Agenda and minutes

In the absence of the Chair, Councillor Stewart (Vice-Chair) opened the meeting.

Councillor Stewart in the Chair

Apologies for absence were received from Denis Heathcote.

Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor Cooke, Councillor Scott and Val Paley.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. (Late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with at items 10 & 18 below)

There was no urgent business to discuss.

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider any questions, deputations or petitions received In accordance with Part 4, Section B29 of the Council's Constitution.

None.

i.                    To confirm the unrestricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 24 July 2012 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

ii.                  To receive the minutes of the Alexandra Park and  Palace Advisory  Committee held on 17 July 2012, and to consider any recommendations from that Committee.

iii.                To receive and consider the minutes of the informal joint Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee, and Alexandra Park and  Palace Advisory  Committee held on 17 July 2012, and to consider any recommendations from that Committee.

iv.                 Process for circulation of draft minutes

RESOLVED

i)          That the unrestricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 24 July 2012 be approved as a correct record.

ii)         That the minutes of the Alexandra Park and Palace Advisory Committee held on 17 July 2012 be noted.

iii)        That the minutes of the informal joint Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee and Alexandra Park and Palace Advisory Committee held on 17 July 2012 be noted.

iv)        That, following agreement by the Chair of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board and Committee Members, draft minutes of the APPB would be presented at future meetings of the informal joint Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee and Alexandra Park and Palace Advisory Committee, as discussed at the 17 July 2012 SAC/CC meeting.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace, detailing –

·        Events programme

·        Governance

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

Events

·        There had been a number of different events over the summer months, and a full programme planned for the forthcoming months.

·        It had been a stretch for the Palace to facilitate these events but it had been worthwhile, given the popularity of such events and the publicity for the Palace.

·        The strategy was to cover as many events as possible, and the Palace was cautiously optimistic that the current volume of events could be managed.  However, a couple of previous events had been lost from the programme – the International Make-up show organisers had decided that the venue was too inaccessible, as it had snowed at the last event and there had been issues with the Council with regards to gritting the roads.

Clerks note – Councillor Cooke arrived at this point in the proceedings.

Councillor Cooke in the Chair

Red Bull

·        At the SAC/CC meeting on 16 October 2012, there had been no approach by Red Bull to hold another event in the Park.  However, following the  meeting, Red Bull had made an approach to the Palace to hold a ‘soap-box derby’.  Further information had been requested, and Duncan Wilson would consult with the SAC and CC Members via their respective Chairs when this information was available.

Governance

·        Following previous discussions on the inclusion of ‘expert advisors’ to the Board, the paper proposed that a small sub-group of the Board be appointed to short-list candidates to recommend to the Board.

·        The list of potential candidates would be available in January.

The Chair asked for nominations / volunteers for the sub-group, as follows: Councillor Cooke (Chair), Councillor Stewart, Councillor Scott and Colin Marr (in a non-voting capacity).

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the report be noted; and

ii)         That a sub group be formed to consider candidates before recommending candidates to the main Board.  The sub committee membership shall be Councillor Cooke, Councillor Stewart, Councillor Scott and Colin Marr (in a non-voting capacity).

To receive the report of the Finance and Resources Director detailing –

·        Latest Trust Management Accounts

·        Update from Finance and Resources Committee (19 October 2012)

 Nigel Watts – Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

·        The accounts to date showed an overspend of £25k – this was due to a ‘deep clean’ before Holland Heineken House and the cost of re-seeding the grass following the Red Bull event.  The cleaning cost would be recovered from the Trading Company by way of a Gift Aid repayment, and Red Bull had covered the cost of reinstatement.

·        Regeneration spend was £8k below budget, but this was due to timing as opposed to actual spends – it was not anticipated that there would be an underspend on the regeneration project.

·        Although there was an overspend on the security budget, the security contract was included as part of the larger contract with Europa.  Once each element of the contract was taken into account, it was likely that at year end the position would balance out.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the financial results for the 5 months ended 31 August 2012 be noted; and

ii)         That the update from the APTL Finance Resources & Audit Committee be noted.

To receive the report of the Park Manager, Alexandra Palace, updating the Board on events and works within the park.

Mark Evison – Park Manager, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

·        The Park had been successful in a number of awards – Green Flag award, Green Heritage award, and a silver-gilt award in the large park category of the London in Bloom competition.

·        Funding from Red Bull had been used for repairs and maintenance of the street lighting on the South Front, replacement of street lighting in The Grove (due to be completed before Christmas) and tree works to improve the views of London from the terrace (also due to be completed before Christmas).

·        The trial period for the overnight gates closure was due to commence in the new year – once a new gate had been manufactured and installed.

·        £220k section 106 funding had been provided to improve the access around the Campsbourne Estate and New River Village.  Further details would be available once a project manager had been appointed.

