Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Paul Abbey, Christopher Barrass, Colin Cross, Andrew Gomm, David Goodwin, Steven Lee, Ann McShee, Susan Parker, Jo Randall, and James Steel and also from Honorary Aldermen Catherine Cobley, Sarah Creedy, Jayne Marks, Terence Patrick, Tony Phillips, Lynda Strudwick and Jenny Wicks.

To receive and note any disclosable pecuniary interests from councillors. In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

There were no disclosures of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Council held on 16 January 2023.

The Council confirmed, as a correct record, the minutes of the extraordinary meeting held on 16 January 2023. The Mayor signed the minutes.

To receive any communications or announcements from the Mayor.

The Mayor was pleased to announce that there had been an excellent response to the request for nominations for The Mayor’s Award for Service in the Community. The nomination period had now closed, with over 25 recommendations received.

The Mayor was delighted to report that there had been excellent support for The Mayor’s Ball and that we were very close to capacity.

Finally, the Mayor was pleased to confirm that the Knife Angel would be coming to Guildford in March.  This magnificent exhibit would be on display outside the Cathedral and there would be a month of seminars and activities particularly aimed at older students in our secondary schools.  The Mayor asked councillors with close ties with secondary schools, to encourage attendance by Years 11-13.  There were a number of important visitors scheduled to come to the event including the father of Stephen Lawrence. 

To receive any communications or announcements from the Leader of the Council.

The Leader reported on the following matters to the Council:

(a)   Becoming a Councillor briefing – Thursday 9 February 2023 (6pm to 8pm in the Council Chamber)

Prospective candidates were encouraged to attend.

(b)   Purple Flag 

The Council had been awarded the prestigious Purple Flag accreditation for our evening and night-time economy for the eighth year running.  The Purple Flag aimed to raise the standard and the appeal of town and city centres between the hours of 5pm and 5am. It was awarded to towns that met or exceeded standards of excellence in managing the evening and night-time economy. This meant that Guildford was recognised for providing: 

·       a vibrant and diverse mix of dining 

·       entertainment and culture 

·       the safety and wellbeing of visitors and local residents 

(c)   Bring ID to vote: public awareness campaign 

The Council had launched a public awareness campaign in partnership with the Electoral Commission to make voters aware that they need to bring photo ID to polling stations at the local elections on 4 May 2023.

In response to questions from councillors, the Leader confirmed that Voter ID was only required for voters who voted in person at polling stations, not for those with a postal vote.

To receive questions or statements from the public.

There had been no questions or requests to make statements from the public.

To hear questions from councillors of which due notice has been given.

(a)       Councillor Ramsey Nagaty asked the Lead Councillor for Finance and Planning Policy, Councillor Joss Bigmore, the following question:

·       “Proposed changes to the Planning System were recently announced by the Rt Hon Michael Gove MP. 

·       There is a consultation on changes to the NPPF.

·       GBC has declared a Climate Change emergency.

·       The ONS have confirmed that the housing need in the GBC Local Plan is greatly exaggerated.

In view of the above, can the Lead Councillor for Planning Policy confirm that all necessary evidence (not merely infrastructure, economy, incorporation of the TCMP) is being gathered, specifically including a review of the Green Belt and Countryside study and an updated Brownfield Register?”

The Lead Councillor’s response was as follows:

“The Council will have regard to all relevant factors when undertaking the Local Plan review in the context of National guidance on the matter. To support this, we will continue with preparatory work including gathering a proportionate and relevant evidence base to understand any changed circumstances affecting the borough.

At this stage, we are not of the view that circumstances have changed in such a way that means that undertaking an earlier review of the Local Plan would be advantageous to the borough and officers continue to work toward concluding a formal review towards the end of the statutory five-year period (i.e. by early next year) in line with the Council resolution in April 2022 (CO113).

Work will continue to be undertaken to update the relevant parts of the evidence base and this new evidence will be used to help inform the review.

