To receive reports from Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council for determination.

Report No: 07/2021

Councillor G Brown presented a report to Council regarding payments being made to Parish Councils for the CIL [Community Infrastructure Levy] money that they would have received but for the issues described within the agenda report. The Cabinet report of 17^th November 2020 (report number 153/2020) was attached to the agenda papers outlining these.

It was outlined to Members that as a result of the issues, Parish and Town Council’s may have missed out on CIL Payments. As a consequence, (and in addition to the recommendations made in the Report) Cabinet considered that, as Parish and Town Council’s had not received CIL payments they may otherwise have received, the County Council should make equivalent payments to the amount of CIL, approximately £22,563.77.

Council noted that there was no provision within the budget for this payment. It would be taken from general reserves if approved. As the payments in relation to CIL were never received then the Council was not able to use CIL monies to make these payments.

Prior to the Chairman opened up this item for debate and discussion, the Interim Chief Executive clarified that Cabinet had agreed to ‘write off’ £150,425.26 potential income associated with the 8 applications as this was in its powers.

Councillor Coleman advised that although he felt that it was a morally right thing to do and that they should get the full percentage owed to them. But should take into account that we did not get the full percent owed to us. He asked, being aware of the current financial climate, whether officers had asked the Parish Councils whether or not a phased approach could be taken.

Councillor Powell agreed it was the morally correct thing to do. She asked Councillor G Brown if the terms of giving that CIL be given under the same terms, i.e, spend, monitoring and retrieving monies because its technically not a CIL payment and legally where id the Council stand with this. She was alarmed that there had been a failure of the system. So adding the £20,000, it was now £170,000 of income that had disappeared. In the improvement plan that had already gone to Cabinet, there was in progress the review of the Section 106 process and payment and would like to know that this come back to Cabinet or Council with an action plan with dates included to ensure the processes were correctly applied.

Councillor Waller was concerned about the use of reserves which the Council may need in future. However, she agreed that they did need to pay the funding. If any of these Parishes were in her Ward, none of them would on balance our loyalty outweighs anything else and it isn’t their fault that we made a mistake. What she was more worried about was some Members may recall losing Section 106 monies as the Council didn’t claim them in time. For example, with the Oakham North development and wanders about how robust the processes across the board were. This had happened in the past and hoped that going forward the Council would prioritise looking at processes.

Councillor Cross felt that this was not about the systems but the people running it and wanted action to be taken.

In response to the above questions Councillor G Brown he advised that they could discuss with Parishes about delaying the payments by taking a phased approach. In place of conditions on the payments, he would need to speak with the Monitoring Officer and take legal advice but he would like to think conditions would be similar if not identical to CIL payments. Agree with the comments that this was a difficult decision financially but it was morally the correct decision to take for its parishes. He clarified that the maximum liability now was £160,000 and not £170,000 as had been mentioned by Councillor Powell. In response to the comments from Councillor he advised that he had been assured that the new Director of Places had put in some real performance management aims for the directorate. He recognised it did come down to individuals but ensuring adequate and effective training and he can confirm that the training advised through the consultant’s report had been completed.

Councillor Hemsley seconded the proposal.

Before going to the vote, Councillor Oxley asked whether every decision would always be a recorded vote. The Monitoring Officer advised that this was agreed as part of the virtual meetings protocol but could bring something back to retract this position. Currently though it was in the standing orders to do as part of a virtual meeting.  

A recorded vote was held:

There voted in favour:

Councillors Ainsley, Baines, Begy, Blanksby, Bool, A Brown, G Brown, Burrows, Coleman, Cross, Dale, Fox, Harvey, Hemsley, Jones, Lowe, MacCartney, Oxley, Payne, Powell, Razzell, Stephenson, Waller, Walters, Webb, Wilby and Woodley.

RESOLVED:

As the amounts do not form a part of the budget framework Council approved:

That payments be made to Parish Councils for the CIL [Community Infrastructure Levy] money that they would have received but for the issues described in Cabinet Report No. 153-2020 -17th November 2020