Agenda item

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

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer introduced the item and explained within the Panel’s agenda packs, they had a copy of the current CIL Governance and Spending document for 2023 and the first draft of the proposed CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024.

 

She went through the amendments which had been made on the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024. She explained to the Panel all amendments within the document had been highlighted in boxes. A copy of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024 is attached.

 

She explained she had updated the Funding Streams and amalgamated Central Government to include Infrastructure Bank and removed the LEP.

 

A new heading had been included which was ‘How CIL is proportioned and allocated’ and the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained this would help identify how the CIL would be split before the funds go into the infrastructure fund.

 

The Chair raised a question in relation to the 5% retained by the Borough Council and asked whether the 5% was a statutory figure and it was confirmed as such by the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained a new section had been added which included definitions on what infrastructure was, what would be considered as infrastructure and what was not infrastructure. She explained this had been added based on the comments received from the CIL Spending Panel and reminded the Panel they wanted more specific information in relation to infrastructure as they felt the definitions were not clear enough.

 

In response to questions raised by Councillor Joyce, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained the ‘What is Infrastructure’ was based on the regulatory statement within the CIL regulations. The Chair highlighted the questions which were raised by Councillor Joyce in relation to whether social services and flood defence were included under infrastructure, were included within 2.0.3 of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document 2024.

 

In response to a question raised by Councillor Sandell, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed the infrastructure levy was designed to support the infrastructure and explained if they had an area with no new development, they would not be entitled to apply for CIL funding unless it benefitted the wider community.

 

Councillor de Whalley stated that he felt the Planning Act 2008 was not clear and explained the importance of the CIL Spending Panel making it clear on what they could and could not accept as CIL infrastructure within their CIL Governance and Spending Document 2024.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer highlighted to the Panel that the section had been included to try to define what infrastructure was to make it clearer for the Panel, Members and applicants. She explained under 2.0.11, the Non Infrastructure Projects related to sundry items, miscellaneous small items or works which would not fit within the definition of infrastructure.

 

Councillor de Whalley continued to raise concerns and advised he remained unclear on what infrastructure was having read through the draft CIL Governance and Spending Document for 2024 and suggested the Panel have a clear steer to prevent applications coming forward and getting rejected due to them being considered not CIL infrastructure.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed that within the draft CIL Governance and Spending Document for 2024, it went into more detail about infrastructure and what would be accepted as infrastructure.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained under Project Scoring, information in relation to the amount of CIL Neighbourhood Parish money retained and unallocated had been included as set out below.

 

 

She highlighted to the Panel that there was a proposal for Management Team to consider any funding streams prior to the Panel sitting to enable the progress of an application to not be delayed and the Panel would be fully informed of any other funding streams that may apply to the application.

 

In response to a number of concerns raised by Members of the Panel, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained Management Team’s role as set out below.

 

 

She confirmed to the Panel that Management Team would not be making any decisions before the Panel sees the projects.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained there was a proposal for the Panel to amalgamate the funding list to ensure there was not an overall or under, but they would all be within the same project list to enable the Panel to consider them all fairly based on the scoring and the applications before them.

 

In response to a question raised by Councillor de Whalley, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained when the original Governance went to the Regeneration and Development Panel, R&D gave the Panel a delegated responsibility which enabled the CIL Spending Panel to make decisions up to £50k and the current document simply revert back to the original spending limit. She advised the Panel that if they had the £50k, Cabinet would be considering the major projects that would be over the £50k and highlighted to the Panel that this would speed up the process and allow the Panel more responsibility for the higher projects.

 

Councillor Joyce asked whether it could be increased to £100k. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer commented that if the Panel wished to increase the amount that the Panel could make decisions on, then 2025 would be the best time to implement that if they wished and reminded the Panel that this round was supposed to be a light touch approach. She added if the Panel increased the amount now, it would not be beneficial as the Panel agreed they wanted the applications to open on the 1^st January 2024 and this would not allow enough time to go through the decision making process and get it considered if there were significant changes to the documents.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer went on to explain she had amended the list of projects which could be considered for funding. She commented there was now only two criteria, green infrastructure and leisure time activities, which had been linked directly to the new overarching corporate business plan of priorities to promote growth and prosperity to benefit West Norfolk and to promote the environment. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer highlighted education had now been included within the two criteria. She explained on pages 12 and 13 of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024, she had tried to include a definitive description of what infrastructure was and what would be accepted within the list of infrastructure projects.

 

Councillor de Whalley asked for a breakdown from the previous spending year of the % of what went to green infrastructure projects and the % of what went to leisure time activities. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer commented that this information was provided within the presentation at the last CIL Spending Panel meeting on the 16^th October 2023.

 

In response to a question raised by Councillor Joyce, the Planning Control Manager explained although social was not explicitly stated in the document, in terms of the projects which would be supported, economic, social and environmental objectives are implicit within all the green infrastructure and leisure time categories.

 

In response to further questions raised by Councillor Joyce, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed the police had submitted applications to the Panel previously and reminded the Panel that they had refused their applications as they considered they received a precept and therefore there were other projects which would benefit more greatly from CIL. She explained flood defences was included within the green infrastructure. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer highlighted to the Panel that this was a light touch and advised if the Panel wanted to consider public buildings such as police stations and fire stations, this could be considered when reviewing the full Governance in 2025.

