Councillor Fox welcomed everyone to the meeting. Apologies were received from Councillor L Stephenson and Councillor M Jones.  Councillor R Powell attended as the representative of Councillor M Jones.

To confirm the amended record of the meeting of the Growth, Infrastructure and Resources Scrutiny Committee held on the 16 September 2021 and the record of the meeting held on 18 November 2021.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 16^th September 2021 were approved as an accurate record following the requested amendment.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 18^th November 2021 were approved as an accurate record.

In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have and the nature of those interests in respect of items on this Agenda and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Act 1992 applies to them.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any petitions, deputations and questions received from Members of the Public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 216.

The total time allowed for this item shall be 30 minutes. Petitions, declarations and questions shall be dealt with in the order in which they are received. Questions may also be submitted at short notice by giving a written copy to the Committee Administrator 15 minutes before the start of the meeting.

The total time allowed for questions at short notice is 15 minutes of the total time for 30 minutes. Any petitions, deputations and questions that have been submitted with prior formal notice will take precedence over questions submitted at short notice. Any questions that are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting and be the subject of a report to the next meeting.

Councillor Fox confirmed that two questions had been submitted from members of the public.  The questions had been approved by the Chief Executive and the Monitoring Officer following amendments and had been circulated to all Committee members and published on the Council’s website.

Councillor Fox reminded attendees of Procedure Rule 28, Item 4, Paragraph j, which stated that ‘Every question shall be put and answered without discussion.  No discussion nor resolution shall be permitted on any question or in reply to a question’

---oOo---

Mr David Baker joined the meeting at 19:03

---oOo---

Mr David Baker on behalf of Rutland Quarry Forum joined the meeting and addressed the Committee with his question regarding the Minerals Authority Contract.

---oOo---

Mr David Baker left the meeting and Mr Ken Edward joined the meeting at 19:10

---oOo---

Mr Ken Edward on behalf of Greetham Parish Council joined the meeting and addressed the Committee with his question regarding the Minerals Authority Contract.

---oOo---

Mr Ken Edward left the meeting at 19:15

---oOo---

Councillor Fox thanked Mr Baker and Mr Edward for their questions and confirmed that a full written response would be sent to both parties and would be published on the Council’s website with the minutes.  It was confirmed that the Scrutiny Committee would continue to work in close collaboration with partners and stakeholders to ensure that the voice of Rutland residents was heard in such matters. 

Councillor Fox informed attendees that agenda item 14) – Minerals Authority Contract would be taken next for discussion as this was relevant to the questions submitted from the public.      

To receive Report No. 34/2022 from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Roger Ransom, Planning Policy and Housing Manager following the request from Councillors M Oxley, G Waller and G Brown and the Rutland Quarry Forum for a discussion regarding Rutland County Council’s minerals planning service contract.

Report No. 34/2022 was received from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Roger Ransom, Planning and Housing Policy Manager following the request from Councillors Oxley, Waller and G Brown and the Rutland Quarry Forum for a discussion regarding Rutland County Council’s minerals planning service contract.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       Paragraph 2.7 detailed the structure in place to monitor the contract. 

·       Paragraph 2.11 detailed the circumstances when the contract could be cancelled but this would only be used as very last resort.

·       Contract performance would be thoroughly managed.  This had not been done over the past 2 years but sufficient resilience had been built into Rutland County Council to monitor and identify any performance issues.

·       Upskilling of staff to improve resilience within the team had been completed by involving officers in site visits, site and operator meetings, additional training courses etc.

·       Communication within the team and with partners had also been improved so as to improve the quality of service.

·       North Northamptonshire Council (NNC) had previously reported that they did not have the staff or resilience to undertake monitoring of the quarry but they now stated that they did have the staff and resilience.  As a result, residents were concerned about the monitoring of the contract and the impact on the localities and Rutland residents. 

·       It was requested if the SMART objectives regarding the contract could be distributed to the Committee and that monitoring, enforcements and development updates be given to the Scrutiny Committee.  It was also proposed that there should be a single point of contact within the Planning Team regarding this contract and that a representative from NNC should attend the meetings of the Rutland Quarry Forum.  Planning and Housing Policy Manager stated that the performance indicators or SMART objectives were detailed in the contract but that NNC had to confirm the release of contract details before any information could be shared and were currently awaiting legal advice.

·       It was noted that the NNC Development Control Manager had confirmed to Councillor G Brown that he would be retiring in the near future and it was queried if this fact was known whilst the contract was being commissioned. The Planning and Housing Policy Manager reported that the contract had been commissioned by Welland Procurement on the 6^th December 2021 so RCC was not aware of the NNC Development Control Manager retiring.  If this had been known at the time, then safety measures would have been included in the contract.  However, NNC had confirmed that they had the necessary staff to undertake the contract and meet the identified performance indicators.  Should the performance indicators not be met then financial sanctions and ultimately cancellation of the contract had been built into the contract. 

·       It was proposed that officers from NNC should give an update briefing to this Committee and that Cabinet should review the monitoring arrangements, consider the outcomes to date and evaluate the effectiveness of the contract within the next 6 months.

