Issue - meetings

Cabinet will be asked to note The Scrutiny Review of Community Infrastructure Levy – Governance Arrangements and agree the Cabinet’s response to the recommendations included at appendix 2 of the report.

Councillor Charles Wright, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny, presented the Scrutiny Review of the CIL [Community Infrastructure Levy] governance arrangements. This was an underdeveloped policy area and arrangements were needed to support allocation of receipts from the CIL to local neighbourhoods.

Councillor Wright was pleased to note that Cabinet were accepting all of the recommendations with actions included on how these recommendations would be implemented.

Cabinet continued to consider the responses to the recommendations at appendix 2.

Councillor Newton welcomed the recommendations and raised some questions in relation to Scrutiny recommendations 4 and 8. They were responded to as follows:

• There were current proposals for a Planning specific training programme for all Members. Further to consulting with the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning, training on the role of Councillors in the operation of the neighbourhood CIL fund and supporting the community put forward applications, could be included in the programme.

• The Assistant Director for Planning explained that recommendation 4 was trying to reflect what is important for community and forums in respect of community spending. The Council was already putting together an explicit capital programme and would try and capture what is Council and third party based funding .This was not exclusive to the 25% infrastructure projects but for the importance of the CIL regime where there was a degree of discretion and therefore it was important to provide consistent investment that can be set out and consulted upon. The Council would have this investment information through the capital programme which is defined each year.

RESOLVED

1.    To agree the responses to the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review as set out at appendix 2 of the report.

2.    To note that where the recommendations have a cost implications, the funding source should be determined by the Chief Operating officer.

Reasons for Decision

The evidence supporting the Panel’s recommendations was outlined in the main body of the report [appendix 1]

Alternative Options Considered

The evidence supporting the Panel’s recommendations was outlined in the main body of the report [appendix 1]. The Cabinet could have chosen not to accept the recommendations, despite endorsement by the Planning service. The Council did not currently have a protocol for the spending of CIL receipts and would have to prepare and adopt an alternative process.