Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Jones declared an interest in the item relating to Willesden Green development as a member of the Willesden Locality Board.

This report considers the proposals to close Harmony and Treetops nurseries and restructure Willow nursery, which have been the subject of public consultation from 19^th October 2011 to 13^th January 2012

(i)         that Willow nursery be restructured to enable further provision for children with a wide range of disabilities, while retaining its character as a mainstream nursery; 

(ii)        that Council-run day care services at Harmony Children’s Centre be closed from 30 March 2012;

(iii)       that Council-run day care services at Treetops Children’s Centre be closed from 20 July 2012; 

(iv)       that the building used for nursery services at Harmony Children’s Centre be used to facilitate expansion of Mitchell Brook School in the event that a decision is made to expand the school;

(v)        that officers invite proposals from private, voluntary and independent providers for use of the space at Treetops Children’s Centre as a nursery,  expected to be independent of and at no cost to the council, any such proposals to be considered on their merit; 

(vi)       that the decision on whether to proceed with  any such proposal in 2.5 above to use the space at Treetops Children’s Centre, be delegated to the Directors of Children and Families  and Regeneration and Major Projects, in consultation with the Lead Member for Children and Families.

(vii)   that it be noted that if the space at Harmony Children’s Centre is not used for the purpose identified in (iv) above that it will be used or disposed of in accordance with the relevant funding requirements and council policies, and 

(viii)  that if a decision is taken not to proceed with proposals received under paragraph (v) above, the space inside Treetops Children’s Centre no longer used for nursery services, be used to expand the core functions of the Centre.

Councillor Arnold (Lead Member, Children and Families) introduced the report from the Director of Children and Families which considered proposals to close Harmony and Treetops Nurseries and to restructure Willow Nursery, which have been the subject of public consultation from 19 October 2011 to 13 January 2012.

She referred to reductions in central government funding and the change in government policy, announced in November 2010, which removed the requirement to provide day care provision in children’s centres. The recommendations in the report had been amended as a result of comments received during the consultation exercise and the nurseries were now to remain open a further month to reduce disruption to children going on to school in September. Councillor Arnold stated that consideration was being given to allowing private nursery providers to rent space at Treetops. An options appraisal had been carried out, published last December, which showed that it was not possible to reduce costs sufficiently to a level that would be able to successfully compete with other nurseries. Councillor Arnold outlined the council’s statutory responsibilities set out in the report and that from monitoring and assessment, officers knew that good quality alternative childcare was available, for example with childminders, for the 60 children that would be displaced by the closures. Councillor Arnold drew members’ attention to the equalities impact assessment and likely impact on various groups in the borough, in particularly those children that were due to turn five in the next academic year. She stated that it was necessary for the council to make changes in line with available resources.

The Chair, Councillor John, thanked the parents/carers attending, acknowledged that the children concerned were at an important stage in their lives and stated that decisions were not taken lightly but regrettably the current financial climate was forcing the council to make changes. She looked forward to hearing from them again and thanked them for their involvement.

The Executive also had before them an appendix to the report which was not for publication as it contained the following category of exempt information as specified in Schedule 12 of the Local Government (Access to Information Act) 1972: 

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that Willow nursery be restructured to enable further provision for children with a wide range of disabilities, while retaining its character as a mainstream nursery; 

(ii)        that council-run day care services at Harmony Children’s Centre be closed from 30 March 2012;

(iii)       that council-run day care services at Treetops Children’s Centre be closed from 20 July 2012; 

(iv)       that the building used for nursery services at Harmony Children’s Centre be used to facilitate expansion of Mitchell Brook School in the event that a decision is made to expand the school;

(v)        that officers invite proposals from private, voluntary and independent providers for use of the space at Treetops Children’s Centre as a nursery,  expected to be independent of and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

The minutes of the previous meeting are attached.

RESOLVED:-

that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 16 January 2012 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

A petition has been received in the following terms signed by more than 50 people.

“Petition to Save Treetops and Harmony nurseries from closure by Brent Council

As a representative of a group of parents, I am gathering signatures to help prevent Brent Council closing its local nurseries – Treetops and Harmony. Please sign the petition below to show your support for our fight to keep these nursery facilities open.”

(Report below refers)

Noted

The Executive heard from Justin Morgan, speaking on behalf of petitioners who were against proposals to close Harmony and Treetops Nurseries (located on Bridge Road, NW10 and Doyle Gardens NW10 respectively). He thanked Councillors Arnold and Powney, (Lead Members for Children and Families and Environment and Neighbourhoods respectively) for taking the time to speak to parents and for extending the consultation period. Mr Morgan referred to the money spent on the Treetops Nursery, a first class facility, which he felt would be wasted if closed. He also paid tribute to the work of the staff.  The Ofsted inspection gave the centre an ‘outstanding’ rating and the children were also happy and developing relationships with peers and staff. He felt the Centre provided affordable childcare to hard working families and if less affordable, would adversely affect working women in particular and increase disparities. While parents understand the council’s financial position, community nurseries could only survive with council support. Mr Morgan stated that any solution must include parents and would demonstrate that the council was a community leader.