RESOLVED

That the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider any questions with notice from Members received in accordance with the provisions of Procedure rule No. 218 and No. 218A.

There were no questions with notice from members

To consider any Notices of Motion from Members submitted in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule No. 219.

There were no notices of motion from members

To consider any matter referred to the Committee for a decision in relation to call in of a decision in accordance with Procedure Rule 206.

There were no call ins

Discussion regarding the refurbishment of Oakham High Street including the maintenance of noticeboards, grounds, roads, lamp-posts and sign posts.

Councillor Fox informed attendees that Full Council had received a request from a member of the public for an update on Oakham Town Centre.  Full Council had requested that the matter be discussed at a meeting of the Growth, Infrastructure and Resources Scrutiny Committee.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       Work was ongoing with the Highways and the Environment teams in developing Oakham Town Centre including pavements, lampposts, signage etc.

·       It was agreed to receive the verbal update from Councillor Fox regarding ‘4Oakham’ as this would better inform for a discussion.

To receive a verbal update report from Councillor J Fox regarding the ‘For Oakham’ project group.

A verbal update was received from Councillor Fox.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       ‘4Oakham’ was a project group created and tasked by the Council to develop and maintain Oakham Town Centre following recommendations from the Oakham Town Centre Task and Finish Group.

·       The Terms of Reference for the project group were identified and a budget of £2000 was allocated.

·       The project group has since reduced in size to 4 people including Councillor Fox and has stalled as a result. 

·       Additional members were needed preferably Councillors for the Oakham and/or Barleythorpe areas.

·       It was agreed that there was a need to develop better lighting, improve pavements, maintain noticeboards, grounds, roads, lampposts and signposts.

·       There was a view that Oakham Town Council had not previously invested in any maintenance or development of Oakham Town Centre, which was why the project group had been established in the first place.  However, the Town Council was much improved and was more engaged with developing and improving Oakham Town Centre and had recently funded the refurbishment of Victoria Hall. 

·       Councillor Ainsley confirmed that he would like to volunteer to be a member of the project group.

·       It was proposed that ‘4Oakham’ needed relaunching following the pandemic lockdown and needed to identify what money was available for it to use.

·       Councillor Hemsley informed attendees that he would be meeting the Mayors of Oakham and Uppingham and would discuss the future of the project group with them including support and representation from Oakham Town Council to identify if the group was still viable.

RESOLVED

That the Scrutiny Committee:

a)    RECOMMENDED that Councillor Hemsley meet the Mayors of Oakham and Uppingham for their views on the future of ‘4Oakham’ and then report to Full Council regarding re-establishing or disbanding ‘4Oakham’. 

To receive a briefing and a presentation from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places.

A briefing and a presentation were received from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Roger Ranson, Planning & Housing Policy Manager.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       The figures stated in paragraphs 4.2, 5.3 & 5.4 were based on those stated in the rejected Local Plan and that the figure for heritage and arts included the building of village halls and outdoor play areas.  However, the figures did need reviewing and updating to obtain a more accurate reflection.

·       Councillor Toseland queried which items listed in paragraph 5.3 would require financial input in the short term and what the contingency would be.  The Planning & Housing Policy Manager stated that it was not possible to currently say due to the large number of undetermined applications.  CIL was being collected but there was no Local Plan to identify or plan a contingency.  He stated that the Council needed to be very prudent as to how it should spend CIL money moving forward. 

·       The Planning & Housing Policy Manager confirmed that that school capacity was a matter for the Children’s Services’ Pupil Place Planning Board of which he was a member but that he would speak to Children’s Services and notify Councillor Toseland regarding secondary school capacity within Rutland.

ACTION: Roger Ranson

To receive a presentation and a verbal update from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places.

A briefing and a presentation were received from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Martin Jones, Interim Principal Environmental Services Manager.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       The existing contract would end on the 31^st December 2023, after being extended.

·       A report would be submitted to Cabinet on the 15^th February 2022 before public consultation began on the 16^th February 2022.

·       It was suggested that rather than questions, the public take part in a pros and cons or advantages/disadvantages scenario and that Town and Parish Councils be included in the questioning as they were involved in a lot of local ground maintenance.

·       The contract tendering process was to find the contract that gave the best value and this was not always the cheapest contract.  Comparisons would also be made with neighbouring Local Authority contracts to help obtain the best deal for the county. 

·       A ‘lessons learned’ exercise would be undertaken to identify what worked well in previous contract procurements and more importantly what did not.  

·       Consultation was being undertaken with the parishes but clarification was still needed as to who was responsible for which areas and this would entail detailed and lengthy conversations.  Comprehensive data mapping had been completed which identified council land and parish land.  Councillor Powell proposed sending this mapping information to Parishes so as to clarify who was responsible for which area of land. 

·       Councillor G Brown proposed that a recommendation be made to Cabinet about an additional paragraph regarding active involvement of Parish Councils; extra time for Councillors to feed back to Officers on consultation questions and that the data mapping be shared with Parish Councils.  He suggested that the Council used Parish Online, which was an online tool for helping Local Councils use digital maps to store and manage assets, produce neighbourhood plans and engage with the public.  Councillor Oxley seconded the proposal and it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED

That the Scrutiny Committee:

a)    RECOMMENDED to Cabinet that an additional paragraph be included in the procurement process regarding the active involvement of Parish Councils; that extra time be given to Councillors to feed back to officers on the public consultation questions (timescales tbc) and that the data mapping done by the service area be shared with Parish Councils.

