Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED:  That Councillor H Humphrey be appointed Vice-Chair for the Municipal Year 2022/2023.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J Collop, C Manning, J Kirk and Portfolio Holder for Property Councillor A Lawrence, Portfolio Holder for Finance Councillor Mrs A Dickinson.

To approve the minutes from the Corporate Performance Panel held on 13 April 2022.

The minutes of the Corporate Performance Panel meeting held on 13 April 2022 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

These declarations apply to all Members present, whether the Member is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local Member on any item or simply observing the meeting from the public seating area.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chairman proposed to accept as urgent under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There was no urgent business.

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the Chairman of their intention to do so and on what items they wish to be heard before a decision on that item is taken.

Councillor M de Whalley was present under Standing Order 34.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chair informed the Panel that he has received a letter from Stoke Ferry Parish Council and summarised the contents.

The Chair also advised that he had received an email from the Chief Executive regarding an exemption notice for the Levelling Up Fund which would be considered at a special Cabinet meeting on 24 June 2022.

There were no call-ins.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Assistant Director, Regeneration, Housing and Place explained that the purpose of the report was to seek views of panel members and aid a discussion which could lead subsequently to policy or strategy development. 

The key issues were outlined as set out in the report.

Councillor de Whalley addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.

The Panel discussed the report and a summary of the key issues/concerns are set out below:

·         Adverse house prices – mitigate by providing opportunities for local people to buy local property.  Councillor Morley stated that this should be considered as a separate item by the Panel.

·         Tourism provided income to the Borough and supported businesses.

·         Habitat Regulation Levy used to mitigate the increase in tourism and enable both visitors and residents to visit green spaces, etc.

·         What could the Borough Council do to help local residents to alleviate the pressures identified within the whole Borough – rural, coastal and west of borough

·         Lack of infrastructure.

·         Standard of holiday accommodation.

·         Role of Norfolk Coastal Partnership.

·         Role of Wash and Marine Partnership.

·         Increasing pressures in rural areas.

·         Conservation Areas had not been reviewed, extra pressures on that part of the community.

·         Fishing and Bird watching tourist attractions within the Borough, for example, Welney and associated pressures on the roads, etc.

·         Encourage businesses to West Norfolk

·         Car parking difficulties in all areas of the Borough.

The Chair drew the Panel’s attention to Section 2 of the report and asked for clarification on the table of figures and information within that paragraph.  The Assistant Director, Regeneration, House and Place undertook to respond direct to the Chair.

Following questions from the Chair, the Assistant Director, Regeneration, Housing and Places explained that there was a proposal to establish a countywide tourist/countryside pressures group to bring together stakeholders and employ an officer in order that there was somewhere for Parish Councils who had concerns regarding tourism pressures to express their concerns and be supported towards routes to resolve the problem.

The Portfolio Holder for Business, Culture and Heritage explained that conservation areas were not within his remit.  The Portfolio Holder commented it was important to recognise that there were pressures in areas of the county with growing tourist destinations and that more could be done by the council or wider county council in order to assist with infrastructure changes recognised by the Coastal Pressures Group and those same pressures are now being faced in land.  The Portfolio Holder commented that the key word in the report was potential mitigation which represented an appetite with Norfolk Council and its partners to set up a pressure group.

In conclusion, the Portfolio Holder for Business, Culture and Heritage explained that the previous Coastal Pressures Group had identified the pressures faced by residents and stated that the next step as Cabinet Member was for himself to have discussions with Norfolk County Council and ask that the group be set up and that the Borough  ...  view the full minutes text for item CP9

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Panel received a presentation from the Waste and Recycling Manager, a copy of which was circulated with the Agenda.

The Assistant Director, Operations and Commercial and the Waste and Recycling Manager responded to questions/comments in relation to:

·         Refuse and Recycling Contract – service exemplary.

·         Disruption experienced on the A10 when collecting refuse/recycling in West Winch.

·         Failure to report – recordable accidents.

·         Whether deduction payments for poor performance had been incurred by the Council.

·         Series of waste collection related services e.g. reuse of furniture, bulky collection, outstanding small electrical items/batteries

·         Community grants – to collect smaller items, e.g. batteries, bulky waste, etc.  The Assistant Director advised that this was the subject of ongoing discussions to identify a commencement date. 

·         Levels of significant contamination – aspect of education to encourage residents to place correct items in relevant bins.

·         Complaints received by residents to Ward Councillor(s).

·         Outstanding issues, USP’s rolled out elsewhere, why not here.

·         Collection dates/reporting weekends/bank holidays.

·         Changing rounds without consulting offices and Councillors.

Councillor de Whalley addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.

In response to questions raised by Councillor de Whalley relating to the use of online forms to report missed bin collections, the Refuse and Recycling Manager explained that the council would like to go through the processes and have a reporting tool available for a whole range of services provided by the Council to enable residents to do the very best form of self-service/certification. Work was currently in progress to develop a report tool which would automatically load information into the Serco management system.

