Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

A copy of the Register of Interest for each Selby District Councillor is available for inspection at www.selby.gov.uk.

Councillors should declare to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest in any item of business on this agenda which is not already entered in their Register of Interests.

Councillors should leave the meeting and take no part in the consideration, discussion or vote on any matter in which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Councillors should also declare any other interests. Having made the declaration, provided the other interest is not a disclosable pecuniary interest, the Councillor may stay in the meeting, speak and vote on that item of business.

If in doubt, Councillors are advised to seek advice from the Monitoring Officer.

There were no disclosures of interest.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Policy Review Committee held on 14 September 2021.

The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting held on 14 September 2021.

Members enquired as to whether there was any progress with tree planting in the district and if there was available stock and sites. Officers explained that no planting had been done, but suitable sites had been identified; an overarching strategy was needed. Members were disappointed that no planting had been done as there was a short window in which it could be successfully undertaken.

RESOLVED:

To approve the minutes of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 14 September 2021 for signing by the Chair.

There was no address from the Chair.

To receive an update on and discuss the work of the Low Carbon Working Group – verbal update.

Members received an update on the work of the Low Carbon Working Group, including the online workshop that was held on 9 December 2021.

Officers explained that the Low Carbon Strategy was due for consideration at full Council soon. The feedback from the Executive on the strategy had been that more work should be undertaken on identifying quickly deliverable actions.

Following the workshop, Members had identified the following priorities: tree planting, the retrofitting of social housing, biodiversity and greener energy tariffs.

The Committee were informed that LGR’s (local government reorganisation) climate change working group would be held within the policy workstream, and that membership of the group would be drawn from climate leads across different North Yorkshire authorities.

Officers went on to give updates on various projects:

·         The climate change training module for Members and Officers was complete and would be made available on the Council’s online training system soon.

·         The remaining data for the calculation of the Council’s 2019-20 and 2020-21 carbon footprint was being collated.

·         Officers planned to move the Council’s energy tariff over to renewables from April 2022.

·         Urbaser had been involved in a three-month trial using hydrotreated oil with waste collection vehicles.

Members asked if the renewable energy tariff would be tied in with the hospital; Officers confirmed that it would be, but that they were also looking at other buildings such as the Council’s community centres.

The Committee were very keen to see some action with the identified projects but acknowledged the need for the carbon footprint calculations to be completed so that an accurate comparison could be made.

Members asked that at the following week’s meeting of the Low Carbon Working Group details and figures were provided on energy efficiency of social housing.

RESOLVED:

                        The Committee noted the update.

To consider and comment on the Draft Revenue Budget and Capital Programme 2022-23 and Medium-Term Financial Plan.

The Committee received the report of the Chief Finance Officer which had been brought before Members to provide comments on the Draft Revenue Budget, Capital Programme and Medium-Term Financial Plan 2022-2023.

Officers presented the report which set out the draft revenue budget; capital programmes and the Programme for Growth for 2022/23. As a result of local government re-organisation in North Yorkshire from April 2023, this would be Selby District Council’s last budget. The report also presented indicative budgets and planned programmes for 2023/24 and 2024/25, to enable the impact of recurring proposals to be viewed over the medium term and to support a smooth transition to the new unitary council in North Yorkshire. This approach provided the new council with an understanding of the pressures and opportunities facing Selby District, and investments planned by Members.

Members noted that subject to the confirmation of the Local Government Finance Settlement and Council Tax level, the 2022/23 budget was expected to require £4.25m of funds earmarked in the Business Rates Equalisation Reserve (BRER) for revenue support.

The Committee were also informed that for the purpose of the draft budget, a Council Tax freeze for 2022/23 was proposed. This was a departure from the approved Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and added £119k p.a. to the forecasted deficits. A CPI+1% increase was assumed for housing rents.

Officers went on to report that in 2021/22 the £9.2m of renewable energy business rates were transferred to the Business Rates Equalisation Reserve, and then subsequently applied to the Programme for Growth as part of the MTFS approved by Council in July 2021. For 2022/23 no assumptions had been made at this stage, pending the Local Government Finance Settlement. Current policy would be to allocate such receipts from 2023/24.