The Chair thanked Mr Morgan for his contribution.

The Executive heard from members of the public speaking in support of the reference from the Call in Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1 February 2012 which had resolved to ask the Executive to reconsider proposals for the interim service delivery strategy for the Willesden Green library development specifically to consider the use of some closed existing libraries to provide a comprehensive interim service.

Local residents put forward the use of Preston Library closed the previous year as part of the libraries transformation programme as in interim study area as it had good public transport  links from the Willesden area and volunteer staff ready to help run the service. Ms Jacky Bunce-Linsell addressed the Executive stated that as Preston Community Library operated as a charity it would have reduced running costs. It also had a large stock of books that had recently been donated. Ms Bunce-Linsell drew members’ attention to correspondence she had sent to the Head of Libraries, copies of which had been circulated at the meeting, which suggested that many of the children attending the faith schools in Willesden lived within walking distance of Preston Library and that some establishments do not allow children from other boroughs to use their study spaces. Mr Mel Hacker stated that a key point in the council’s defence of the libraries closure was that other libraries would open on Sunday with longer hours however, this was be compromised with the closure of Willesden Green Library. Mr Hacker referred to reports that the council was expecting money back from investments in Icelandic Banks as a windfall opportunity.

Other members of the public expressed concerns over what they considered to be the lack of proper consultation on the proposals to date, the facilities within the new centre and the future of the Willesden Green Library Bookshop currently located in the library centre. Ms Gill Wood spoke in support of the Bookshop, a long established business she felt it deserved a place in the new development under similar terms as currently as the business would not be able to afford to pay rent at commercial rates. She questioned whether the existing manager had been consulted on plans for temporary relocation, and, in the light of reference in the report to the new centre being a safe space for entrepreneurs, whether a contract had been already signed. The new centre could result in the loss of the bookshop and the market, would not enhance the area and Ms Wood questioned whether residents wanted a cafe. Ms Wood also questioned the level of profit that would go to the developers. Mr Kevin McKillop referred to the on-line petition in support of the Bookshop which was expected to attain more than 1,000 signatures. Local residents were upset and angry and wanted their voices to be heard. Dr Salpadoru expressed concern at the lack of substantial information, questioned how the council had arrived at the existing plans, criteria for allocation of space and the likely profitable outcome for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 1 February 2012 considered the call in of the Willesden Green Redevelopment Projectreport previously considered by the Executive on 16 January 2012 and RESOLVED:-

that the Executive be recommended to reconsider proposals for the interim service delivery strategy and specifically consider the use of some closed existing libraries and the costings involved for the proposed strategy in order to provide a comprehensive interim library service for residents. (the report and supplementary report submitted to the Call-in Overview and Scrutiny have been circulated to members separately and are available the council’s website (http://democracy.brent.gov.uk).

(i)         that this Executive’s agreement to the interim service strategy agreed on 16 January 2012 be reconfirmed;

(ii)        that the proposal to use the closed buildings in Kensal Rise, Neasden and Cricklewood as part of the Council’s library service and interim service delivery strategy be rejected due to the conclusive need to provide a service from Willesden Green.

The Executive noted the request from the Call in Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 1February 2012 for the Executive to reconsider the proposals for the interim service delivery strategy during the redevelopment of Willesden Green Library Centre. Councillor Crane (Lead Member, Regeneration and Major Projects) acknowledged concerns expressed by members of the public earlier in the meeting indicating that he would endeavour to respond to all. He reminded the meeting of the report received by the Executive in February 2011 which set out the poor condition of the existing centre building, the necessary repairs and the high cost of refurbishment. Additionally, the café and cinema had not been well used. Councillor Crane reminded members of the decision making process referring the decision taken a year ago to test the market for a development on the site that would be at no cost to the council. Subsequently, a meeting with users took place which informed the brief submitted to the market and the decision to proceed was taken at the last Executive. The full consultation process would now commence as the development partner would produce a full design and there would be three to four months to work on detailed design and plans.

Councillor Crane then went on to address other concerns raised earlier in the meeting. Regarding the bookshop in the existing premises, he agreed that it was a valued resource but commercial considerations had to be taken into account. Compensation may be available for the owner in the event that the lease was terminated. On the plans for facilities within the building, Councillor Crane confirmed that the full detail of community spaces was set out in the report to the Executive in January 2012 which included at least three meeting rooms. He emphasised that so far discussions had been about the design brief and the real consultation would now commence. It was clear a year ago that the library would have to close for a considerable time and work on a high quality interim strategy had been on-going, consequently there would be no need to re-open closed libraries.