Councillor Long, Portfolio Holder Corporate Services addressed the Panel and commented that this was a good set of figures and results.

Councillor Kunes, Portfolio Holder Environment addressed the Panel and gave an example of a complaint he had received within his Ward.

The Chair thanked Assistant Director, Operations and Commercial and the Waste and Recycling Manager for the presentation.

RESOLVED:  The Panel received a further report addressing the outstanding issues as set out below (prior to Christmas 2022):

·         Collection dates/reporting weekends/bank holidays

·         USP’s – rolled out elsewhere – why not rolled out here/

·         Changing rounds without consulting officers and Councillors.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

In presenting the report, the Corporate Performance Management explained that the Council’s performance management framework had historically included performance monitoring and reporting of performance.

The Panel was reminded that a Covid-Recovery Strategy was agreed by Council on 8 October 2020.  The report provided the final overview on the corporate recovery performance indicators for the Recovery Strategy for the 2021/22 year.

The key issues were outlined as set out in the report.

The Panel’s attention was drawn to the sections of the report 2.2 and 2.3.

In response to a question from the Chair in relation to indicator 1.8 %of Business Rates collected against target (cumulative), the Corporate Performance Manager explained that this target had been based on historical trends over many years and 98% was a realistic target.  The Chief Executive provided clarification on the point raised by the Chair.

Councillor Humphrey reference to indicator 4.1 no of days to process new benefit claims – why had the number of days peaked in February.  The Corporate Performance Manager to investigate and report back to the Panel.  Following the meeting it had been confirmed that the processing times peak in February because the systems were taken down for a couple of days for annual billing and the Council was unable to process any work during this time.  At the same time the Council were clearing the welfare benefit increases which were notified to the authority in bulk during January.

Councillor Morley commented that he wished to place on record his appreciation of the Corporate Performance Manager in looking at KPI’s with him in detail and reshaping them for the future year.

The Portfolio Holder, Environment responded to questions from Councillors Morley and Nash on fly-tipping within the Borough and the additional pressures on the County Council to dispose of waste and charges incurred at waste recycling centres for DIY materials/waste, etc.  The Portfolio Holder, Corporate Services added that the County Council collected the waste from district councils and the data collected did not account for the individual number of fly tipping incidents.

The Chair referred to 2.4 % of rent arrears on retail units and what arrangement the Council had in place to collect payment.  In response, the Assistant Director Property and Projects explained that when Covid hit Central Government put in place protections for commercial tenants so commercial landlords could not take their usual rent arrear action.  The Assistant Director provided an overview of the 2020 and 2022 Acts and action available to commercial landlords.  The legislation set out the covid rates and this enabled commercial landlords to set out what was a Covid and non-Covid debt, the Council therefore working through the legislation and would then work out a place to deal with the rent arrears.  It was noted that the Council’s approach would be discussed with the relevant Portfolio Holder.

RESOLVED:  The Panel reviewed and noted the Council’s performance indicators for 2021/22.  Performance against the recovery  ...  view the full minutes text for item CP11

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Assistant Director, Property and Projects provided a verbal update and advised that kiosk tenants had been contacted and asked how they disposed of their waste items including water.  There were still a number of responses outstanding which were being followed up by the Property Services Team.  It was highlighted that this was difficult to police.

The Chair advised that Council Beal had tendered his apologies but had sent in a photograph which was passed to the Assistant Director, Property and Projects who advised that a member of the Property Services Team would investigate.

Hunstanton Ward Councillor Bower commented that Councillor Beal had been pursuing the issue over a long period of time and it was thought related to one particular kiosk which he had taken a photo of.

Councillor Nash commented that the tenants would have duty of care for waste disposal and asked whether it was possible for the Borough Council to provide a waste disposal facility for an additional charge.

RESOLVED:  A further update be provided to the next meeting of the Panel on 18 July 2022.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

RESOLVED:  1) Councillor C Rose be nominated to the observer role only to the Hunstanton Sailing Club.

2) That the report arrangements be noted, as shown in the report.

3) That Council be requested to approve the nomination made by the Panel.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Executive Director presented the report and explained that to increase capacity within the Development Management team to reflect increased workloads and the need to provide an acceptable level of service to those engaged in the planning process.  The structure will also respond to the changes put forward in the Levelling up and Regeneration Bill in respect of planning and in particular the need to improve speed and quality of decision making.

In response to questions from Councillor Joyce on the current structure of the Development Management team, the Assistant Director, Central Services advised that the information requested was set out in the structure chart at page 67 of the Agenda.

Councillor Devereux commented that he was pleased to see the report with the proposed additional resource, particularly an Ecologist post and Arboricultural Assistant/Officer.