Members acknowledged that the Medium-Term Financial Plan (3-year draft budget) showed there was an underlying gap between spending (with spending reflecting the budget risk highlighted in the MTFS) and current assumed core funding, as a result of New Homes Bonus being phased out and the renewable energy business rates windfalls ceasing. The Council continued to await the outcome of the Government’s Fair Funding Review, and reform of the Business Rates Retention System, to confirm the level of future savings.

Officers reported that there was capacity in reserves to smooth the impact of funding reductions, and that the draft budget confirmed the deferral savings until 2024/25. However, the ongoing use of reserves to support the revenue budget was not a long-term sustainable solution, and therefore achievement of efficiency savings and additional income generation remained crucial. The budget proposals also included a number of discretionary growth bids, along with contingencies to support the LGR transition and ongoing Covid impacts.

The draft budget was subject to public consultation before the Executive finalised their proposals in February 2022.

Members asked a number of questions of Officers on the budget. Some Committee Members were pleased that a freeze on Council Tax had been proposed due to the rise in the cost of living; it was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

A report to allow Members to review the street cleansing service. The report sets out the details of the existing service along with an independent review of standards by Keep Britain Tidy that was carried out in 2019.

The Committee received the report of the Contracts Team Leader, which had been brought to Members to allow them to review the street cleansing service. The report set out the details of the existing service along with an independent review of standards by Keep Britain Tidy that was carried out in 2019.

Officers explained that street cleansing services were carried out as part of an integrated environmental services contract that included domestic and commercial waste and recycling collection, street cleansing and grounds maintenance. The current contract was due to expire at the end of March 2024 and work had commenced on the first stages of contract succession.

The street cleansing function was carried out in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA) and the Code of Practice on Litter and Refuse. Under those pieces of legislation every adopted road in the district was given a zone which determined frequency of cleansing; the zones reflected the amount of public usage/footfall:

Zone 1 – Main retail

Zone 2 – Other retail

Zone 3 – High density housing (generally terrace housing)

Zone 4 – Low density housing

Zone 5 – Medium density housing

Zone 6 – Industry / warehousing

Zone 7 – Main roads (these are A roads such as the A19)

Zone 8 – Rural roads

Zone 9 – Other highways

Zone 10 – Recreation areas (only those owned by SDC)

The Council was also responsible for the cleansing of around 950km of adopted highway by means of litter collection and mechanical sweeping.

Officers gave an update on the recent review of the street cleansing service. There had been a full consultation with the operatives and a shift to a new seven-day working pattern had begun that week. The new arrangement meant that operatives were able to undertake more high-risk cleansing when roads weren’t as busy at weekends, including use of the mechanical sweeper. Members were encouraged by the change but expressed their concern about the amounts of litter on the edges of settlements, which seemed to be caused by the public throwing rubbish out of their cars. The Committee asked if clearance of the litter on the roadside was Selby District Council’s responsibility. Officers confirmed that it was a district function, but that one of the benefits of the new arrangements was that more resource could be put into the harder to reach areas.

The Committee were pleased with the litter posters that had been produced and requested more copies for other areas, such as Gowthorpe in Selby, which was particularly bad near the school. Officers were aware of such areas but were pleased to report that the extended operative hours would mean more street cleansing in both Selby and Tadcaster. Further work with the schools was encouraged. Brayton was also identified as a problematic area for litter; Officers confirmed that they would be able to share data on litter and dog bin collection with ward Members when available. When litter was reported by Members, a job was raised by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

To consider and comment on the Disabled Facilities Grant (Adaptations) Policy 2021.

The Committee received the report of the Operational Service Manager and Housing Strategy Officer, which had come to Committee to allow Members to review the draft Adaptations (DFG) Policy 2021 and provide feedback as part of the consultation process. The report set out the Council’s legal responsibility for the provision of Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs). The draft DFG (Adaptations) Policy 2021 at Appendix A would provide residents and relevant stakeholders with a clear policy and process for delivering property adaptations, as well as providing suitable alternatives when adaptations were not appropriate or practicable.

Officers explained that the report allowed the Committee to consider current service provision and the ways in which the new policy could improve both services for residents, as well as make best use of current housing stock and maximise spend of the Better Care Fund allocation.