Councillor Powney (Lead Member, Environment and Neighbourhoods) stated that the plans were for an improved development for the area, a cultural centre not just a library. He too reiterated that there would be widespread consultation on the configuration before submission for planning permission. The Director of Regeneration and Major Projects contributed that £700,000 was the minimum cost of refurbishment, the existing building was poorly designed, expensive to heat and under used. The process required an indicative design for bench marking and once the development agreement was signed there would be deconstruction, consultation and engagement then the statutory application for planning permission. He reassured that consultation would be on-going.

The Chair, Councillor John, (Leader of the Council) stated that the aim was for a high quality design and the Director confirmed that the new Civic Centre would be the bench mark for fixtures, fitting and design. Councillor Powney added that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The purpose of Brent’s Local Account is to communicate priorities and to provide Members, residents and service users with a key accountability mechanism by which self-regulation and improvement activities can be systematically monitored and reported.

(i)         that the performance and contextual information contained in the  report from the Director of Adult Social Services be noted;

(ii)        that the current and future strategic risks associated with the information provided be noted;

(iii)       that it be noted that responsible officers will be challenged on progress as necessary.

Councillor R Moher (Lead Member, Adults and Health) introduced the report from the Director of Adult Social Services which set out the background to the publication of an annual council ‘Local Account’, the new means of demonstrating performance and drive improvement. The ‘Promoting Excellence in Councils’ Adult Social Care Programme Board was set up in 2010 with representatives from key stakeholders across the sector and recommended the report should be short, accessible and produced by December each year. Councillor Moher referred to the increasing recognition of the critical importance of health and wellbeing and drew attention to the financial implications set out in the report. The Local Account would also provide a mechanism by which self-regulation and improvement activities could be systematically monitored and reported. Councillor Moher asked members to note the information and consider the risks.

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that the performance and contextual information contained in the report from the Director of Adult Social Services be noted;

(ii)        that the current and future strategic risks associated with the information provided be noted.

This report further requests authority to extend existing contracts for a period of up to 1 May 2012 to ensure planned implementation for the new services.

(i)        that the outcome of the investigation into the procurement process be noted;

(ii)       that approval be given to the appointment of the three organisations detailed at paragraph 3.4 of the Report to the Supporting People Young People Accommodation based Support Services Framework Agreement (“Framework 1”) for a period of three years with an option to extend Framework 1 for a further two years;

(iii)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 1 to Coram (Thomas Coram Foundation for Children) in respect of Lot A (single sex accommodation based services for young people with complex needs across scattered accommodation) from 1 May 2012 for a period of three years with an option of extending for two years;

(iv)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 1 to De Paul UK in respect of Lot B (mixed sex accommodation based services for young people across hostel, crash pad and move on units) from 1 May 2012 for a period of three years with an option to extend the framework for a further two years;

(v)       that approval be given to the appointment of the five organisations detailed at paragraph 3.5 of the Report to the Supporting People Young People Floating Support Services Framework Agreement (Framework 2”) for a period of three years with an option to extend for a further two years;

(vi)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 2 to Coram (Thomas Coram Foundation for Children) from 1 May 2012 for a period of 3 years with an option to extend the Framework 1 for a further 2 years.

(vii)     that approval be given to a short extension of existing contracts for young people based accommodation services and floating support services with De Paul Trust, Catch 22, St Christopher’s Fellowship, Coram Housing and Support Services, Brent Housing Partnership and Centre Point for the period to 1 May 2012 to ensure appropriate implementation of services.

Following a meeting of the Executive on 17 August 2011 when authority was given to appoint organisations to two frameworks for young people housing support services as required by Contract Standing Order 88, officers received representations from tendering organisations regarding the process.  Councillor R Moher (Lead Member, Adults and Health) advised that these concerns were investigated during which time the existing contracts were extended. Officers had concluded investigation of representations from tendering organisations and had requested authority to appoint organisations to the frameworks and award call off contracts from the frameworks as required by Contract Standing Order 88.  The report further requested authority to extend existing contracts for a period of up to 1 May 2012 to ensure planned implementation for the new services.

RESOLVED:-

(i)        that the outcome of the investigation into the procurement process be noted;

(ii)       that approval be given to the appointment of the three organisations detailed at paragraph 3.4 of the report from the Director of Adult Social Services to the Supporting People Young People Accommodation based Support Services Framework Agreement (“Framework 1”) for a period of three years with an option to extend Framework 1 for a further two years;

(iii)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 1 to Coram (Thomas Coram Foundation for Children) in respect of Lot A (single sex accommodation based services for young people with complex needs across scattered accommodation) from 1 May 2012 for a period of three years with an option of extending for two years;

(iv)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 1 to De Paul UK in respect of Lot B (mixed sex accommodation based services for young people across hostel, crash pad and move on units) from 1 May 2012 for a period of three years with an option to extend the framework for a further two years;

(v)       that approval be given to the appointment of the five organisations detailed at paragraph 3.5 of the report to the Supporting People Young People Floating Support Services Framework Agreement (Framework 2”) for a period of three years with an option to extend for a further two years;

(vi)      that approval be given to award a call-off contract from Framework 2 to Coram (Thomas Coram Foundation for Children) from 1 May 2012 for a period of 3 years with an option to extend the Framework 1 for a further 2 years;

(vii)     that approval be given to a short extension of existing contracts for young people based accommodation services and floating support services with De Paul Trust, Catch 22, St Christopher’s Fellowship, Coram Housing and Support Services, Brent Housing Partnership and Centre Point for the period to 1 May 2012 to ensure appropriate implementation of services.