A significantly greater evidence base would be required to support any updated (or new) Local Plan that is necessary following formal review. It would be premature to commission much of this work now prior to the outcome of a review, before a formal plan-making process is underway, and considering the significant uncertainty in relation to the national planning reform process and the potentially changed legal and national policy context for plan-making. Thus, following the review, an outline will be presented in terms of the extent of evidence base necessary and resources required to support a new plan-making process, and this will include consideration regarding whether our Green Belt and Countryside study remains fit for purpose.

This approach will enable us to respond flexibly to changing circumstances and avoids the risk of undertaking abortive work.  That said, we are exploring if any evidence that is unlikely to become outdated can be produced jointly with Waverley Borough Council who have now carried out a review and decided to embark upon updating their evidence base.

Nevertheless, excellent progress is being made in the meantime with work toward adoption of our Local Plan Development Management Policies – I remain hopeful that we will be in a position to table the Plan before Council to consider for adoption during March following the Inspector’s consultation on his proposed main modifications that ended last week.

I am also pleased to report that in line with Council’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO116

Under Section 39 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council was required to consider and approve a pay policy statement for the financial year ahead and publish it on its website.  The Council therefore considered the Pay Policy Statement covering 2023-24, which had set out the elements of pay and other benefits paid to staff and in particular the most senior employees. 

The Pay Policy Statement reflected the current Senior Management structure following the creation of the shared Joint Management Team.The posts defined as senior management within the legislation were now employed by Waverley Borough Council, therefore all reference to these posts had been removed.

The Pay Policy Statements for Waverley and Guildford Borough Councils had been aligned where there were common aspects within the Policies.  The new style of document had retained the key elements required for both Councils within their Pay Policy with the additional information added in respect of each Council.

The relevant provisions of the statutory guidance on the making and disclosure of Special Severance Payments by local authorities in England, which had been published on 12 May 2022, had been incorporated into the Pay Policy Statement.

Councillors noted that the Council would continue to pay at the Real Living Wage for outside London, at the bottom of the pay scale. This would aid recruitment difficulties in attracting and retaining key staff. 

Upon the motion of the Lead Councillor for Climate Change and Organisational Development, Councillor George Potter, seconded by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane, the Council

RESOLVED: That the Pay Policy Statement for the 2023-24 financial year, attached at Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Council, be approved.

Reason:

To comply with the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 (Section 39) and associated guidance.

Prior to consideration of the budget related reports, of which the Capital and Investment Strategy was the first, the Chief Finance Officer (CFO) made a presentation to the Council, which provided information about the strategic context within which the budget had been prepared, the medium-term financial plan, the robustness of the estimates, adequacy of reserves and budget risks. 

The Council considered a report on the Council’s capital and investment strategy, which gave a high-level overview of how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to the provision of local public services along with an overview of how associated risk was managed and the implications for future financial sustainability.

Decisions made now, and during the period of the strategy on capital and treasury management would have financial consequences for the Council for many years into the future. The report therefore included details of the capital programme, any new bids/mandates submitted for approval plus the requirements of the Prudential Code and the investment strategy covering treasury management investments, service investments, and commercial investments.  The report had also covered the requirements of the Treasury Management Code and the prevailing DLUHC Statutory Guidance.

Councillors noted that in order to achieve the ambitious targets within the Corporate Plan, the Council needed to invest in its assets, via capital expenditure, which was split into the General Fund (GF) and Housing Revenue Account (HRA).

All projects, regardless of the fund, would be funded by capital receipts, grants and contributions, reserves, and finally borrowing.  When preparing the budget reports, it was not known how each scheme would be funded and, in the case of regeneration projects, what the delivery model would be.  The report showed a high-level position.  The business case for each individual project would set out the detailed funding arrangements for the project.

The Council noted that some capital receipts or revenue income streams might arise as a result of regeneration schemes, but in most cases the position was currently uncertain, and it was too early at this stage to make assumptions.  It was likely that there would be cash-flow implications of the development schemes, where income would come in after the five-year time horizon of the report and the expenditure incurred earlier in the programme.

The Council had an underlying need to borrow for the General Fund capital programme of £286 million between 2022-23 and 2027-28.  Officers had put forward bids, with a net cost over the same period of £10 million, increasing this underlying need to borrow to £296 million should these proposals be approved for inclusion in the programme.