·        The works at the Cricket Club would commence on 12 November 2012.

Local Nature Reserves

·        Council officers were now ready to declare a number of sites as Local Nature Reserves.  The LNR declaration would not bring new restrictions to the Park beyond those that already exist.  There would be no effect in terms of impact on events in the Park.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the contents of the report be noted; and

ii)         That the advice of the Statutory Advisory, and Joint Informal Advisory & Consultative Committees be noted and the proposal for the Officers to conclude the Local Nature Reserve Declaration be approved.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace, detailing –

·        Summary of progress since the last meeting

·        Proposal for Major Grants bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund for approval

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

·        The report summarised the outcome of the public consultation.

·        The Heritage Lottery Fund bid would be submitted on 30 November, and a decision was expected in April 2013.

·        The masterplan for the theatre, BBC Studios and East Court had been completed to RIBA stage B, which was required for the HLF bid, and further work by Farrells in 2013 would provide an idea of the level of investment required elsewhere in the Palace.

·        The HLF bid was for a total of £16.8m – around 70% of the total cost, the remainder of which would be raised via match-funding.

·        Potential designs for a hotel were shown, and it anticipated that these would be more likely to attract investors if the HLF bid was successful.

BBC Studios

·        The funding would enable the restoration of the theatre, the East Court entrance and BBC Studios A & B. 

·        The scheme allowed for the unblocking of all external archways and the provision of a studio exhibition using technical models.  The BBC had offered use of their archives.

·        It was still to be decided whether an entrance fee would be charged to access the studios.  The use of the BBC archives was only for non-profit projects, however Duncan Wilson would investigated whether this included or excluded any contributions asked for to cover the running costs of the studios.

Theatre

·        A key point of the theatre refurbishment was to retain the character of the existing theatre, and also to allow for the space to be used flexibly.  The space was not commercially viable just as a theatre.

·        The theatre floor would be flattened, to allow for the space to be used for conferences, banquets and other receptions.  There would be no fixed seating, to allow for these different set ups.  The possibility of an adaptable floor had been explored but the cost was too high to consider this option.  Adaptations could always be made in the future, and the Roundhouse in Camden was a good example of where this has happened.

·        The balcony would be structurally repaired, and would have fixed seating.

·        There had been approaches made by Complicite, the Royal Shakespeare Company and Cirque du Soleil with regards to using the theatre space.

·        The English National Opera had also expressed an interest in running a project in the Great Hall.

·        In response to whether there would be any governance issues in running the space, Duncan Wilson explained that it was likely to be run by the Trading Company as usual for events elsewhere in the Palace but in the event that a longer licensee for a particular operator or promotor was requested, Charity Commission approval might be required.

East Court

·        Due to its’ size, the East Court was an expensive area to redevelop.

·        The East Court would be used to tell the story of Alexandra Palace through pictures and models.  This would be the starting point for a visit and lead  ...  view the full minutes text for item 252.

There was no such business.

To note the date of the next meeting – Thursday 7 February 2012.

NOTED the date of the next meeting – Thursday 7 February 2013.

Items 13-20 are likely to be subject of a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972;  Paragraph 2 – Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual, Paragraph 3 – Information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the Authority holding that information) and Paragraph 5 – Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings.

To confirm the exempt minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 24 July 2012 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

RESOLVED that the restricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 24 July 2012 be approved as a correct record.

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive – introduced the paper as set out.  He informed the Board that since the publication of the report, the tender panel had reached an agreed verdict to award the contract to DBR Ltd.

In addition to being the lowest cost bid of £421k, DBR Ltd scored highest in the quality aspect of the tender, and the bid was in line with the pre-tender estimate.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED that the contract be awarded to DBR Ltd.

Mark Evison – Park Manager, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

·        In fitting with the regeneration plan for the Park and Palace, the medium and long-term requirements for leased properties were considered by the Chief Executive and other officers.  Current arrangements mean that short term changes were difficult, and so a longer-term properties policy was required.

·        The proposed policies and objectives were outlined at paragraphs 7.5 and 7.6 of the report.

·        Raymond Prince – LBH Legal – informed the Board of a typo in paragraph 11.2, which should read: “The Council’s Head of Legal Services has been consulted in the preparation of this report, and has no comments save to confirm that the Council, acting as Trustee does have the statutory power to grant leases as set out in paragraph 6.1 of the report.”

Actual workshop ‘Little Dinosaurs’

·        The tenant had requested that approval be given for an adjustment to a wall.  Mark Evison had been previously informed that this was not a planning issue, but had since been advised (following the publication of the report) that the tenant would need to take plans to the Council’s planning department to ascertain whether the application was needed.

·        Members of the Board decided that until further information regarding planning permission and detailed plans were available, no decision could be made.