Members recognised the importance of a suitable and well adapted home, which could be the defining factor in enabling a disabled person to live well and independently. Selby District Council was committed to making sure that vulnerable and disabled residents had the ability to remain in their homes for as long as it was safe and reasonable for them to do so, a provision provided for via the DFG process. As a two-tier administrative area, Selby District Council staff facilitated and administered the adaptation process, as well as carrying out any required work. However, this was done in partnership with North Yorkshire County Council and the Occupational Therapy team. They were responsible for the majority of visiting residents, assessing their needs and submitting the adaptation request for the Council’s consideration.

Members asked if any consultation work had been undertaken with local disability groups; Officers explained that a number of people that they had spoken to included local disability forums.

There was general concern from Members as to the time it took to make adaptations to properties in order for people to stay in their homes, and how the Covid-19 pandemic could have made it worse. Officers described how referrals from North Yorkshire County Council had doubled in the last 12 months, and that it was taking and average of 80 days to do the work, which was above the national average. 

Officers clarified that Personal Independence Payments were considered to be a passported benefit, administered by the government, not Selby District Council.

RESOLVED

The Committee noted the draft policy and provided feedback as part of the consultation process, before the draft was returned to the Executive, expected in March 2022.

To review the draft Private Sector Housing Assistance Policy 2021-23 and provide feedback as part of the consultation process.

The Committee received the report of the Operational Service Manager and Housing Strategy Officer which had come to Committee to allow Members to review the draft Private Sector Housing Assistance Policy 2021-23 and provide feedback as part of the consultation process. Whilst responsibility for maintaining privately owned homes rested primarily with their owners, the policy recognised that some owners (particularly the elderly and vulnerable) did not always have the necessary resources to repair or improve their homes. The powers afforded under Article 3 of the Regulatory Reform (Housing Assistance) (England and Wales) Order 2002 gave the Council greater freedom to provide financial assistance in these cases, for adaptations, essential home repairs or to improve housing conditions to benefit an individual’s health and wellbeing.

Officers explained that the report enabled the Committee to consider current service provision and the ways in which the new policy could improve services for residents, helping to encourage improvement in private housing choice and quality across the district and enable independent living wherever possible.

Members recognised that stock condition work completed in the district in 2017 showed that there were 39,423 dwellings in Selby. Notably, almost 6,000 of those in the private sector were categorised as having a Category 1 safety hazard (equating to 17% of total private stock). The total cost of mitigating these hazards was estimated to be £20.9 million, whilst the cost to the NHS and wider society of treating accidents and ill-health caused by such hazards was estimated to be £14.4 million per year. However, it was often the case that removing Category 1 hazards required relatively inexpensive housing solutions, which could save organisations thousands if it prevented an accident or further health issues.

Officers went on to explain that with this in mind, the aim of this policy was to encourage improvement in private sector housing choice and quality across the district, primarily through support and assistance. The Council would seek to:

·           help owner-occupiers maintain and repair their homes;

·           remove or reduce housing related defects that were detrimental to health;

·           assist people whose independence may be at risk, to remain in or return to their homes;

·           boost domestic energy efficiency to reduce the number of households in fuel poverty, improve heating and reduce carbon dioxide levels;

·           encourage and enable private landlords to provide good quality and well managed properties for their tenants;

·           maximise the use of existing housing stock to increase housing choice across the district; and

·           increase the number of empty properties brought back into use, particularly where this could be used to relieve homelessness.

Members asked how private homeowners would be aware of the assistance offered; Officers explained that it could be through North Yorkshire County Council, Selby District Council’s website or social services.

RESOLVED

The Committee noted the draft policy and provided feedback as part of the consultation process, before the draft was returned to the Executive, expected in March 2022.

The Committee requested a report on business grants in September 2021, to give further detail about the use of the remainder of the government’s Covid-19 grant to the Council and details of security, fraud, and data protection for previous payments of the grants. The Committee are asked to consider and note the report.

Councillor K Arthur left the meeting at this point.

The Committee received the report of the Revenues and Benefits Manager Housing Service Manager which had been requested by Members and set out business grants in September 2021 in order to give further detail about the use of the remainder of the government’s Covid-19 grant to the Council, and details of security, fraud, and data protection for previous payments of the grants.