The capital programme included several significant regeneration schemes, which it was assumed would be financed from GF resources.  Detailed funding proposals for each scheme would be considered when their Outline Business Case was presented to the Executive for approval.

The main areas of expenditure (shown gross), as set out in the report, were:

·       £274 million Weyside Urban Village (WUV)

·       £62 million strategic property purchases

·       £32 million North Downs Housing (NDH)

·       £28 million  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO118

Councillors noted that the Council owned and managed over 5,200 Council Houses which it rented to tenants who qualified for social housing or for which it held the freehold.  The Housing Revenue Account (HRA) was the ring-fenced account within which the Council recorded the income and expenditure for its operations as landlord to its residents and for the day-to-day management, repairs and maintenance of the council housing stock.

The Council considered a report on the proposed Housing Revenue Account (HRA) budget for 2023-24, which had been built on the estimates and assumptions in the updated 2023 HRA Business Plan. The business plan had been reviewed to reflect changes in relevant legislation and guidance, along with consideration of the Council’s declaration of a Climate Emergency and the ongoing challenges of the pandemic as it affected the Council’s operating environment. 

The Direction on the Rent Standard 2019 had required the Regulator of Social Housing to set a rent standard for social housing which came into effect from 2020, which would have been CPI +1% from the preceding September rate. This would have resulted in a rent cap of 11.1%. However, a new Direction was issued on 12 December 2022 which stated that rents should be capped at 7%.

However, it was proposed that rather than adopting the directed cap, the Council should adopt a 5% rent cap, which would mean that, on average, households in a 1 bedroomed property would save £8.84 a month compared to the Government cap, and £10.22 for those in a 2 bed and £11.70 for those in a 3 bedroomed property. This below cap level was a recognition of the challenging wider climate faced by residents and had been achievable due to the ongoing prudential management of the overall HRA Account to provide households with some additional assistance at this time.

For those in shared ownership, the Government had not introduced a cap and so rent increases could be set at up to 11.1%; however, the Council was proposing to cap these rents in line with rented homes at 5%.

A 3% increase in garage rents was proposed for 2023-24, which was in line with the wider Council policy on fees and charges.

The report included overall details of the proposed investment programme for the properties that were managed within the HRA, additional details of this work had also been set out within the item on the Capital and Investment Strategy. 

The HRA annual budget and HRA business plan had assumed that any surpluses on the HRA were used to invest in redevelopment and upgrading of the existing stock, invest in new build affordable housing to be retained and rented by the Council within the HRA and then if there were sufficient monies available, the repayment of debt taken on under HRA self-financing. 

The 30-year business plan had shown that there were sufficient resources within the HRA to carry out the Council’s investment plans as well as repay the debt over the 30-year business plan period  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO119

The Council considered a report which outlined the draft General Fund Budget for 2023/24 and Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) ending 2026/27. The MTFP had set out the key work streams for the Council to focus on over this period which, collectively, aimed to address the projected significant shortfall in the General Fund budget.

The proposed budget for 2023-24, which included a Council Tax requirement for Guildford Borough Council of £11,392,760 excluding parish preceptsand a Council Tax increase of £5.59 per year (2.99%), resulting in a Band D charge of £192.41.  As set out in the report, the Council was required to set a balanced budget for 2023-24. 

Parish Councils had requested precepts totalling £2,174,116 meaning the overall council tax requirement for the borough, including parish precepts would be £13,566,876.

The General Fund Budget Summary had shown a budget deficit of £3.1million to be resolved in 2023-24.  There were no proposed cuts to services included in the draft 2023-24 General Fund budget.  The budget strategy outlined in the report had identified a framework that would deliver savings from the asset management, business transformation, commercial and collaboration programmes to address the financial challenges and help protect funding for front line services.

It was anticipated that cost pressures would reduce over the MTFP period and reserves would be utilised in the short term whilst longer term base budget cost pressures would be resolved through the budget strategy. 

The Joint Executive Advisory Board (JEAB) had considered this report at its meeting held on 24 January 2023.  At its meeting held on 26 January 2023, the Executive had also considered this report, including the comments of the JEAB and had endorsed the recommendation therein. 