A report was approved by the Executive on 17^th October 2011 for Adult Social Care and Children and Families departments to procure a joint framework agreement for carer short break and respite services. The report of the 17^th undertook to report back to Executive, seeking authority for selection criteria.  

In line with 1.1 above this report seeks Executive approval of the project timetable and selection criteria for the procurement exercise.  In addition this report provides an update on progress with the consultation process for the establishment of a Carers Services Hub and review of carer services within Adult Social Care.

(i)         that approval be given to the pre-tender considerations and the criteria to be used to evaluate tenders as set out in paragraph 3.0 of the report;

(ii)        that approval be given to the invite of expressions of interest, agreement of shortlists and invitation of tenders in accordance with the procurement timetable and their evaluation in accordance with the approved evaluation criteria referred to in (i) above.

Councillor R Moher (Adults and Health) in introducing the report from the Directors of Adult Social Services and Children and Families reminded the Executive of the selection criteria agreed on 17 October 2011 for Adult Social Care and Children and Families departments to procure a joint framework agreement for carer short break and respite services. The report now before members sought approval of the project timetable and selection criteria for the procurement exercise. Additionally it provided an update on progress with the consultation process for the establishment of a Carers Services Hub and review of carer services within Adult Social Care. Councillor Moher drew attention to the financial implications and added that there were no TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations) implications.

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that approval be given to the pre-tender considerations and the criteria to be used to evaluate tenders as set out in paragraph 3.0 of the Directors’ report;

(ii)        that approval be given to the invite of expressions of interest, agreement of shortlists and invitation of tenders in accordance with the procurement timetable and their evaluation in accordance with the approved evaluation criteria referred to in (i) above.

This report seeks approval for participation in the Central Buying Consortium (CBC) framework for the supply of library books and other stock items from April 2012. The library stock budget of £550,000 has been maintained for 2012/13 at the same level as in previous years – in effect almost doubling the stock budget for each library.

(i)         that approval be given to the Library Service’s participation in the Central Buying Consortium’s framework for the purchase of library books and other library materials;

(ii)        that there are good operational reasons as set out in paragraph 3.10 of the report for not seeking approval from the Director of Legal and Procurement for each and every time the Council enters into a call-off contract under the Central Buying Consortium’s Framework and agree that a blanket approval to use the Framework for the framework duration may be given.

The report from the Director of Environment and Neighbourhood Services sought approval for participation in the Central Buying Consortium (CBC) framework for the supply of library books and other stock items from April 2012. The library stock budget of £550,000 had been maintained for 2012/13 at the same level as in previous years – in effect almost doubling the stock budget for each library.  The council has been a member of the CBC for the supply of library books and other library materials since September 2010, after the contracts for the Welstock consortium came to an end and Welstock was disbanded. The current contract between the suppliers and the CBC comes to an end in March 2012. Councillor Powney (Lead Member, Environment and Neighbourhoods) advised that it was being recommended to continue with the current supplier.

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that approval be given to the Library Service’s participation in the Central Buying Consortium’s framework for the purchase of library books and other library materials;

(ii)        that there are good operational reasons as set out in paragraph 3.10 of the report for not seeking approval from the Director of Legal and Procurement for each and every time the Council enters into a call-off contract under the Central Buying Consortium’s Framework and agree that a blanket approval to use the Framework for the framework duration may be given.

This report summarises the procurement process undertaken by the Council to dispose of two sites within the South Kilburn Regeneration area, known as (i) Cambridge Court, Wells Court,(ii) Ely Court; and (iii) Bond House, Hicks Bolton House and Wood House which will be disposed of in the form of three leasehold interests (see plans at Appendix 1, 2 and 3), and seeks authority to dispose of these 3 sites.

(i)         that the mini-competition process undertaken by panel members set out within paragraphs 3.9 to 3.17 of the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects be noted;

(ii)        that approval be given to the disposal of the land at Cambridge Court, Wells Court and Ely Court; and Bond House, Hicks Bolton House and Wood House (see plans at Appendix 1, 2 and 3),to Catalyst Housing Group subject to:

                           (1)        Catalyst Housing Group entering into a Development and Sale Agreement with the Council.  The Development and Sale Agreement to provide for the acquisition of the land for the sum set out in Appendix 6 (restricted) and to contain such other terms as are approved by the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects in consultation with the Borough Solicitor.

