Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

17.1   Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Carole Cockburn, Andrew Law, and Michaela Wicks.

To confirm the Minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 23 May 2023 and the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 7 June 2023.

18.1   The Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Council held on 23 May 2023 and the Extraordinary Meeting held on 7 June 2023 were confirmed and signed.

To receive from Members, declarations of interest in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.

19.1   There were no interests declared in relation to matters on the meeting agenda.

20.1   The Mayor reported that since the last Council meeting, she had undertaken many engagements including: addressing the Ahmadiyya community; attending the Milford Village Show and Cranleigh Carnival; met Princess Anne; opened the new Godalming Funeral Service premises; and with Mark Foster and Colin Jackson, re-opened all four of Waverley’s leisure centres under their new operator. The Pride Flag had flown outside the building for the entire month of June.

20.2   Her Civic Service, held on 2 July in St John’s Parish Church, Farncombe had been a wonderful occasion. The Mayor thanked her PA, Chloe Mickiewicz, for organising the event and to all others who contributed their time and talents. The Mayor had been disappointed that there had only been fourteen Waverley councillors present, including herself and Cllr Paul Rivers, and a further three councillors had given their apologies. She hoped that more would be able to support her mayoral fundraising events during the remainder of her time in office, the first of which would be on Friday, 6 October 2023.

21. 1   The Leader noted that he had been honoured to join the Mayor at her Civic Service, and a highlight had been seeing Rev’d Rattue following the Jamaican tradition of blessing the cake.

21.2    The Leader, and Executive colleagues, had been following closely the information reported by Guildford Borough Council regarding their financial situation. He had had several meetings with the Guildford leadership over the last couple of weeks, and both Executives had met informally as a group. The Leader reassured Members that Waverley and Guildford were still separate councils, with separate accounts, and whilst the scale of issues at Guildford were larger than expected the issues themselves were not of a surprise and had been factored into Waverley’s risk assessments of the collaboration.

21.3    Waverley’s collaborative work with Guildford continued to save the council hundreds of thousands of pounds per annum and there would be a report on the next steps for the collaboration in September, after the details of Guildford’s financial issues had been properly absorbed. The Leader reminded those opposed to the collaboration that while Guildford’s issues were not on the scale of Woking’s, unless the Government and Chancellor started to address the crisis in local government funding there would be many more councils issuing Section 114 notices or starting urgent remediation works as Guildford were doing. Net debt for the districts and boroughs in Surrey plus the County Council itself was now more than £5.5bn, with at least £1.5bn of that attributable to Woking. For comparison, Waverley had a debt of £138 million, almost all of which was contained in the Housing Revenue Account as the remainder of the loan that all councils who wanted to retain their Council housing were forced by government themselves to take out. 

21.4    The Leader was proud of Waverley’s own relative stability and relatively favourable position in this increasingly bleak local government picture and thanked, the council’s Finance Team and Portfolio Holder, Cllr Merryweather, for their work in this regard.

21.5    The Leader referred to matters at The Edge, which would be raised again under public questions. He noted that the petition being presented had reached the threshold of signatures for the matter to be discussed at Overview and Scrutiny, and he intended to attend and speak on that occasion. The Leader apologised to users of The Edge for the gap in service, which was especially disappointing coming over the summer months. The Leader further noted that there were members of the public present who had been present at a meeting with Sport Haslemere prior to the May elections when he had given good faith assurances based on conversations with Surrey County Council and the school about the future of The Edge.

21.6    The current situation was deeply concerning, because discussions had started with Surrey County Council in early 2022 regarding the future of the building that was owned by Surrey County Council and that Waverley had been managing at public cost since 2003. Surrey County Council had stated  ...  view the full minutes text for item CNL21/23

To respond to questions from members of the public, received in accordance with Procedure Rule 10.

The deadline for receipt of questions is 5pm on Tuesday 11 July 2023.

22.1   The following questions were received from members of the public in accordance with Procedure Rule 10:

(i)        From Mr Daniel Kuszel, Godalming:

“Could the Portfolio Holder give their assessment of the state of street cleaning in Godalming High Street and the town generally. Also, does the Portfolio Holder believe it is reasonable for residents to take the time to report graffiti on Council owned property but to not see this removed even though 8 weeks have passed since it was reported?”

Cllr Steve Williams, Portfolio Holder for Environment & Sustainability provided the following response:

“In general I believe the cleaning of our towns, including Godalming, is generally very good and our contractor applies significant resources to each town centre every day. That said there will be occasions where something may be overlooked or litter is dropped after we have cleaned in which case we would encourage the public to report any concerns through our website or customer services.