Officers explained that from March 2020 onwards the Council had administered a number of business grants schemes on behalf of the Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). Most of these schemes had mandatory qualifying criteria and the guidance on administration of the schemes had been issued by BEIS. The guidance for all grant schemes had been comprehensive and included details of the process required for businesses to apply for the grants, the level of evidence required from businesses and the pre and post payment assurance work that local authorities should undertake.

The Chair asked what could stop a small business from applying for a grant; Officers explained that discretionary grants asked for evidence that losses did happen for a business, which could put some business owners off. The amount of the grant was set by central government.

Members were pleased that constituents had reported that the Revenues and Benefits Team had been very helpful and efficient. In response to a question about remaining funds, Officers explained that the £167k could be spent up to 31 March 2022, after which it had to be returned to central government. However, this date could be extended. The Council would urgently be looking at businesses in the district that may need help.

Members were disappointed that the recipients of the grants had to pay tax on the amounts; Officers acknowledged this and emphasised that they tried to make it very clear to all recipients that the amounts would be taxed.

RESOLVED

The Committee noted the content of the report.

To receive a short update on the impact of Universal Credit in Selby District.

The Committee received an update from the Revenues and Benefits Manager Housing Service Manager in relation to Universal Credit.

Members noted that the previous rise in Universal Credit recipients in the Selby Jobcentre Plus area had now slowed.

In October 2019 there were 1936 recipients of UC in the Selby Jobcentre Plus area, October 2020 there were 4131 claimants in receipt of UC, the latest figures from October 2021 show there were 4020 recipients.

The natural migration due to change in customers circumstances from legacy benefits had now slowed down. The managed migration by the DWP of legacy benefit recipients onto UC had been paused due to the need for DWP to move resource in the COVID-19 pandemic.

It was therefore expected the numbers of UC claimants in the district would therefore remain quite static for some time. As such, it was suggested that future updates may not be needed by the Committee, and that the recurring item could be removed from the Committee’s work programme going forward.

Members acknowledged that UC was now a wholly DWP function, but that it would still be useful for them to be aware if numbers of claimants was rising. Officers explained that the Council didn’t report back on any other legacy benefits; however, the Committee agreed that the update should be kept on the work programme going forward, but only when there was a significant change in numbers, i.e., a shift of 10% each way.

RESOLVED:

The Committee noted the report and agreed that the update on Universal Credit numbers should be kept on the work programme going forward, but only reported on when there was a significant change in numbers, i.e., a shift of 10% each way.

To consider the Committee’s work programme.

The Committee considered the 2021-22 work programme presented by Democratic Services.

It was noted that as per the previous agenda item, an update on Universal Credit would be maintained on the work programme. The street cleaning item had been covered and as such would now be removed.

Officers explained that with reference to the Corporate Policy Framework, the development of this had been complicated by the upcoming local government reorganisation (LGR). As Selby District Council would be ending as an authority in 2023, there was little reason to develop or refresh existing policies for a soon to be defunct organisation. The exception to this was if the policies had to be updated to remain legally compliant. As such, it was suggested that this matter be removed from the work programme.

Members asked if a report on the Council’s industrial units could be brought to the fore, including information such as the state of the units, how many there were, where, number that were vacant etc.

Officers advised the Committee that such an item had been suggested as a joint project between the Audit and Governance, Scrutiny and Policy Review Committees, as the matter had been raised at previous meetings of all three.

It was agreed by Members that the best way forward with the matter would be to receive an information report on all aspects of the industrial units for consideration by the Policy Review Committee, after which the matter could be, if appropriate, brought forward as a joint piece of work between the three committees; it was acknowledged by Members that this work would be subject to the demands of LGR, specifically Officer time and availability.

RESOLVED:

The Committee noted and agreed the work programme 2021-22, subject to the following changes, that:

1.    the matter of Universal Credit would be maintained on the work programme for future updates;

2.    consideration of the draft Corporate Governance Framework item be removed;

3.    the item on street cleansing be removed as this had now been completed; and

4.    an information report on the Council’s industrial units be submitted to the Policy Review Committee, including information such as the state of the units, how many there were, where the units were, the number that were vacant etc. after which the matter could be, if appropriate, brought forward as a joint piece of work between the Audit and Governance, Scrutiny and Policy Review Committees.