Campsbourne Play Centre

·        It was hoped that improvements could be made as part of the s106 package.

·        The principle idea was to improve the connection between the Park and the play centre and to carry out some improvement works to the building.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the report and the updated position of the Park leases and concessions be noted;

ii)         That the proposed policies and objectives as set out at paragraphs 7.5-7.6 be approved;

iii)        That it be agreed that further consideration be given to the request from the tenant in the Actual Workshop (Little Dinosaurs) to:

·        Adjust the rear wall

·        Begin negotiations for a lease extension, in light of the proposed policies at paragraphs 7.5-7.6 of the report;

following submission of a clear set of plans, and confirmation of planning permissions required;

iv)        That permission for development on the pitch and putt course be revoked;

v)         That the current position of the project to amalgamate the Lakeside Café, boat-hire provision and toilet cleaning services be noted; and

vi)        That the position regarding Campsbourne Play Centre be noted, and authority granted to the Chief Executive to follow up the matter on behalf of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board.

At this point in the proceedings, the Chair proposed that, as the time was approaching 22.00hrs, Standing Orders be suspended to enable the meeting to continue, and the agenda completed.  Members of the Board agreed nemine contracidente to the proposal and it was

RESOLVED that Standing Orders be suspended to enable the meeting to continue past 22.00hrs.

Nigel Watts – Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED

·        The business plan showed a reduction in the Trust deficit.

·        This was a valuable exercise to look ahead for the next three years, although a large element depended on the Council’s budget setting policy.

The Chair commented that this was a positive piece of work and could have an impact on the regeneration work.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED that the three year capital bid to Haringey be approved.

Nigel Watts – Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.  The revenue account was performing better this year and the forecast outturn for the Trust and Trading company was due to hit the budget target.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the results of the Trust and Trading Company for the 5 months ended 31 August 2012 be noted.

ii)         That the latest combined Trust and Trading Company Risk Register be noted.

Nigel Watts – Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out. 

NOTED:

·        The new position would be beneficial, as would cover three areas – Regeneration, Facilities and Parks.

·        The budget for the post would include the budgets previously used for two existing posts (which were to be deleted).

·        The recommendations were amended, following advice from the Council’s Chief Finance Officer.

The Chair MOVED and it was

RESOLVED that

i)          The establishment of the post of Director of Regeneration and Property Services as set out in the report be approved; and

i)          That a recruitment panel of Board Members (Councillors Cooke, Hare and Peacock) be appointed to make the relevant appointment.

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.  He welcomed Robert Oakley – LLP Partner, Bates Wells and Braithwaite (BWB) – who was in attendance to present the preliminary advice of BWB on the merits of taking further the case (if any) against the Trust’s former legal advisors, Howard Kennedy.

Mr Oakley informed the Board that based on the reasons set out in the report, there would be little merit in further exploring a claim in negligence and/or for breach of contract against Howard Kennedy.  Such a claim would be expensive and would have very limited prospects of success. 

Mr Oakley referred the Board to paragraph 48 of the report, in particular to the line ‘it was and is not our role to advise on the commercial prudence of this decision and we were not asked to advise upon the licence terms’.  Mr Oakley advised that ‘the Court has held that if, in the course of doing work for which he is retained, the solicitor becomes aware of a risk or potential risk, this does not mean that the solicitor should go beyond the scope of his/her instructions, or do ‘extra’ work’.  It was clear that Howard Kennedy had not been asked nor was required to advise on the drafting of or entering into the licence with Firoka.

In response to questions from the Board, Mr Oakley explained that once advice had been given to an authorised person, a solicitor would not normally be expected to police how his advice was disseminated within the client organisation.

Councillor Hare referred to the meeting where the Board had agreed the licence, and that he recalled that he had asked the then Trust Solicitor Iain Harris’ opinion as to whether the Board should go ahead and give its agreement for officers to proceed with the proposed licence.  Councillor Hare stated that Mr Harris had responded ‘yes’ – however there was no record of this in the minutes of the meeting.  Robert Oakley responded that a solicitor should only be asked for legal advice and Iain Harris would not have been duty bound to provide advice on any business decisions of the Trust.  Mr Oakley added that as there was no written record, a court would not favour ‘recollection’ over contemporaneous evidence. 

Councillor Williams questioned the rationale of paragraph 28 of the report, adding his view that if someone had attended meetings and was aware that their advice was not asked for / taken into consideration and did not say anything then this would be a case of the solicitor withholding information.  Duncan Wilson and Julie Parker informed the Board that further investigation had shown that later advice given by Iain Harris was that it would be prudent to wait a month before proceeding with the proposed licence.  Robert Oakley explained that a solicitor would only act within the scope of their retainer – they would not make any comment or provide legal advice if it was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 262.

There was no such business.

There being no further business to discuss the meeting ended at 22.40hrs.