                           (2)        The Council obtaining the Secretary of State’s consent to the disposal under Section 32 of the Housing Act 1985;

(iii)       that agreement be given to that the sum set out in Appendix 6 (restricted) from the proceeds of the sales be re-invested into the regeneration of South Kilburn, including for the purposes of bringing forward further development sites within the regeneration area in line with priorities set out in paragraphs 4.1 of the Director’s report;

(iv)       that agreement be given to the rent assumptions for both sites as set out in paragraphs 3.18 to 3.23 of the report;

(v)        that agreement be given to the proposed next steps within paragraphs 4.1 to 4.6 of the Director’s report;

(vi)       that the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects (in consultation with the Director of Legal and Procurement) appropriate the land comprised in (i) Cambridge Court, Wells Court, (ii) Ely Court; and (iii) Bond House, Hicks Bolton House and Wood House (described in the plans in Appendix 1, 2 and 3) under Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 for planning purposes when it is no longer required for the purposes for which it is currently held.

The report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects summarised the procurement process undertaken by the council to dispose of two sites within the South Kilburn Regeneration area, known as (i) Cambridge Court, Wells Court, (ii) Ely Court; and (iii) Bond House, Hicks Bolton House and Wood House which would be disposed of in the form of three leasehold interests and sought authority to dispose of these three sites to a housing association. Councillor Crane (Lead Member, Regeneration and Major Projects) stated that this was a good news story planning permission for which had been obtained in February and May 2011. He advised that the rent levels would be set at target rents, examples of which were set out in the report, higher than for previous developments. The sites would provide further decant capacity for Bronte and Fielding House and the next steps would include planning permission for Queens Park Station development and progressing phase 2 of the programme.

The Executive also had before them an appendix to the report which was not for publication as it contained the following category of exempt information as specified in Schedule 12 of the Local Government (Access to Information Act) 1972: 

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that the mini-competition process undertaken by panel members set out within paragraphs 3.9 to 3.17 of the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects be noted;

(ii)        that approval be given to the disposal of the land at Cambridge Court, Wells Court and Ely Court; and Bond House, Hicks Bolton House and Wood House (see plans at Appendix 1, 2 and 3), to Catalyst Housing Group subject to:

(1)       Catalyst Housing Group entering into a Development and Sale Agreement with the council.  The Development and Sale Agreement to provide for the acquisition of the land for the sum set out in Appendix 6 (restricted) and to contain such other terms as are approved by the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects in consultation with the Borough Solicitor.

(2)       The Council obtaining the Secretary of State’s consent to the disposal under Section 32 of the Housing Act 1985;

(iii)       that agreement be given to that the sum set out in Appendix 6 (restricted) from the proceeds of the sales being re-invested into the regeneration of South Kilburn, including for the purposes of bringing forward further development sites within the regeneration area in line with priorities set out in paragraphs 4.1 of the Director’s report;

(iv)       that agreement be given to the rent assumptions for both sites as set out in paragraphs 3.18 to 3.23 of the report;

(v)        that agreement be given to the proposed next steps within paragraphs 4.1 to 4.6 of the Director’s report;

(vi)       that the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects (in consultation with the Director of Legal and Procurement) appropriate the land comprised in (i) Cambridge Court, Wells  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Government legislative changes mean the Community Infrastructure Levy will replace S106 Planning Obligations as the vehicle for funding the infrastructure that supports growth and development. Authorities will collect Community Infrastructure Levy contributions from developers to pay for the infrastructure needs created by development, with S106 Planning Obligations restricted in the main to site specific matters. This report details the results of the consultations on Brent’s Preliminary Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule and the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document that closed at the end of last year. Approval is sought to publish, and submit for examination, a Draft Charging Schedule, as well as the adoption of the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document.

(i)         that the comments received during the consultations on the Preliminary Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule and the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document and the subsequent amendments made to both documents be noted;

(ii)        that agreement be given to the publication of the Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule for submittal to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination, and, subject to any changes, recommend Full Council adopt the subsequent Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule;

(iii)       that approval be given to the Adoption of the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document at the same time as the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule.

Government legislative changes meant the Community Infrastructure Levy would replace S106 Planning Obligations as the vehicle for funding the infrastructure that supports growth and development. Authorities would collect Community Infrastructure Levy contributions from developers to pay for the infrastructure needs created by development, with S106 Planning Obligations restricted in the main to site specific matters. Councillor Crane (Lead Member, Regeneration and Major Projects) advised that the CIL was agreed in principle last year and with consultation commencing in October and the report before members detailed the results of the consultations on Brent’s Preliminary Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule and the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document. Approval was sought to publish and submit for examination, a Draft Charging Schedule, as well as the adoption of the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document. Once agreed the report would be forwarded to Full Council for approval.