In response to comments made by Councillor Nash on the level of service expected by residents when submitting an application, the Executive Director explained that each planning application was determined on a case by case basis.  If a resident was unhappy with the service received then a corporate complaint form could be completed and submitted to the council.

Following a question from the Chair in relation to 2.5, the Assistant Director Environment and Planning explained that there was the option to agree an extension of time with planning applications but if the application determination date exceeded 6 months and if an extension of time had not been agreed past the 6 months, then the planning fee would need to be repaid.  He stated that at present there was too much reliance on extensions of time.

In response to questions from Councillor Morley with regard to recruitment of the proposed additional officers, the Executive Director explained that it would be a challenging process and there were currently a number of vacant posts.

The Chair referred to 4.1 and the income from pre-application, street naming and numbering advice.  The Executive Director explained that any charges for those services would be paid by the developer. 

Following comments from Councillor Nash, the Assistant Director, Environment and Planning added that a charge was made for pre-application advice but this was a voluntary service and applicants could not be forced to use the pre-application service.  The Assistant Director agreed to clarify situations where the pre-application service was not appropriate or utilised, following concerns raised by Councillor Nash about the pre-application service.

Following questions from the Chair on 4.3, the Executive Director explained that the 20% ring fenced funds for planning was included in the overall budget.

The Portfolio for Development, Councillor Blunt provided an overview of the work that

Had been undertaken and highlight the major changes including the move from two area teams (north and south) to three area teams (north, central and south).  It was noted that this change was intended to provide greater management support within the department and would enable planning officers to cover a smaller  ...  view the full minutes text for item CP14

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Assistant Director, Environment and Planning presented the report and highlighted the key proposed changes and drew the Panel’s attention to 2.8 which set out other changes to the Scheme of Delegation.

Councillor Joyce referred to the letter read out at the beginning of the meeting by the Chair from Stoke Ferry Parish Council.  Councillor Joyce outlined the reasons why the Borough Councillor should determine in his/her own mind whether they wished to call-in a planning application.  In response, the Chair explained that the letter from Stoke Ferry Parish Council was in relation to an inadvertent omission to call-in a planning application and to ask if there was an alternative way for a Parish Council to call-in an application if there was a breakdown in relationships/communication.  The Chair commented, could the Parish Council contact the Chair of the Planning Committee as an option to call-in an application.

Councillor Mrs Spikings commented that this would be a disadvantage for King’s Lynn as there was no Parish Council and there needed to be a fair approach for all.  Councillor Mrs Spikings added that the current system worked well with the correct checks and balances in place.

The Assistant Director, Environment and Planning explained that a Councillor could only call in a planning application within their own ward unless there were exceptional circumstances.  Councillor Spikings advised that Councillors currently had 28 days to call in an application and that the Parish Council could send a reminder to the relevant Borough Councillor to call in an application.  The Chair added that at the next training session for Parish Councils it be suggested that the Parish Council email the Borough Councillor to call in an application and copy in the Planning Department.  The Executive Director, Environment and Planning confirmed training would be scheduled for Parish Councils at the end of the summer.

In response to questions from Councillor Joyce on Councillors, Officers or former Councillors acting at Planning Agents and the LGA guidance, the Monitoring Officer referred to an email from a Councillor regarding planning issues relating to former officers and councillors and any such planning applications should be determined by the Planning Committee and explained that the LGA and Planning Advisory Service offered guidance which was not statutory.  The Monitoring Officer provided a summary of the guidance and the Borough Council’s current position.

The Chair referred to 2.8 on tree works applications that could not be called in by Councillors and asked if Councillors received prior notification of any such works.  In response, the Assistant Director Environment and Planning undertook to check whether or not they were on the weekly list, and respond direct to the Chair.

The Chair referred to the agenda for the Planning Sifting Panel not containing details of the applications to be sifted.  The Portfolio Holder for Development explained that often the details of the applications were not known until 24 hours prior to the Sifting Panel but  ...  view the full minutes text for item CP15

Members are invited to submit questions in advance of the meeting.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chair encouraged the Panel to submit any questions in advance of each meeting to enable the Portfolio Holder to undertake any appropriate research in order to provide a response.

The Chair advised that the question to the Leader for an update on devolution/ mayoralty would be deferred until the next meeting.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chair invited the Panel to forward any items for consideration to be included on the work programme.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chair invited the Panel to forward any items for consideration at the next sifting meeting.

To note that the date of the next meeting of the Corporate Performance Panel will take place on 18 July 2022 in the Assembly Room, Town Hall, Saturday Market Place, King’s Lynn.

The next meeting of the Corporate Performance Panel would be held on 18 July 2022 in the Assembly Room, Town Hall, Saturday Market Place, King’s Lynn.

To consider passing the following resolution:

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act”.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

RESOLVED:  That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act.

The Assistant Director, Property and Projects provided a verbal update and responded to questions and comments from the Panel.