Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Executive held on 03/10/2006
Minutes



Executive 121
03.10.06
WAVERLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE – 3RD OCTOBER 2006

SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL MEETING – 17TH OCTOBER 2006

(To be read in conjunction with the Agenda for the Meeting)
*Miss G B W Ferguson (Chairman)*Mr C H Mansell
*Mrs C E Savage (Vice-Chairman)*Mr K T Reed
*Mr S D Edge*Mr J E Robini
*Mr B Grainger-Jones*Mr V K Scrivens
*Mr P Haveron
* Present
Mr P Betlem, Mrs C Cockburn and Mrs M V M Hunt were also in attendance
Mr M W Byham attended and spoke on Agenda Item 16 on the Surrey Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (Minute No. 128 refers)

113. MINUTES (Agenda Item 1)

The Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive held on 5th September 2006 were confirmed and signed.

114. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST (Agenda Item 3)

Mr J E Robini declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 19 on Decriminalised Parking Enforcement. He withdrew from the Chamber during the consideration of this item.

The following personal interests were declared:-

Mr J E RobiniItem 21 - CCTV and Antisocial BehaviourAs he works for a partner organisation on this project
Item 24 - Review of Meals on WheelsAs his partner is the Chairman of the Meals on Wheels Sub-Committee
Mr C H MansellItem 24 - Review of Meals on WheelsAs his wife is a member of the Meals on Wheels Sub-Committee
Mrs C E SavageItem 9 - Cranleigh Arts CentreAs her husband is the Waverley representative on the Cranleigh Arts Centre Board of Management

115. QUESTIONS (Agenda Item 4)

In accordance with Procedure Rule 10, the following questions were asked by members of the public-


i. from Mr R Sandars of Farnham

“Have all the land acquisitions now been completed, as required for the revised East Street Development Master Plan, publicised in May 2006, to enable that scheme to be fully implemented? If not, what progress has been made and what remains outstanding?”

The Executive Portfolio Holder for East Street replied:-

“Waverley has completed the acquisition of the former Health Centre and secured the removal of the Restrictive Covenant over the Dogflud Car Park. There is an outstanding responsibility on the Council to secure the former cinema site and we are in active negotiation with the owners.

CNS have an outstanding responsibility to acquire the Marlborough Head public house and I am given to understand that they are in active negotiation with the owners, Greene King.”

ii. From Mrs C Sandars of Farnham

“When and where will the responses to the consultation on Waverley’s mini mitigation plan for Farnham Park be made available for the public to see?”

The Executive Portfolio Holder for Planning and Major Developments responded:-

“The consultation was carried out between 1st August and 15th September, and so has just recently finished. The information is currently being collated and will firstly be seen by members at the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 31st October and will be available for the public to see three days before on the Waverley website.”

iii. From Mrs A Thurston of Farnham

“I note in the Council papers of the 19th December 2005, that a planning application was required from CNS no later than the 1st May 2006, and that the concept of a two phase contractual implementation was not acceptable.

The May 1st deadline came and went with no planning application and no public explanation. An outline planning application has now been submitted with detailed drawings of phase 1a. This is not the submission strategy agreed by the Council.

CNS are now asking to have the long-stop date extended. There seems to be little control exercised over CNS by those conducting the negotiations. Why are the requirements of the Council being ignored?”

The Executive Portfolio Holder for East Street replied as follows:-

"CNS were indeed requested by Council on 19th December 2005 to submit a planning application in line with the contract and Development Brief, no later than 1st May 2006. Discussions between CNS and officers early this year explored alternative ways of moving forward and the outcomes were reported to members. In the CNS programme a period of 18 weeks had been allowed from the date of the final meeting of the Development Control Consultative Forum to work up the planning application and the Environmental Impact Statement. The forum was held on 21st June, so in fact CNS’ actual delivery of the valid planning application improved on their target.

iv. from Mr J Hyman of Farnham

“Council Leader. Unless the Conditional Contract has been changed, it still states that Crest's 'detailed plans' (to Building Regulations standards) require the Council's Approval prior to submission for Registration of the Planning Application.

It would appear that Crest's submission of 8th Sept defied the fundamental requirements of the Council, being merely an incomplete phased "hybrid" Outline Planning Application, and so should have first been referred to the Full Council for proper consideration. If Officers' Delegated Authority was indeed exceeded in Approving and Registering an Application that was clearly not in the required "form", is that Application therefore invalid?”