--oOo---

The Chair requested an extension of the meeting

The Committee voted to extend the meeting until 22:00 and paused the meeting at 21:24

The meeting resumed at 21:30

---oOo---

To receive a presentation and a verbal update from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Councillor L Stephenson, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Communities, Environment and Climate Change.

A briefing and a presentation were received from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Martin Jones, Interim Principal Environmental Services Manager.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       Results of the public consultation had supported the proposed waste collection option of fortnightly twin-stream recycling, weekly food waste collection and fortnightly residual collection with a reduced bin size.

·       The Waste Contract would be discussed at Cabinet on the 8^th March 2022.  The deadline for the contract to go live was April 2024

·       All options were being considered for the lotting so as to find the most cost-effective option that gave the best value for money and that the cost involved to the Council to monitor the contract also needed to be considered.

·       It was confirmed that the size of the new waste receptable would depend on where it was for i.e. house, flat, shop etc as one size did not fit all.

·       The cost of educating the public about waste and recycling was included in the contract and would entail engagement with the public throughout the whole life of the contract.

To receive a presentation and a verbal update from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Councillor L Stephenson, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Communities, Environment and Climate Change.

A briefing and a presentation were received from Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places and Martin Jones, Interim Principal Environmental Services Manager.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       Cabinet approved the progression of the leisure contract on the 16^th November 2021.

·       Plans for a new site-neutral wet and dry facility have been commissioned from a firm of professional architects and a cost consultancy firm.

·       Further repair to the existing Catmose Pool was not affordable and the pool would not be re-opened.

·       Negotiations were being held with Catmose College regarding what the future provision would look like.

·       Welland Procurement had begun the soft market testing exercise and results were expected at the end of February 2022.

To consider the current Forward Plan and identify any relevant items for inclusion in the Growth, Infrastructure and Resources Scrutiny Committee Annual Work Plan, or to request further information.

The Forward Plan is available on the website using the following link:

https://rutlandcounty.moderngov.co.uk/mgListPlans.aspx?RPId=133&RD=0

There forward plan was discussed.  There were no changes.

To receive any other items of urgent business which have been previously notified to the person presiding.

Request from Councillor A Brown to discuss the new legislation that may provide the Council with powers regarding carbon management controls.

Councillor A Brown briefed attendees on proposed new legislation for the country to be carbon neutral by 2050.  During the discussion, the following points were noted:

·       Large areas of land could be lost to tree planting and other carbon management controls and this could pose a danger to rural farming areas.

·       New legislation could provide the Council with powers in relation to carbon management controls on the total amount of certain greenhouse gases that could be emitted by sectors covered by the legislation.

·       If legislation did provide such powers, then the Council could seek that:

a)    Any subsidy directly or indirectly obtained for carbon management affecting the County was retained as carbon credit for the benefit of Rutland’s economy and people.

b)    Any third-party sale or lease of carbon credit outside Rutland could not be activated unless Rutland was carbon neutral and where there was a 10% surplus of credit.

·       The Council needed to become more proactive in looking after Rutland‘s environment so that tomorrow’s generation would inherit a cleaner, healthier world.

·       It was agreed further investigation and discussion was required before future actions could be decided and it was agreed to defer this item to a later meeting.

Councillor G Brown proposed that the following recommendations be made to Cabinet following the budget meeting of the Growth, Infrastructure and Resources Committee on the 27^th January 2022:

1.    Earlier action to deliver the costs for the 2023/24 budget and involvement of members generally to achieve an early consensus.

2.    The removal of the Climate Change Officer in the current budget year, (possibly until a clearer picture of the savings to be achieved for 2023/24 and the implications on the services)

3.    A lead from Cabinet be taken by reducing back to a total of five members and thus demonstrating to our staff that all functions needed to save money over the next year and beyond.

·       The recommendations were seconded by Councillor Begy and voting was as follows:

a)    Voted in favour: Councillors G Brown and Begy

b)    Voted against: Councillors Oxley, Waller and Fox

c)    Abstentions: Councillors Toseland and Powell

·       With 3 votes against and 2 in favour, the proposal of the recommendations to Cabinet was defeated.

Thursday, 7 April 2022 at 7pm via Zoom - https://us06web.zoom.us/j/93499296307

Items to include:

1.     Finance Update – Saverio Della Rocca, Strategic Director of Resources

2.     Property Asset Review – Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places

3.     Revised Parking Policy: Update – Councillor I Razzell

Thursday, 7 April 2022 at 7pm via Zoom

Proposed Agenda Items

1. Finance Update – Saverio Della Rocca, Strategic Director of Resources

2. Property Asset Review – Penny Sharp, Strategic Director of Places

3. Revised Parking Policy: Update – Councillor I Razzell

4. Carbon Management Controls – Councillor A Browne