 

The Planning Control Manager commented that in order to enable two rounds of applications to occur next year, this would be a light touch approach built upon on the existing Governance document. She advised going forward, they would have a fundamental look at infrastructure needed across the Borough as part of the next Local Plan Review. The Planning Control Manager confirmed it would be a planned approach and a planned list but highlighted to the Panel again that there was not enough time to turn the Governance document around and do a fundamental review in order to meet the Panel’s timelines.

 

Following on from previous discussions, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained there would be words included on page 14 of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024 to highlight Management Team would not be filtering applications.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained amendments had been made as set out below.

 

 

In response to concerns and questions raised by Councillor de Whalley, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained Officers did not have the responsibility of providing applicants guidance but advised Officers would provide the Panel with their recommendations on whether it was infrastructure or not.

 

The Chair commented that he understood Councillor de Whalley’s point but explained he did not want Officers telling applicants not to apply as that was the Panel’s call. In response to the Chairs comment, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed Officers did not have the delegated authority to tell applicants not to put in an application because it’s not CIL or not considered as infrastructure. She explained if the Panel were to go against Officers recommendations, they would seek legal advice.

 

Councillor Joyce raised concerns around Officers seeking legal advice if they did not agree with Officer recommendations. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained to the Panel that the Officers role was to ensure that the Panel spend and allocate the funding in line with the CIL regulatory requirements as defined within the CIL regulations, therefore, the Officers advice was based on their knowledge and experience of infrastructure and if the Panel decided that they wished to go against the Officers recommendation, Officers would seek legal advice to help the Panel to ensure that any decisions they make are in line with the legislation.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained CIL was currently going through an Audit and they recommended that the Agreement Form include 2 signatories.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained that previously the Panel had made their recommendations and it would go to the R&D Panel to be reviewed and then onto Cabinet to be agreed. The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer suggested to the Panel that the list of Infrastructure Projects did not go to R&D to be reviewed as it delays the decision making progress going forward.

 

The Panel felt it should continue to be reviewed at R&D but commented that if it was to slow the process down for this round, agreed that it shouldn’t be reviewed at R&D to enable to stick to the timelines.

 

The Planning Control Manager commented that the Panel wished to maintain 2 rounds of funding for next year and explained as this was a light touch approach, she felt it did not need to go to R&D this time and undertake a thorough review for 2025 in line with the Local Plan Review. The CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed it had not gone to R&D previously.

 

The Panel agreed with Officers that in order to meet the Panel’s timeline, their recommendations would not be reviewed at R&D but would go forward to Cabinet. However, Officers would check first.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained the statutory annual infrastructure list was on page 22 of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024 and this was the corporate list of what the Panel would spend the CIL funding on for 2024 as set out below.

 

 

Councillor de Whalley referred back to previous comments which he had made during the meeting and felt there were still examples of what would be accepted and wouldn’t be accepted as infrastructure to prevent and help applicants feeling disappointed. The Chair commented that decisions needed to be made on the document today.

 

The Chair explained that the Planning Control Manager had come up with a suggestion for the Panel to consider give delegated authority to Officers to have a conversation with Councillor de Whalley and report back to the Panel this week with any further changes to the CIL Annual List of Infrastructure Projects.

 

The Panel agreed with the suggestion put forward by the Planning Control Manager.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained on page 24 of the draft CIL Governance and Spending document for 2024 was the new Governance Framework diagram. She explained the diagram highlighted that Management Team would scrutinise and give opportunity to coordinate projects with other spending streams and would not filter anything out.

 

She reminded the Panel that Councillor de Whalley wanted specific information in relation to the maximum points and explained this had been clearly identified within the document as set out below.

 

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer commented that to keep the Governance document in line with the procurement requirements, Audit recommended that the Panel get 1 quote for funding up to £5k and 3 quotes for projects funding over £5k.

 

In response to a question raised by Councillor Joyce, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed the applicant would have to produce 3 quotes.

 

Councillor de Whalley commented and explained he approved of the more rigorous scoring.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained Audit raised concerns that the projects over 40% get 5 points and asked the Panel to review the scoring so projects of 80%+ would get 5 points and they would be scored incrementally by 20%. She highlighted to the Panel that this would make match funding more important and allows projects which are bought in more match funding to gain higher points.

 

In response to concerns and questions raised by Councillor Blunt, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer confirmed that within the decision making part of the document it states the Panel must consider neighbourhood CIL parish monies and what is in hand and unallocated. All information relating to parish payments, spend and unallocated monies is contained within the Spending Panel report and she explained it was up to the Panel to decide which projects they would want to bring forward.

 

Councillor de Whalley commented that he was happy with the point scoring system with regards to the funding and felt it was well balanced.

 

In response to comments raised by Councillor de Whalley, the Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained amalgamating the projects into one list had got rid of having to have a minimum point scoring as the Panel would be looking at all the projects in the round and would all be based on the same scoring criteria.

 

The Senior CIL Monitoring Officer explained the scoring for timescales had been clarified as set out below.

 

 

AGREED:

(1)          The Panel’s recommendations would not be reviewed at R&D. However, Officers would check.

(2)          The Panel give delegated authority to Officers to have a conversation with Councillor de Whalley and report back to the Panel this week with any further changes made to the CIL Annual List of Infrastructure Projects.