The Executive Portfolio Holder for East Street replied as follows:-

“The full meeting of the Council on 17th May approved a revised scheme, described as the master plan. This approval was given in line with 3.1.3 of the Development Agreement. This new approved master plan has become “the Annexed Development Plans”.
v. From Mr M Thurston of Farnham

“Crest Nicholson Sainsbury have submitted a planning application for the development of the East Street area of Farnham, and this has been validated by Council officers. The application is for, and I quote, "outline planning application for a phased mixed use development". Detailed drawings have been included for Phase 1A, but not for Phase 1B. A phased development is contrary to Council requirements. As stated in the minutes, Members adopted the recommendation of the Executive at their meeting on the 19th of December 2005 that, "the concept of a two phase contractual implementation is not acceptable". This problem was highlighted in the Scoping Opinion.

The Executive Portfolio Holder replied:-

“As I have earlier pointed out in response to your wife's question, Waverley remains opposed to any contractual as opposed to constructional phasing. The application which has been validated refers to the construction being carried out in phases while the developer will remain contractually committed to carrying out the entire scheme. I hope that clarifies the position.”
PART I - RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

116. WAVERLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL RESTRUCTURING - INTERIM REPORT (Agenda Item 6; Appendix B)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

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

116.1 The Executive received the report of the Head of Paid Service (currently vested in the four directors on a rotating basis) on proposals for the future structure of the Council, attached as Appendix A to these minutes. The report is set out in full and any observations made by the Executive are detailed separately below.

116.2 The Executive agreed with a proposal to visit Chichester District Council, a neighbouring authority operating with a Management Team of 3 Directors, all with operational responsibilities. It was also clarified that there would not necessarily be a review of Heads of Service despite the reference in the report that top management posts would be appointed before Heads of Service were reviewed.

116.3 The Executive agreed with the first two recommendations set out in the report. They did, however, feel that it was premature to determine a view on which of the appointment options would be most appropriate (paragraph 25 of the report refers) and recommend that this should be deferred until the final report was prepared.

116.4 The Executive

RECOMMENDS that

Background Papers (MD)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

117. RIVERSIDE, FARNHAM (Agenda Item 8; Appendix D)
[Wards Affected: All Farnham Wards]

[With the agreement of the Executive, the Chairman reordered the agenda and took this item before Agenda Item 6].

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

117.1 Members will recall that the report to the Executive on 21st July 2003 set out the work required by the Council in conjunction with the re-development of the East Street area of Farnham. The Riverside site was identified as a possible location for the tennis courts and clubhouse, which the Council must relocate in accordance with the Development Brief and under the terms of the Conditional Contract. Members agreed the provision on five courts with clubhouse at Riverside, in April 2003.

117.2 It has also been reported and agreed at the Executive on 13th June 2006 that 300 car parking spaces be constructed at Riverside for temporary and permanent parking needs generated by the East Street Regeneration Scheme.

117.3 The report to the Executive meeting on 1st March 2005 identified significant issues relating to the condition of the site in terms of contamination and flood levels which have implications for the costs of the necessary remediation and flood compensation works.

117.4 The Executive on 13th June 2006 required the officers to report back to members for final authorisation after the scheme had been worked up, to assess the affordability against the overall East Street Regeneration Scheme. After considerable research and correspondence between the Council’s Specialist Consultants and the Environment Agency (EA), two options have been identified, as follows:


Option 1

Option 2

117.5 The estimates for both options are shown at (Exempt) Annexe 2 and both estimates have allowed for

SITE PREPARATION WORKS

- Diversion of overhead electric cables to underground
- Earthworks and flood compensation works to EA requirements based on 1:100 year storm plus 20%
- Contamination remediation works to EA & Environmental Health requirements
- Replacement of contaminated fill under existing car park (Option 1 only)
- Land and surface water drainage works to EA requirements.