RESOLVED:

(i)         that the comments received during the consultations on the Preliminary Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule and the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document and the subsequent amendments made to both documents be noted;

(ii)        that agreement be given to the publication of the Draft Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule for submittal to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination, and, subject to any changes, recommend Full Council adopt the subsequent Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule;

(iii)       that approval be given to the Adoption of the S106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document at the same time as the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule.

This report presents to Members the revised (probable) HRA budget for 2011/12 and the draft HRA budget for 2012/13 as required by the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.  Members are required to consider these budget estimates and the associated options, taking account of the requirement to set a Housing Revenue Account (HRA) budget that does not show a deficit and in particular Members need to consider and agree the level of HRA dwelling rents and service charges for 2012/13. The report also includes proposals for setting the rent and service charge levels for 2012/13 for the non HRA Brent Stonebridge dwellings.

(i)         that approval be given to the revised (probable) budget for 2011/12 (Appendix 1 Table 1);

(ii)        that it be noted that the new HRA self financing system that takes effect from April 2012 and that the draft budget for 2012/13 has been prepared on that basis, noting that:-

·         HRA Subsidy will cease from 2012/13;

·         The Government will redeem £198.000m of Brent Council’s debt with the Public Works Loan Board on 28 March 2012;

·         Brent’s HRA borrowing limit under self financing will be £199.291m; and

·         The estimated HRA borrowing “headroom” will be £59m

(iii)       that agreement be given to the savings/budget reductions for 2012/13 as set out in paragraph 3.53.4;

(iv)       that agreement be given to the HRA budget growth of £5.642m for depreciation (major repairs or debt repayment) as set out in paragraph 3.53.5 of the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects;

(v)        that approval be given to an average overall rent increase (excluding service charges) from April 2012 of £6.81 per week, which is an average overall increase of 7.14%, as set out in further detail in paragraphs 3.35 to 3.39 of the report;

(vi)       that agreement be given to increase HRA Council Dwelling service charges by 5.6% from April 2012;

(vii)      that approval be given to the HRA budget for 2012/13 (Appendix 1 Table 1) of the report;

(viii)     that that from April 2012 all HRA dwellings that are relet (except successions, assignments and mutual exchanges and internal transfers ) are set at target rent from the commencement of the new occupancy;

(ix)       that it be noted that updated HRA Business Plan would be presented to the Executive shortly and this would include options for spending the Major Repairs resources;

(x)        that agreement be given to an average overall rent increase of £7.03p per dwelling per week on the Brent Stonebridge Dwellings, which is an average overall rent increase of 6.3% as set out in paragraph 3.68 of the report;

(xi)       that agreement be given to decrease the service charges on the Brent Stonebridge Dwellings by an average of 0.7% or an average of £0.06 per dwelling per week as set out in paragraph 3.71;

(xii)      that approval be given to delegate to the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects in consultation with the Director of Finance and Corporate Services the Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) management fee for the financial year 2012/13.

Councillor Long (Lead Member, Housing) presented the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects which set out the revised (probable) HRA budget for 2011/12 and the draft HRA budget for 2012/13 as required by the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.  She advised the Executive that the HRA budget had been compiled under the devolved system of council Housing finance self financing to be implemented from April 2012 and rent levels had been set in accordance with the national formula which gave an average overall rent increase for 2012/13 of 7.14% per week with service charges to also increase. Councillor Long then drew members’ attention to the recommended increases for non HRA properties. The HRA budget growth of £5.642m would be spent on either on major repairs or repaying debt. Councillor Long moved an amendment to the recommendations that clarified that the target rent levels would only apply to new tenancies and not current. The report had been presented to Brent Housing Partnership Board.

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that approval be given to the revised (probable) budget for 2011/12 (Appendix 1 Table 1 of the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects);

(ii)        that it be noted that the new HRA self financing system would take effect from April 2012 and that the draft budget for 2012/13 had been prepared on that basis, noting that:-

·         HRA Subsidy will cease from 2012/13;

·         The Government will redeem £198.000m of Brent Council’s debt with the Public Works Loan Board on 28 March 2012;

·         Brent’s HRA borrowing limit under self financing will be £199.291m; and

·         The estimated HRA borrowing “headroom” will be £59m

(iii)       that agreement be given to the savings/budget reductions for 2012/13 as set out in paragraph 3.53.4;

(iv)       that agreement be given to the HRA budget growth of £5.642m for depreciation (major repairs or debt repayment) as set out in paragraph 3.53.5 of the report from the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects;

(v)        that approval be given to an average overall rent increase (excluding service charges) from April 2012 of £6.81 per week, which is an average overall increase of 7.14%, as set out in further detail in paragraphs 3.35 to 3.39 of the report;

(vi)       that agreement be given to increase HRA Council Dwelling service charges by 5.6% from April 2012;

(vii)      that approval be given to the HRA budget for 2012/13 (Appendix 1 Table 1) of the report;

(viii)     that that from April 2012 all HRA dwellings that are relet (except successions, assignments and mutual exchanges and internal transfers ) are set at target rent from the commencement of the new occupancy;

(ix)       that it be noted that updated HRA Business Plan would be presented to the Executive shortly and this would include options for spending the Major Repairs resources;

(x)        that agreement be given to an average overall rent increase of £7.03p per dwelling per week on the Brent Stonebridge Dwellings, which is an average overall rent increase of 6.3% as set out  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

This report proposes the disposal of the former Charteris Sports Centre which is now surplus to Council requirements.