In relation to graffiti we do aim to clean our own property within a few days of reports, but there can be complications which can lead to delays, for example “council owned” does not mean Waverley owned and could be the County Council or a Town or Parish Council. Graffiti is the responsibility of the owner to remove and not Waverley Borough Council by default and whilst we are happy to receive reports and pass these on to the relevant bodies, we are not in a position to remove graffiti from others’ property.”

(ii)       From Brian Edmonds, Farnham:

“The question is sustained by statutory guidance issued under the Local Government Act 2003 that allows the public to assess a local authority’s total risk exposure because of its investment decisions.

The losses incurred by Waverley BC Leisure Centres from 2020 until 2022 advised by FOI request A12/4759 were understood to be £3,246,000 million with external support of £754,000 reducing the net impact to £2,492,000. Please advise why business interruption insurance did not mitigate these losses and who approved sustaining these losses by considering them an appropriate burden for council taxpayers?

The Statement of Accounts is the principal means by which the council is accountable to its electorate. However, it is understood that “the latest draft Statement of Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2022 is available on the Council’s website, subject to conclusion of the audit.” Recognising this limitation, what management controls are now in place to either prevent or mitigate similar substantial Waverley BC Leisure Centre losses?”

Cllr Mark Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Assets, provide the following response:

“The losses referred to by Mr Edmonds were due almost wholly directly to lost revenue from income from the closures caused by the mandatory Covid lockdown which were not reimbursed from central government. Throughout the period of Covid there were many decisions that had to be made to maintain and sustain services for residents. The council mitigated lost revenues and controlled costs wherever possible and the whole council approved the  ...  view the full minutes text for item CNL22/23

To respond to any questions received from Members of the Council in accordance with Procedure Rule 11.2.

The deadline for receipt of questions is 5pm on Tuesday 11 July 2023.

23.1    There were no questions received from Members.

Local Plan Part 1 (LPP1) was adopted in February 2018. In accordance with statutory requirements, the Council undertook a review of the Plan within five years of its adoption to decide if an update was required. The full Council on 21 February 2023 resolved that LPP1 required updating and instructed officers to explore all options for carrying out this update.

This report addresses that resolution by exploring two broad options for updating the Local Plan.

Recommendation

The Executive recommends that:

Work commences on a comprehensive update of the Local Plan (option A), meeting the requirements of the existing development plan system but ensuring flexibility to migrate to the new system if implemented.

24.1   The Mayor invited the Leader to introduce the item. The Leader moved the recommendation from the Executive, which was duly seconded by Cllr Liz Townsend, Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration and Economic Development who introduced the report and recommendations.

24.2   Cllr Townsend reminded Members that Local Plan Part 1 was now over five years old and in February, Council had considered the outcome of the statutory review undertaken by officers. Council had agreed that Local Plan Part 1 needed updating and that officers were to explore all options, including updating the plan immediately to make what was referred to as a broadly compliant plan as well as a more comprehensive update of Local Plan Part 1 and Local Plan Part 2 together to produce a single Local Plan whilst acknowledging that the existing Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plans remained the starting point for all decisions on planning applications while the update was brought forward.

24.3   The report in front of Council now had been considered by the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 21 June 2023, and their recommendations had been broadly agreed by the Executive on 4 July, along with a recommendation to Council that a comprehensive update of the Local Plan, into a single plan be undertaken. It was critical that an up-to-date assessment of local housing need be carried out to present an appropriate and achievable housing strategy to meet the Government’s housing target while acknowledging the constraints across the borough, whether that be Green Belt, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or other landscape designations.

24.4   Cllr Townsend advised that the report made it clear that it would be very difficult to convince an inspector that a partial update with an end date of 2032 would meet the requirements in the NPPF which stated that strategic policies should look ahead over a minimum 15-year period. That approach would be contrary to the advice of council officers and also the Planning Advisory Service and their consultants who considered a comprehensive update was likely to be the only feasible approach.

24.5   The Executive was also acutely aware of the limitations of local infrastructure, particularly water and sewage infrastructure, which had suffered from a lack of investment and oversight. The intention was to carry out a full water cycle study to ensure that there was understanding of the environmental and infrastructure capacity needed for fresh and wastewater. Recent experience in Cranleigh showed that there was a duty to residents and future generations to plan properly and use all levers available to make sure residents and the environment could thrive together.

24.6   Cllr Townsend stressed that whilst the proposed timescale for a comprehensive update outlined in option A of the report was ambitious it was realistic, and it was unlikely that it could be accelerated although any opportunities to shorten this process would be taken. The existing evidence base and knowledge in relation to Local Plan Parts 1 and 2 would be used where appropriate in producing a single plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item CNL24/23

Public Space Protection Orders relating to Dog Fouling and Dog Controls were made by the Council in 2019 and 2020 respectively. These Orders must be reviewed every three years to determine if they are still required and relevant. Public consultation has been carried out to assist this assessment and this report reviews the feedback from the public consultation and makes recommendations for the proposed replacement Public Spaces Protection Orders.