- Hoofmark, or equivalent plastic grid surfacing system with sharp gravel infill on sharp sand bedding on compacted sub-base on terram geogrid laid on terram Geotexile or equivalent.
- Tarmac surfacing top access road to pavilion
- Tarmac surfacing to existing car park (Option 1 only)
- Lighting using lighting columns
- Ticket machines and CCTV

TENNIS COURTS

Five tennis courts built to SAPCA and LTA recommendations comprising:

- Coloured porous tarmacadam surfacing laid on suitable sub base designed to take account of possible flooding
- Painted line markings, posts and netting
- Heavy duty colour coated weldmesh steel fencing, 3m high including gates.
- Floodlighting controlled from pavilion (12Nr columns, asymmetric fittings)

TENNIS CLUB PAVILION

Single storey changing and clubroom pavilion of approx 80 m2 floor area comprising:

- Raft type foundations with floor level below 1:100 year storm plus 20% flood level
- Facing brickwork cavity external walls
- Pitched roof with artificial slate coverings
- Colour coated aluminium windows with security shutters
- Generally robust and vandal proof construction
- Materials, finishings and design features to minimise damage from flooding

FOOTPATHS AND LANDSCAPING

Soft landscaping to all remaining areas comprising:

- Works to public footpaths including self binding gravel surfacing with edgings
- Earthworks and preparation works to provide suitable layer of topsoil for planting
- Grass seeding to all landscaped areas
- Trees and shrubs generally to meet Planning requirements
- Works to fencing to North boundary

117.6 The figures shown in the (Exempt) Annexe are estimated by consultants using appropriate professional advice and methods. They are subject to change, as the scheme changes, as more accurate information is available and depending on any time delays affecting inflation rates. In addition, changes in market conditions and any changes arising from the planning process will continue to affect the overall costs.

117.7 The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the report and agreed that, subject to expert advice on contamination, Option 2 appeared to be the most sensible and favoured approach.

117.8 The shorter timescale required for Option 2 will enable the provision of the tennis courts and extra car parking to be brought forward, reducing the risk of lost income and impact on the trading of the Town Centre both during and after the construction period of the East Street scheme. Whilst the car park surface proposed is described as temporary, this has a guaranteed life of at least 15 years. This is approximately the same as the life of a tarmac surface before major works are required. This proposal also requires significantly less disruption to the contaminated ground on the site.

117.9 The Executive accordingly

RECOMMENDS that

Background Papers (DoPD)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

118. INTERIM ARRANGEMENTS - AMENDMENT OF GOVERNANCE RULES (Agenda Item 13; Appendix I)
[Wards Affected: All]

118.1. Waverley’s internal rules have been written in such a way that the Chief Executive has been given responsibility for taking specific decisions and actions. With the deletion of the post of Chief Executive, the rules need to be revised so as to avoid, or reduce the scope for, ambiguity in the current situation where the four directors are to assume the role of Head of Paid Service (to be referred to as Managing Director). The Constitution SIG stressed that these are interim arrangements that may need to be reviewed as the Council’s restructuring process develops. There is no intention to, in any way, anticipate or pre-empt the outcome of that review.

118.2 The current rules are designed to introduce appropriate checks and controls. The involvement of two officers, specifically the Chief Executive and the relevant director, brought about such a check and control. Now a service director will, for a two-month period, also have to make decisions as Managing Director in respect of the services for which he is responsible. There is a potential for a conflict of interest to arise, and it is therefore necessary to make alternative arrangements to maintain the appropriate checks and controls. It is also important for the Directors to be aware of this potential and to distinguish between actions and decisions taken in their temporary role as Managing Director and those taken as a service director.

118.3 The rules that specifically need to be revised are Contract Procedure Rules, Financial Regulations, the Scheme of Delegation and some Procedure Rules. The proposed course of action for each is discussed in turn and appropriate recommendations made. It must be stressed that the issues raised are not intended to question the honesty and integrity of any of the officers involved, but members will appreciate that clear frameworks are essential to maintain confidence in the systems of internal control and high standards of corporate governance.

118.4 Throughout the period when the current interim arrangements are in place, it will be important that whichever director is fulfilling the role of Managing Director he accepts responsibility for actions initiated or instigated when another director fulfilled the role of Managing Director.

Scheme of Delegation

118.5 The Scheme of Delegation is post-specific when it gives authority to officers. For example, in some property related matters it will bestow authority on the Director of Planning and Development, and in others upon the Property and Development Manager. In other cases, it requires these two officers to consult each other. Sometimes it might require either of these officers to consult with the Chief Executive.