Under The Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 and Council Procedure Rule 19 (d), the Council was reminded that a recorded vote would be conducted on the proposed budget and Council tax resolution as set out in the report, and the Order Paper circulated at the meeting which contained details of the respective precepts set by Surrey County Council and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey, neither of which were deemed to be excessive.

Upon the motion of the Deputy Leader of the Council and Lead Councillor for Finance and Planning Policy, Councillor Joss Bigmore, seconded by the Leader of the Council, and Lead Councillor for Housing and Community, Councillor Julia McShane, the Council:

RESOLVED:

(1)    That the budget be approved, and specifically that the Council Tax requirement for 2023-24 be set at £11,392,760 excluding parish precepts and £13,566,876 to include parish precepts.

(2)    That the Band D Council Tax for 2023-24 (excluding parish precepts) be set at £192.41, an increase of £5.59 (2.99%).

(3)     That the Band D Council Tax for 2023-24 (including parish precepts) be set at £229.12.

(4)     That the Council approves the following, as considered by the Executive on 26 January 2023:

(i)     the General Fund revenue estimates for 2023-24 including proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO120

Following receipt of the KPMG internal audit report on the effectiveness of the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee, which was considered by the Committee at its meeting on 24 March 2022, the Council noted that one of the recommendations was that the Committee should report at least annually to the Council on its activities and an assessment of its performance in discharging its responsibilities as defined in the Committee’s terms of reference.

The Council considered the first of these annual reports, for the municipal year 2021-22, having noted that it had been commended for adoption by the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee at its meeting held on 19 January 2023.

Upon the motion of the Chairman of the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee, Councillor Deborah Seabrook, seconded by the Lead Councillor for Climate Change and Organisational Development, Councillor George Potter, the Council

RESOLVED: That the annual report of the Corporate Governance & Standards Committee for 2021-22, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Council, be adopted.

Reason:

To ensure that the Committee is accountable for its work to the full Council.

At the Council meeting held on 6 December 2022, the Council had considered a report on the selection of Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2023-24.  In accordance with the constitutional changes adopted by the Council in 2014, the Council had agreed to nominate the current Deputy Mayor, Councillor Masuk Miah for election as Mayor of the Borough for 2023-24, subject to the outcome of the Borough Council elections in May 2023.

However, as no nominations had been submitted in respect of the appointment of Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2023-24, the matter had been deferred to this meeting for consideration of any nominations.

Councillor Paul Spooner proposed and the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Joss Bigmore, seconded the nomination of Councillor Nigel Manning for Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2023-24.  Councillor Manning absented himself from the meeting during the formal consideration of the nomination.

Having considered the nomination, the Council

RESOLVED: That, subject to the outcome of the Borough Council elections in May 2023, Councillor Nigel Manning be nominated for the Deputy Mayoralty of the Borough for the 2023-24 municipal year.

Reason:

To make early preparations for the selection of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the municipal year 2023-24.

The Council was required to conduct the next review of councillors’ allowances in 2023 following the local elections.  Under The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003 (“the 2003 Regulations”), the Council must appoint an independent remuneration panel to make recommendations as to the type and level of allowances to be included in the next scheme of allowances for councillors.  The Council had a duty to have regard to the panel’s recommendations.

Waverley Borough Council was also committed to conduct a review of allowances for its councillors following next year’s local elections.

Taking account of the current collaborative arrangements for joint working, both councils had agreed to establish a Joint Independent Remuneration Panel (JIRP) to conduct separate reviews of the allowances payable to councillors of both authorities and make separate recommendations to both councils.  The panel would also act as a parish remuneration panel and would be required to produce a separate report collectively for the parish councils in Guildford borough and another report for the town and parish councils in Waverley borough.

At its meeting on 11 October, the Council had approved the terms of reference of the JIRP, and the re-appointment of three persons who had served previously on the independent remuneration panels for both Guildford and Waverley.  Both councils had expressed a wish to appoint a JIRP comprising five members.  Accordingly, the Democratic Services and Elections Manager had been authorised to advertise for candidates from the general public and a wide range of organisations, including the local business community and voluntary organisations, for the appointment of up to two other members of the JIRP to serve for a period of up to four years commencing with the 2023-24 municipal year. 