Recommendation

That the Council approves:

1          the updated Public Spaces Protection Order No.1 relating to dog fouling.

2.         the updated Public Spaces Protection Order No.2 relating to dog controls.

3.         that the FPN level is set at £100 for breach of the order, where offered as a disposal.

25.1   The Mayor invited the Leader to introduce the report and move the recommendations. The Leader noted the very high level of engagement there had been on the consultation on the proposed PSPOs which showed strong support for renewing these measures which supported responsible dog ownership. He endorsed the recommendations and asked the Portfolio Holder, Cllr Tony Fairclough, to present the detail.

25.2   Cllr Fairclough advised that the PSPOs had to be reviewed every three years and were now due for renewal. The PSPOs addressed issues caused by irresponsible dog owners not the dogs themselves, and it did this by way of controls but also by seeking to educate dog owners about their responsibilities. There had been public consultation which had generated a high level of engagement and there had been a briefing for Members last week to address any outstanding matters. Cllr Fairclough recommended that Member support the proposals before them, and approve the two PSPOs relating to dog control and dog fouling.

25.3   Cllrs Keen, Weldon, Hyman, Beaman, Munro and Murray all spoke in support of the renewal of the PSPOs whilst noting that there were still issues involving dogs that were not addressed by the PSPOs. In response to their questions, Council noted that:

·       enforcement resources were limited and would be deployed in response to intelligence provided about problem areas;

·       the level of the Fixed Penalty Notice was set by government and was currently under review with the possibility of this being increased to £500;

·       the council had no powers over privately owned land, including land owned by the MOD and National Trust;

·       there were no requirements for licensing professional dog-walkers but it was possible that some licensing regime would be introduced once the Coroner’s report into the incident in Tandridge had been published.

25.4   Cllr Munro particularly thanked the rangers an enforcement officers at Frensham Common, where the situation was much improved, but noted that it would be helpful if a uniform system of controls and enforcement could be adopted across open spaces across the borough, particularly MOD and NT owned land that bordered Waverley owned land.  Cllr Fairclough also thanked Frensham Parish Council for their contribution to the PSPO schedules.

25.5   With the agreement of Members, the Mayor put the three recommendations to the vote together, and Council RESOLVED unanimously that:

1.       the updated Public Spaces Protection Order No. 1 relating to dog fouling be, approved;

2.       the updated Public Spaces Protection Order No. 2 relating to dog controls, be approved; and

3.       the Fixed Penalty Notice level be set at £100 for breach of the Order, where offered as a disposal.

Waverley Borough Council has accepted a capital grant of £734,335   from Arts Council England’s Museum Estate and Development Fund to carry out essential brickwork repairs and conservation works to Wilmer House (Museum of Farnham).  The total cost of the project is estimated to be £1,029,145.  As it currently stands there is a potential budget gap of £275,000, which includes a match funding contribution of £100,000 previously agreed by the Executive at their meeting on 6 September 2022. In addition to the MEND grant a further £20,500 of external funding is already secured and officers are confident that funding from other sources can be found to reduce the shortfall further.

At their meeting on 6 June 2023, the Executive supported a recommendation to Full Council that if all efforts to raise additional external funding prove unsuccessful, that the Council shall agree to fund the budget gap of up to £275,000 from capital receipts or the Property Investment Reserve.

Recommendation

The Executive recommends to the Council that:

a budget of up to £275,000 be approved from capital receipts or the Property Investment Reserve. This will be to fund a potential budget gap in the MEND project, if efforts to obtain external funding are unsuccessful or overall project costs increase following the tender for the main build contractor. 

26.1   The Leader moved the recommendation, which was duly seconded by Cllr Kika Mirylees. The Leader noted his great pleasure at being able to bring this matter forward as it was one of the final steps to completing a project that many had told him was impossible. The Leader invited Cllr Mirylees to present the details.

26.2   Cllr Mirylees reminded Members that the council had been awarded a capital MEND grant of £734,335 from the Arts Council to carry out essential brickwork repairs and conservation works to Wilmer House, home of the Museum of Farnham. The estimated cost of the works was £1.03m and after currently identified external funding left a potential budget gap of £275,000. The aim was to raise as much of this as possible from external funders, but to accept the grant it was necessary for the council to agree to meet this funding gap in case there was a shortfall in additional fundraising. Cllr Mirylees urged Members to support this request so that the work to repair Wilmer House could move forward which would be a wonderful outcome for the Museum.

26.3   Cllr Hyman noted the long history to this project, and thanked the current and previous administration for their work in achieving this outcome. He thanked Cllr Mirylees, and also former Cllr Sally Dixon and others, who had campaigned relentlessly in support of restoring Wilmer House.