118.6 The Scheme has evolved over a period of time, and it appears that as a consequence the post titles sometimes given will not be the actual officer involved. For example, in many cases directors are required to consult the Chief Executive on legal matters, and it would be reasonable to interpret that as meaning the Head of Legal Services (sometimes referred to as Solicitor to the Council*). In such instances, the Head of Legal Services would be acting as one of the Chief Executive’s staff, and it would be deemed that the Chief Executive had delegated responsibility to the Head of Legal Services.

118.7 Further to the comment regarding the references to both “Solicitor to the Council” and “Head of Legal Services” to refer to the same post, it would be prudent to standardise references to “Solicitor to the Council” throughout the Scheme of Delegation. This would bring the Scheme into alignment with Contract Procedure Rules.

118.8 There are many instances in the Scheme where a director or one of their members of staff is required to consult the Chief Executive. In each of these, the subject matter involves a variety of legal matters. It would be within the spirit and style of the Scheme if these references to the Chief Executive were replaced with references to the Solicitor to the Council with the proviso that that officer consults the Managing Director. The relevant Scheme of Delegation items are listed at Annexe 3; members are asked to refer to the Members’ Handbook should they wish to read the full text.

118.9 In respect of licensing matters, the Scheme refers to the Chief Executive for some of the items between 224 and 263 inclusive. It would be reasonable and, again, within the intention and spirit of the Scheme to amend these references to read “Head of Committee and Member Services”, who is responsible for the licensing service.

Contract Procedure Rules

118.10 The Contract Procedure Rules (CPRs) refer to the “relevant chief officer” in respect of a contract, and this means the director who is responsible for the project (he may or may not be the line manager of the project leader). Some CPRs make reference to the Chief Executive, and in some instances these could be easily substituted as detailed in Annexe 4. (As with the Scheme of Delegation, the full text can be found in the Members’ Handbook.)

118.11 Whoever is the incumbent Managing Director at a point may be required to approve an action in respect of a project that commenced prior to their taking up the position. They will have to act as they would if taking up a position with a new employer, and will need to observe the date upon which they assumed the role and not seek the preceding director to retrospectively approve or authorise an action.

118.12 The circumstances under which there is potential for a conflict of interest is in respect of seeking a waiver for a contract where, as a relevant chief officer as defined in CPRs, the director who is also acting as Managing Director needs to seek the Chief Executive’s approval if they consider that a waiver is the best course of action and urgent approval is sought and the matter cannot wait until the Executive next meets or can be convened. The current requirement for a relevant chief officer to seek the Chief Executive’s approval is an important control. In such instances it will be necessary to regard this as falling under CPR W104, and the Managing Director, if also the relevant chief officer as defined by CPRs, is required to obtain the approval of the Chairman of the Executive.

118.13 Similarly, the Director of Finance has to be consulted and his approval sought on many aspects of CPRs. Whereas at present he is required to consult the Chief Executive in instances where he is the relevant chief officer (CPR W103), he will need to consult the Managing Director except at times when he is serving as Managing Director. At these times, he will also be required to consult the Chairman of the Executive. Revised wordings for CPR W103 and W104 are included in Annexe 5. Additional words are underscored, deleted words are struck through – the proposed wording assumes approval is given to replacing “Chief Executive” with “Managing Director”.

118.14 Since the last review of CPRs in March 2006, the Chief Officer Group has been renamed “Management Team”, and CPRs still refer to the Chief Executive. An overall change is recommended to replace such references with “Management Team” and “Managing Director” respectively.

118.15 There are a few minor amendments that have been identified since the review in March, and approval is sought to seek these, which are also set out in Annexe 5. Again, additional words are underscored and deleted words are struck through.

Financial Regulations

118.16 There are just 2 references to the Chief Executive within Financial Regulations, both of which can appropriately be replaced by reference to the Managing Director. These are in C403 and D203.

Staffing Establishment

118.17 At the meeting of the Executive on 6th September 2005, it was agreed that decisions to achieve savings in the staffing budget could be made by the Chief Executive (after consultation with the Leader and the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Human Resources). Now that the post of Chief Executive has been deleted, there is a need to replace this delegation. The Council’s Management Team recommends that the Executive should undertake such decisions by recommendation to the Council. This is covered by the Scheme of Delegation, item 3b and is included in Annexe 3 as an item to be deleted.

