Agenda item

i)                    Report of the Monitoring Officer

TO FOLLOW

ii)                  Report of the Director of Corporate Resources

TO FOLLOW

iii)        Appendix (For information only):

a)     Copy of the ‘call in’

b)     Draft minutes of meeting of the Cabinet of 28 July 2008 (Subject to confirmation by the Cabinet)

c)      Civic Centre and Ceremonial Functions report from the Cabinet of 28 July 2008.

A decision on the above item was taken by the Cabinet on 28 July 2008. The decision has been called in, in accordance with the provisions set out in the Constitution, by Councillors Whyte, Gorrie, Oakes, Wilson and Reid.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee is requested to decide what further action it wishes to take regarding the Call In.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may deal with the Call-In in one of three ways:

i)                    The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide not to take any further action, in which case the decision is implemented immediately.

ii)                  The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide to refer the decision back to the decision taker, in which case the decision taker has 5 working days to reconsider the decision before taking a final decision.

iii)                The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide to refer the decision to Full Council.

It is proposed that consideration of this item be structured as follows:

(i)         A brief outline by the above Members on the reasons for the Call In.

(ii)        Response by the Cabinet Member for Housing.

(iii)       Debate by Members on action to be taken.

(iv)       Decision.

Note: Under Standing Order 32.6 no other business shall be considered at the meeting.

The special meeting of the committee had been convened to consider the call-in of the Cabinet item regarding the Civic Centre and ceremonial functions.

A decision on the item had been taken by the Cabinet on 28 July 2008, and had been called in, in accordance with the provisions set out in the Constitution, by Councillors Whyte, Gorrie, Oakes, Wilson and Reid.

The proposal was considered by the above Councillors to be outside the budget/policy framework.

The committee noted that the Monitoring Officer had ruled the call-in valid for the following reasons:

(a)    it was submitted and signed by 5 Councillors

(b)    it was received by the Head of Democratic Services by 10.00 a.m. on the fifth working day following publication of the draft minute on 30 July 2008 i.e. before 10 a.m. on Wednesday 6^th August.

(c)    it specified the decision to be called in

(d)    it specified whether the decision was claimed to be outside the policy/budget framework

(e)    it gave reasons for the Call-In and outlined an alternative course of action

(f)      the original decision has not been subject to the urgency procedures required in paragraph 18 of the Rules.

The committee was addressed by Cllr Gorrie, a signatory to the call-in, who stated that the proposed decision was the second largest discretionary expenditure by the Council this decade, that there had been a lack of consultation on the decision and that the proposed new Civic Centre was not explicitly stated in the Council’s budget.  The signatories to the call-in regarded the proposal as unjustifiable, and stated their belief that the Council should trial a system of holding Civic meetings at a variety of other buildings around the borough.

The committee was also addressed by Michael Corwell Jones of the Friends of Woodside Park, who stated residents concerns over the impact of the proposed development on the park itself.  Concern was also raised that the proposed timescale would leave little time for consultation with the local community.

The Cabinet Member for Resources addressed the committee and, in concurrence with the Chief Financial Officer, stated that the decision was part of the Council’s policy/budget framework, as it was in accordance with the agreed Accommodation Strategy.  The decision had been taken in public at a meeting of the Cabinet, with final approval for the sale of the Civic Centre site not required for a further two years, thus allowing opportunity for further consultation.  He stated a number of positive benefits of the move, including the need for the delivery of modern Council services, with the Civic Centre being no longer fit for purpose.  The Cabinet Member stated that proposals put forward by the call-in signatories for a trial period without a central Civic Building were uncosted and had no precedent in London governance.

With regards to the services at Woodside House, Officers assured residents that  equivalent alternative accommodation would be provided.  A site at Commerce Road already identified, and extensive consultation would be carried out prior to the proposed move.  The committee was further assured that the proposals would not encroach onto the park landscape in the long-term.

Members expressed their concern over the proposed sale of an asset at a time when the property market was in a ‘slump’.  The Cabinet Member responded that as the sale would not take place for two years, he was confident that the market would have stabilised by that point.  He stressed that that would be the correct time for the Civic Centre site to be sold from a dvelopment perspective.

Officers informed the committee that all known risks had been identified and provided to Members in the report detailing the proposal.  The committee was assured by the Cabinet Member that Project Boards were in place and that he had confidence that the proposed project would be managed effectively.  It was noted that senior oversight would be provided through the Regeneration Stream Board.

Members were also informed that sustainability was at the heart of the proposals, with further work on issues such as energy efficiency to be carried out in due course.  It was acknowledged that the Civic Centre was, by nature of its age, a poor performer in terms of both energy efficiency and in the lack of provision of a termporature-controlled environment within its walls.

Following the withdrawel of the Cabinet Member, Members discussed the proposals, noting their concern that the issue was not brought to the committee’s attention as part of the Budget Scrutiny process.  Nevertheless, they agreed that the Scrutiny Budget process would continue to be improved year-on-year

Councillor Winskill then moved a MOTION that the decision was oustide the Council’s Budget/Policy framework and voted to refer it tbacko the decision maker.  Following a vote, the  motion FELL.

Councillor Aitken then moved a MOTION that the decision should be referred to Full Council.  Following a vote, the motion FELL.

Councillor Bull then moved a MOTION that no further action be taken in respect of the decision, thus allowing the decision to be implemented immediately.  Following a vote, the motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

That no further action be taken in respect of the call in of Cabinet decision CAB47, Future Accommodation for Civic Centre and Ceremonial Functions.