Following the advertisement, four candidates had been shortlisted for interview by a panel comprising the Leaders and Deputy Leaders of both councils.  After one of the candidates withdrew, the panel interviewed the three remaining candidates and had recommended that Rodney Bates and Paul Marcus be appointed to the JIRP.

Upon the motion of the Lead Councillor for Planning Development, Legal and Democratic Services, Councillor Tom Hunt seconded by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane, the Council

RESOLVED: That Rodney Bates and Paul Marcus be appointed to the Joint Independent Remuneration Panel for a period of up to four years commencing with the 2023-24 municipal year.

Reason:

To comply with the requirements of The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003, and both councils’ wish to establish a JIRP comprising of five members.

To receive and note the attached minutes of the meetings of the Executive held on 24 November, 12 December 2022, and 5 January 2023.

The Council received and noted the minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 24 November 2022, 12 December 2022, and 5 January 2023.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Ramsey Nagaty to propose, and Councillor Catherine Young to second, the following motion:

“In reference to the question previously asked please note that KC advice has been obtained confirming that sites taken out of the Green Belt by the adoption of the Local Plan 2019 that are yet to obtain planning permission may be returned to the Green Belt without any liability being incurred by GBC. Green Belt has been removed and then re-instated by GBC in the past.

In view of the considerable developments approved to date in the villages and countryside with GBC having a 5-year housing supply, the Council

RESOLVES:

(1)  That the Local Plan Panel shall commence its formal review of the Local Plan immediately.  

(2)  That progress with regard to such review be reported at each Full Council meeting”.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Ramsey Nagaty proposed, and Councillor Catherine Young seconded the following motion:

“In reference to the question previously asked please note that KC advice has been obtained confirming that sites taken out of the Green Belt by the adoption of the Local Plan 2019 that are yet to obtain planning permission may be returned to the Green Belt without any liability being incurred by GBC.

Green Belt has been removed and then re-instated by GBC in the past. In view of the considerable developments approved to date in the villages and countryside with GBC having a 5-year housing supply, the Council

RESOLVES:

(1) That the Local Plan Panel shall commence its formal review of the Local Plan immediately.

(2) That progress with regard to such review be reported at each Full Council meeting”.

Under Council Procedure Rule 15 (o), Councillor Nagaty as the mover of the original motion, indicated that, with the consent of his seconder and of the meeting, he wished to alter his motion as follows:

Substitute the text of the original motion with the following:

“Guildford Borough Council is legally obliged to review the Local Plan 2019 by April 2024. Having taken Counsel’s advice, the Council previously debated and decided not to accelerate this review because of the risk of higher housing targets being imposed. This could have brought more pressure and threat to the Green Belt, not less, and therefore would have been counter-productive. Nevertheless, the Council also decided to put in hand some preparatory work to enable that 2024 review of the Local Plan. 

Since that decision was taken, there have been speeches by the government that suggest they are more protective of the Green Belt. There is considerable uncertainty in the planning system:  changes to the NPPF are being consulted on; there are proposed changes to the Standard Method (used to calculate the number of homes required); and there may be changes to the legislation as part of the Planning Reform Bill. All this is new compared to when Council last debated whether to conduct an early review or update of our Local Plan.

The Council therefore

RESOLVES:

(1) That as part of a Local Plan update 2024, Council will investigate:

(a)   whether there are exceptional circumstances that would enable the return of allocated, but as yet undeveloped, countryside sites to Green Belt status and how to effect this; and

(b)   the possibility of reducing the local housing need figure according to the Standard Method, as well as the housing allocation number for each allocated site not yet brought forward, in light of Guildford’s specific issues relating to high student numbers and significant environmental constraints.

(2) That consideration should then be given to whether this potentially reduced local housing need figure can be delivered sustainably in light of the increased priority of environmental factors”.

The Council agreed to accept the alteration to the original motion, as indicated above. The motion, as altered, therefore became the substantive  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO125

To order the Common Seal to be affixed to any document to give effect to any decision taken by the Council at this meeting.

The Council

RESOLVED: That the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to any documents to give effect to any decisions taken by the Council at this meeting.