Council Procedure Rules

118.18 A number of sections of Waverley’s Constitution and Procedure Rules similarly contain references or delegations to the Chief Executive. A proposed reallocation of these roles is attached as Annexe 6. The guiding principles have been that roles relating to policy or leading the Management Team have been allocated to the Managing Director whilst routine matters such as notifying absences for purposes of substitution have been allocated to the Head of Committee and Member Services.

118.19 In conclusion, the Constitution SIG commended the changes as an interim solution and agreed it would meet again if necessary when the structure review is completed. The SIG also noted that the proposed Government White Paper on the role of local government, and developments in closer partnership working, may also need the SIG to review parts of the Constitution.

118.20 The Executive

RECOMMENDS that

84. the changes to CPRs as set out in Annexes 4 and 5 be approved;

Background Papers (DoF/MD)

PARTS II AND III - MATTERS OF REPORT

Background Papers

The background papers relating to the following items in Parts II and III are as specified in the agenda for the meeting of the Executive.

Part II – Matters Reported in Detail for the Information of the Council

There were no matters falling within this category.

Part III – Brief Summaries of Other Matters Dealt With

119. EXECUTIVE FOUR-MONTH ROLLING PROGRAMME (Agenda Item 5, Appendix A)

RESOLVED that the four-month rolling programme of key decisions for Waverley Borough Council be adopted, subject to the revised date of Jan/Feb 2007 being added to Choice Based Lettings under the Housing Portfolio, and to officers being requested to provide an update on the proposed minerals site at Eashing.

120. EAST STREET REGENERATION, FARNHAM (Agenda Item 7; Appendix C)

[With the agreement of the Executive, the Chairman reordered the agenda and took this item before Agenda Item 6].

During consideration of this item, at 7.31 p.m. it was
Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) (Paragraph 3); and

Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings (Paragraph 5).

At 8.58 p.m. the meeting resumed in open session when it was

RESOLVED that consideration of the item be deferred pending the receipt of specialist and detailed legal advice, to be reported to a special meeting of the Executive and, if possible, reporting to the Council meeting on 17th October 2006.


121. CRANLEIGH ARTS CENTRE - FINANCIAL SUPPORT (Agenda Item 9; Appendix E)
[Wards Affected: All]

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

The Executive discussed this item in open session and agreed that the revised programme and support from the Maltings were a good way forward for the Centre.

RESOLVED that

1. a revenue supplementary estimate of 20,000 be approved to cover the anticipated deficit in this financial year (2006/2007) at Cranleigh Arts Centre, as set out in the report; and

2. the Executive notes that any requests for future funding would be considered as part of the Council’s annual Sponsored Organisation Scheme.

122. PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT PROGRAMME (Agenda Item 10; Appendix F)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the progress made with the playground replacement programme be noted, as set out at Annexe 1 to the report.

123. SPONSORED ORGANISATION SCHEME 2007/2008: GRANT ELIGIBILITY, CRITERIA AND TIMETABLE (Agenda Item 11; Appendix G)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

6. the overall level of funding for the Sponsored Organisation Scheme and Waverley Voluntary Grants Partnership in 2007/08 be increased in line with inflation but with the proviso that such an increase will have to be assessed alongside other demands on Council finances during the budget process.

124. WAVERLEY VOLUNTARY GRANTS PARTNERSHIP (Agenda Item 12; Appendix H)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that an annual revenue contribution of 4,000 be identified in the draft budgets for 2007-2008 and beyond, in order to contribute to the costs of facilitating the improved allocation of grants to the voluntary sector in Waverley.

125. REPORT OF MODERNISING PLANNING SIG (Agenda Item 14)

It was noted that further work on the Future Shape of the Planning Service would be considered by a future meeting of the Executive.

126. DATA QUALITY POLICY (Agenda Item 15; Appendix K)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the draft Data Quality Policy, attached at Annexe 1 to the report, be approved.

127. CONTINUATION OF MEETING

In accordance with Procedure Rule 9, at 9.42 p.m. the Executive agreed to continue the meeting until the business on the agenda had been transacted.

128. SURREY JOINT MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (Agenda Item 16; Appendix L)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

129. SURRENDER AND RENEWAL OF LEASE OF PLOT 2, FARNHAM TRADING ESTATE (Agenda Item 17; Appendix M)
[Ward Affected: Farnham Weybourne and Badshot Lea]

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

This item was discussed in open session.

