and medium term objectives and a long term 30 year financial forecast. 

RESOLVED that the revised Housing Revenue Account Business Plan 2022 to 2052 be approved.

REASONS

The HRA Business Plan sets out the Councils strategic plan for managing and maintaining the Borough’s social housing stock. It sets out in detail the council’s short to medium term plans and priorities for its housing and asset management services (5 years) and provides a long term (30 year) forecast on stock investment and financial planning.

The HRA Business Plan shows a sound and sensible balance for the priorities of the Council being advanced over the Business Plan period. It gives an economically sustainable strategy for which to go forwards, meeting the statutory health and safety requirements, improving the decency of homes, providing more homes and starting the journey towards carbon neutrality. This is a good framework from which to make decisions on a daily basis moving forwards, aligned with the Strategic Plan and Council priorities.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

To continue with the existing plan but this is out of date and does not reflect the Councils current priorities for delivery of new affordable housing or maintaining its existing stock.

To start the HRA Business Plan review afresh, however, this would not reach any better outcome and would delay ongoing work and planning.

The Assistant Director, Place and Client Services,  submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The 2022/23 HRA revenue estimates as set out in Appendix A of the Assistant Director’s report be approved.

(b) The dwelling rents as calculated in accordance with central Governments rent policy (set out in paragraph 5.7 of the Assistant Director’s report) be approved.

(c) The HRA revenue funded element of £7,855,100 included within the total management fee for Colchester Borough Homes (CBH) (set out in paragraph 5.14 of the Assistant Director’s report) be approved.

(d) The revenue contribution of £3,979,300 to the Housing Investment Programme (HIP) included in the budget (paragraph 5.29 of the Assistant Director’s report) be noted.

(e) The HRA balances position in Appendix B of the Assistant Director’s report be noted.

(f) The Medium Term Financial Forecast (MTFF) set out at Appendix C and the 30 Year HRA financial position set out at Appendix E of the Assistant Director’s report be noted.

REASONS

Financial Procedures require the Assistant Director for Place and Client Services to prepare detailed HRA estimates for approval by the Cabinet, setting the new rent levels for the new financial year.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

The Assistant Director, Place and Client Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member. 

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The Housing Investment Programme for 2022/23 be approved

(b) The Capital Medium Term Financial Forecast (CMTFF) set out at Appendix A of the Assistant Director’s report be noted.

REASONS

(a) Each year as part of the process to agree the Council’s revenue and capital estimates the Cabinet is required to agree the allocations to the Housing Stock Investment Programme. These allow for work to be undertaken to maintain, improve, and refurbish the housing stock and its environment.

(b) Members annually agree to accept a proposed 5 year Housing Investment Programme (HIP) in principle as the framework for procuring housing related planned works, improvements, responsive and void works and cyclical maintenance. 

(c) The proposed investment programme is linked to the Asset Management Strategy (AMS) and reviewed annually in the light of available resources and for each annual allocation to be brought to Cabinet for approval as part of the overall HIP report. 

(d) The Colchester Borough Homes (CBH) Board have considered the content of the Cabinet report submitted and is now seeking approval for the 2022/23 Capital programme.

(e) The Assistant Director’s report seeks the release of funds under grouped headings as described in the AMS and supported by the Management Agreement dated 9th August 2013, which governs the contractual relationship between Colchester Borough Council (CBC) and CBH.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and Improvement Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that performance against Key Performance Indicators be noted and it be noted that where Key Performance Indicators have not been met that appropriate corrective action has been taken. 

REASONS

To review half year performance for 2021 – 2022 and ensure robust performance management of key Council services.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and Improvement Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that satisfactory delivery against the Strategic Plan Action Plan be confirmed and it be noted that the Council has made satisfactory progress in meeting its strategic goals.  

REASONS

To ensure the Council has robust performance management of delivery against key strategic goals.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and Improvement Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that the draft Councillor Development Policy and Councillor Development Strategy be approved.

RECOMMEDED to COUNCIL that the Councillor Development Policy be adopted.

REASONS

The Councillor Development Policy needs to be reviewed to ensure it remains relevant and up to date.  The updated policy proposed the introduction of a Councillor Development Strategy.

Both the Councillor Development Policy and Strategy are key documents that will support the Council’s bid for reaccreditation for the Councillor Development Charter. The benefits of the Charter are that it demonstrates that the Council’s member development processes are in line with good practice.  This provides reassurance to current and potential members, and to other external inspections such as Peer Reviews. It also provides a reassurance to residents that their elected representatives are provided with effective support to enable them to undertake their roles and responsibilities effectively

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were proposed.

The Assistant Director, Place and Client Services, submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Laws, Portfolio Holder for Economy, Business and Heritage, introduced the report and explained that a rigorous procurement process had been undertaken to select the contractor.  He was pleased that a relatively local firm had been selected.  Work to improve the public realm was not easy, but these proposals were very exciting.  It would fulfil a long standing aim to create a public square in Colchester town centre.   This was a complex site with multiple landowners a graveyard, and tribute was paid to the work of officers in developing the scheme and bringing it to this stage. It would be designed to put the needs of people first, and would  be a site that worked in both the daytime and night-time.

RESOLVED that:-

(a) A contract be awarded to Brooks and Wood to undertake the works for a contract period to the end of 2022.

(b) If the recommended bidder cannot fulfil their obligations under the contract, to award a  contract to the next highest ranked bidder. 

REASONS

Following evaluation of submitted bids against the criteria and process detailed in the Invitation to Tender, the recommended bidder submitted a bid that met the essential requirements and scored the highest overall marks to offer the best combination of  technical merit, social value benefits and pricing compared to other bidders.   

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

The project cannot be completed without appointment of a contractor and as the preferred contractor scored the highest on value and was also the cheapest bid there is no other alternative.

Cabinet considered minute 32 from the Policy Panel meeting of 24 November 2021 a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor B. Oxford, Portfolio Holder for Communities, explained that she had attended the recent meeting of the Policy Panel who had expressed concerns about Covid memorials.  There had ben some confusion about the Blossom Circles which were being delivered as part of the Woodland Diversity project rather as Covid memorials.  Whilst the delivery of memorials to Covid 19 were important they needed to be delivered in the right place at the right time and given that the pandemic was still ongoing so there, the timing may need further consideration.  The request for a memorial at Holy Trinity churchyard was noted, but a more accessible location may be more appropriate, such as near the cemetery and crematorium.

Councillor Dundas, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, explained that there may have been a breakdown-own in communications with the Panel on the issue.  Memorials to such events needed the involvement of the wider community. The recommendation from the Panel could be accepted, subject to recognition of this.  Therefore, whilst the Cabinet would consider the request from the Policy Panel, it would also consider suggestions and ideas put forward by the wider community. 

RESOLVED that Cabinet consider the Policy Panel’s suggestions regarding the siting of memorials, including for a town centre memorial to be provided in a location such as the church yard of Trinity Church but the wider public and other community group views must also be taken into account.

REASONS

Whilst Cabinet supported the recommendation of the Policy Panel  the views of the wider public and community groups on the siting of Covid memorials needed to be recognised.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

It was open to Cabinet not to agree to the recommendation from the Policy Panel or to agree it without amendment.

The Assistant Director, Corporate and |improvement Services, submitted a progress sheet a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that the contents of the Progress Sheet be noted.

REASONS

The progress sheet was a mechanism by which the Cabinet could ensure that public statements and questions were responded to appropriately and promptly.
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were presented to the Cabinet.