This report was withdrawn from consideration.

This report was withdrawn from consideration.

The budget report sets out the key decisions Members are asked to make on:

the 2012/13 General Fund revenue budget; the 2012/13 Schools Budget;

the 2012/13 Housing Revenue Account; the Council’s capital programme for 2012/13 to 2015/16; the Council’s treasury management strategy; and  prudential indicators aimed at ensuring the affordability of capital spending and a secure approach to borrowing and investment.

These recommendations only include a provisional Council Tax level for the GLA as its final budget was not agreed when this report was dispatched.  This means that the statutory calculation of the total amount of Council Tax under Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 may be amended by:

(a)  the final Greater London Authority precept; and

(b)  any other significant changes to the budget figures.

That subject to the above full council on 27 February 2012 be recommend to:

In respect of Section 3

2.1       Note the latest forecast for the General Fund outturn (Appendix A(i)) for 2011/12.

2.2       Agree the 2011/12 budget virements (Appendix A(ii)).

In respect of Section 4

2.3       Note the process, including consultation that has led to these budget proposals.

2.4       Agree the General Fund revenue budget for 2012/13, as summarised in Appendix B, or consider any amendments to that budget.

2.5       Agree the Service Area budgets including the cost pressures, savings, fees and charges and other adjustments detailed in Appendices C and D.

2.6       Note Appendix F and agree the budgets for central items and other budgets, or consider any amendments to those budgets.

2.7       Note and, where appropriate, make provision for the contingent liabilities and risks set out in this section of the report.

2.8       Agree the approach to balances set out in the report.

2.9       Receive the report from the Director of Finance and Corporate Services in paragraph 4.30 in respect of his statutory duty under Section 25 of 2003 Local Government Act.

            In respect of Section 5

2.10    Note that a reduced the GLA precept of £306.72 for each Band D equivalent property was approved at the meeting of the Greater London Assembly on 9 February 2012 and that the final budget report will be amended to reflect this.

2.11    Note the information regarding the limitation of council tax increases.

2.12    Agree there is no surplus or deficit at 31 March 2012 for that part of the Collection Fund relating to community charge.

2.13    Note and consider the advice of the Director of Legal and Procurement as set out in Appendix M.

2.14    Agree the instalment dates for council tax and NNDR for 2012/13, and the recovery policy for council tax as set out in Appendix G(ii).

            In respect of Section 6

2.15    Agree the Medium Term Financial Strategy and the provisional service area cash limits for 2013/14 to 2015/16 set out in Appendix H.

            In respect of Section 7

2.16    Agree the Schools Budget set out in Appendix I.

In respect of Section 8

2.17    Agree the Housing Revenue Account budget set out in Appendix J.

            In respect of Section 9

2.18    Note the latest forecast outturn position on the 2011/12 capital programme, and agree the revised budgets.

2.19    Note the properties included within the disposals programme set out in Appendix K(v).

2.20    Agree the 2012/13 to 2015/16 programme as set out in Appendix K(iii), including the new capital allocations.

2.21    Note  ...  view the full decision text for item 15.

Councillor Butt (Lead Member, Resources) introduced the budget report which set out the key decisions members were asked to make on namely: the 2012/13 General Fund revenue budget; the 2012/13 Schools Budget; the 2012/13 Housing Revenue Account; the Council’s capital programme for 2012/13 to 2015/16; the Council’s treasury management strategy; and prudential indicators aimed at ensuring the affordability of capital spending and a secure approach to borrowing and investment. He referred to the level of balances at the end of 2011/12 which were forecast at £10.080m and the key role of the One Council Programme in the delivery of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. The council would receive Formula Grant of £155.420m in 2012/13. This figure included the continuing grant in 2012/13 for freezing council tax in 2011/12, frozen for the third year running. It was noted that the GLA precept had been reduced by 3%. Councillor Butt also highlighted the risks within the budget including service cost pressures and limited resources. Circulated at the meeting was a schedule of fees and charges for 2012/13 which would be included in the report to Full Council and Councillor Butt proposed two amendments to recommendations 2.10 and 2.34 in the report relating to the announced GLA precept and also reference to the Localism Act 2011, which were agreed.