RESOLVED that, should Kindale Limited become the lessee of Plot 2, Farnham Trading Estate, a surrender of the existing lease and a grant of a lease of 125 years be offered, on terms as set out in the (Exempt) Annexe to the report, other terms and conditions to be negotiated by the Property and Development Manager.

130. SALE OF LAND AT HOLDFAST LANE, HASLEMERE (Agenda Item 18; Appendix N)
[Ward Affected: Haslemere East and Grayswood]

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

This item was discussed in open session.

RESOLVED that the land at Holdfast Lane, shown hatched on the plan annexed to the report, be sold to the owner of The Manor House, Three Gates Lane, Haslemere, on terms and conditions as set out in the (Exempt) Annexe to the report.

131. DECRIMINALISED PARKING ENFORCEMENT UPDATE (Agenda Item 19)
[Wards Affected: All]

The Executive noted that the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee had no comments to make on the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement report and endorsed the decisions taken at its meeting on 5th September and recommended to the Council elsewhere on this agenda. The Executive was pleased to note the enforcement of existing regulations now being done by Surrey Police.

132. BEST VALUE AND LOCAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: REVIEW OF WAVERLEY’S PERFORMANCE AT Q1 (APR-JUN) 2006/07 (Agenda Item 20; Appendix O)

RESOLVED that the information presented in the report be noted.


133. CCTV - ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AND WAVERLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL AS LANDLORD (Agenda Item 21; Appendix P)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the purchase of a compact CCTV system, in partnership with Surrey Police, the Council and the Safer Waverley Partnership, be approved.

134. SOUTH WEST SURREY AREA SAFE AT HOME TELECARE PROJECT (Agenda Item 22; Appendix Q)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

1. the funding for the Safe at Home Projects, from the Preventative Technologies Grant for the range of valuable telecare and telemedicine projects, be welcomed;

2. the proposal to recruit a temporary part-time Careline Officer, funded from the Preventative Technologies Grant to support the Careline team with these projects, be welcomed; and 3. a workshop be set up to enable members to familiarise themselves with the equipment.

135. ROYAL BRITISH LEGION SITE, DUNSFOLD (Agenda Item 23; Appendix R)
[Ward Affected: Chiddingfold and Dunsfold]

RESOLVED that

2. approval be given to the disposal of land to the rear of Winn Hall, Dunsfold, to English Rural Housing Association on terms to be negotiated by the Property and Development Manager to enable the affordable housing scheme to progress.

136. REVIEW OF MEALS ON WHEELS SERVICE (Agenda Item 24; Appendix S)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the following key recommendations from the Meals on Wheels Sub-Committee be approved, that

1. a formal request be made to Surrey County Council to meet its obligations for people in need and increase its funding to 23,000 per annum to reflect the service being provided to the County’s clients;

2. Waverley continue to operate its Meals on Wheels service through the WRVS recognising the strength of the volunteer base in the Borough;

3. the location(s) from which Meals on Wheels is provided be examined further to include the possibility of linking in to facilities/kitchens operating in other authorities;

4. regular health and safety tests be undertaken on the temperature of meals delivered;

5. Waverley to explore with WRVS the opportunity of offering a tea-time snack for 1.75 for those customers in receipt of a lunchtime service;

6. the Guardian Visiting Scheme used in Guildford be explored for customers no longer in receipt of Meals on Wheels who might benefit from a visiting service; and b. a formal annual reassessment process be introduced for Meals on Wheels customers.

137. MEETING THE DECENT HOMES STANDARD - OCKFORD RIDGE, GODALMING (Agenda Item 25; Appendix T)
[Ward Affected: Godalming Central and Ockford]

RESOLVED that
3. the Housing Special Interest Group be asked to consider the terms of reference and methodology for the consultation process.

138. CPA IN DISTRICT COUNCILS 2006-2008 (Agenda Item 26; Appendix U)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the information contained within the briefing report be noted.

139. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

140. LEGAL FEES (Agenda Item 29; (Exempt) Appendix V)
[Wards Affected: N/A]
RESOLVED that the recommendation set out in (Exempt) Appendix V to the agenda be agreed.
The meeting commenced at 7.00 p.m. and concluded at 10.34 p.m.



Chairman
Comms/exec/2006-07/158