RESOLVED:-

That Full Council on 27 February 2012 be recommended to:

In respect of Section 3

1)         Note the latest forecast for the General Fund outturn (Appendix A(i)) for 2011/12.

2)         Agree the 2011/12 budget virements (Appendix A(ii)).

In respect of Section 4

3)         Note the process, including consultation that has led to these budget proposals.

4)         Agree the General Fund revenue budget for 2012/13, as summarised in Appendix B, or consider any amendments to that budget.

5)         Agree the Service Area budgets including the cost pressures, savings, fees and charges and other adjustments detailed in Appendices C and D.

6)         Note Appendix F and agree the budgets for central items and other budgets, or consider any amendments to those budgets.

7)         Note and, where appropriate, make provision for the contingent liabilities and risks set out in this section of the report.

8)         Agree the approach to balances set out in the report.

9)         Receive the report from the Director of Finance and Corporate Services in paragraph 4.30 in respect of his statutory duty under Section 25 of 2003 Local Government Act.

In respect of Section 5

10)      Note that a reduced the GLA precept of £306.72 for each Band D equivalent property was approved at the meeting of the Greater London Assembly on 9 February 2012 and that the final budget report will be amended to reflect this.

11)      Note the information regarding the limitation of council tax increases.

12)      Agree there is no surplus or deficit at 31 March 2012 for that part of the Collection Fund relating to community charge.

13)      Note and consider the advice of the Director of Legal and Procurement as set out in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

This report requests exemption from approval to invite tenders as required by Contract Standing Order 88.   This report requests approval to the renewal of the contract for the provision of Independent Domestic Violence Advisors.

that for the reasons set out in the detail of this report there are good operational reasons to award a contract to Advance for  a 12 month period, with options to extend for two further periods of 12 months, without undertaking a further  tendering in accordance with the Council's  Contract Standing Orders.

Councillor Beswick (Lead Member, Crime and Public Safety) introduced the report from the Director of Strategy, Partnerships and Improvement which requested exemption from approval to invite tenders as required by Contract Standing Order 88. The report requested approval to the renewal of the contract for the provision of Independent Domestic Violence Advisors.

RESOLVED:

that for the reasons set out in the detail of this report there are good operational reasons to award a contract to Advance for a 12 month period, with options to extend for two further periods of 12 months, without undertaking a further  tendering in accordance with the council's Contract Standing Orders.

Brent has had a three stage complaints policy in place for over 10 years. Since the policy was first introduced the Council’s overall management of complaints has improved to the extent that we are now in a good position to introduce a streamlined two stage complaints policy that will be less time consuming and have other tangible benefits for customers and the Council. This report explains why officers consider that it is now time to update the complaints policy, what the new policy comprises of and the steps that have been taken to ensure a smooth transition.

that agreement be given to the introduction of a two stage complaints policy for Council complaints with effect from April 2012 .

Brent has had a three stage complaints policy in place for over 10 years. Since the policy was first introduced the overall management of complaints has improved to the extent that the council was in a good position to introduce a streamlined two stage complaints policy that will be less time consuming and have had other tangible benefits for customers and the council. The report from the Director of Strategy, Partnerships and Improvement explains why officers consider that it is now time to update the complaints policy, what the new policy comprises of and the steps that have been taken to ensure a smooth transition.

RESOLVED:

that agreement be given to the introduction of a two stage complaints policy for Council complaints with effect from April 2012.

Brent Council is participating in the West London Alliance Transport Efficiency Programme in collaboration with the London Boroughs of Barnet, Ealing and Hounslow.  Brent Council has agreed to act as the Lead Borough for the procurement of the Passenger Transport Framework on behalf of other participating Boroughs. Following a report to the September 2011 Executive seeking authority to invite tenders for a Passenger Transport Framework Agreement to commence 1^st April 2012, this report seeks an amendment to the pre-tender considerations as required by Contract Standing Orders 88 and 89 contained in that report.

This report was withdrawn from consideration.

This report was withdrawn from consideration.

The Children and Families Committee at its meeting on 8 December 2011 referred two items to the Executive for consideration:

(i)         Results of Ofsted Safeguarding and Looked After children Services Inspection

(ii)        Review of policy for the provision of early years full time places

An extract from the minutes is attached and the reports to the meeting have been circulated separately to members and are available on the council’s website (http://democracy.brent.gov.uk)

Noted.

The Executive considered extracts from the minutes of the meeting of the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee held 8December 2011 which referred two items for consideration. On the Results of Ofsted Safeguarding and Looked After children Services Inspection, Councillor Arnold (Lead Member, Children and Families advised that a full report would be submitted to the meeting in March 2012. Regarding the Review of policy for the provision of early years’ full time places the Director of Children and Families advised that policy guidance on an appeals procedure for early years full time places would be evaluated and that vulnerable families newly arrived in the UK would be assisted by children’s centres and other work with disadvantaged families.

RESOLVED

that the references be noted.