26.4   Cllr Higgins advised Members that he had visited the Museum of Farnham for the first time recently with his son and had been hugely impressed by the Grade 1 Listed Building, and the fantastic volunteers who had greeted them. He felt that the museum collection made it an asset for the whole of Waverley and while he supported the recommendation, he also hoped that further external funding could be raised to provide an extra cushion against cost inflation and unexpected expenses.

26.5   Cllr Beaman spoke and noted that Farnham Town Council had now pledged a further £10,000 towards the project, bringing the total from the Town Council to £20,000.

26.6   Following the Leader’s final comments the Mayor put the vote to Members and Council RESOLVED unanimously that a budget of up to £275 000 be approved from capital receipts or the Property Investment Reserve to fund a potential budget gap in the MEND project if efforts to obtain external funding are unsuccessful or overall project costs increase following the tender for the main build contractor.

The Standards and General Purposes Committee has considered proposed amendments to the Council’s current constitution in relation to Scheme of Delegation to the Joint Executive Head of Planning Development; revisions to the Planning Committee Procedure Rules; and a revised Councillors’ Planning Code of Good Practice which together will help support the effectiveness of the Waverley Planning Committee.

Recommendation

The Standards & General Purposes Committee recommends that the Council approves:

1.    The proposed revised Scheme of Delegation to the Joint Executive Head of Planning Development, attached at Appendix 1A.

2.    The proposed revised Planning Committee Procedure Rules, attached at Appendix 2.

3.    The proposed revised Councillors’ Planning Code of Good Practice, attached at Appendix 3A.  

4.    That a consultation with councillors is undertaken to inform the content of a Memorandum of Understanding between planning officers and councillors.

27.1   Cllr Andy MacLeod introduced the report from the Standards and General Purposes Committee and moved the recommendations, which were duly seconded by Cllr Robini. Cllr MacLeod advised Members that the proposals had been very thoroughly discussed by the Committee and there had been some relatively straightforward amendments made. Officers had brought forward the proposals very quickly following the Council meeting on 7 June 2023 in order to maintain support for the new planning committee arrangements.

27.2   Cllr MacLeod briefly outlined each of the recommendations:

·       The first recommendation related to the revised Scheme of Delegation to the Executive Head of Planning Development and there were four key points to note: the requirement to put all planning applications for more than 25 dwellings to the Planning Committee had gone as this was a holdover from when there was a Joint Planning Committee; second, the 21 days cut off for members to request that an application be called in to the Planning Committee had gone as it was felt that this put too much pressure on councillors and did not give them enough time to properly consider applications and discuss it with the residents; thirdly the number of objections on householder applications required to trigger an automatic referral to the Planning Committee had been set at 10; and the equivalent threshold for non-householder applications (majors and minors) was 20 objections. These last two provisions did not prevent a councillor calling in an application that had fewer objections.

·       The second recommendation related to the Planning Committee Procedure Rules, which had been revised to provide more clarity around when councillors could address the committee, including Ward councillors on applications in their Ward. They also now made better provision for the Planning Committee to propose an alternative recommendation to that put forward by the planning officers.

·       The third recommendation was to adopt a revised Councillor’s Planning Code of Good Practice, which provided guidance to councillors on how best to engage with the planning process from start to finish, whether or not they were members of the Planning Committee.

·       The final recommendation sought agreement for the Executive Head of Planning Development to continue discussions with councillors about how councillors and planning officers engage, with the aim of drawing up a Memorandum of Understanding so that all parties were clear about their roles, responsibilities and expectations.

27.3   Cllr Follows spoke to thank officers for bringing these matters forward so quickly, and the Standards and General Purposes Committee for their careful consideration of the proposals. He reiterated that the rights of ward councillors to speak at the Planning Committee were set out in the Council Procedure Rules 23.1 and 23.2, and these had not changed. Also, the right of councillors to call an application to the Planning Committee, provided there were good planning reasons, was separate to the number of letters of objection that had been received. The proposals strengthened the ability of Ward members to properly represent the views of their residents and their Ward on planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item CNL27/23

1.         Council is invited to note the updated membership of committees following the changes to the size and number of committees agreed by Council on 7 June 2023, as set out in the attached schedule, which reflects changes approved by the Joint Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services under delegated authority.

2.         Council is asked to agree the appointment of the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Planning Committee, in line with the nominations of the Group Leaders, as follows:

Chair 2023/24 – Cllr David Beaman

Vice-Chair 2023/24 – Cllr Penny Rivers

28.1   On the recommendation of the Mayor, Council RESOLVED to note the updated committee memberships that had been completed by the Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services under delegated authority and in line with Group Leaders’ wishes, following the agreement of the revised committee structure at the Council meeting on 7 June 2023.

28.2   Council further RESOLVED to agree the appointment of Cllr David Beaman as Chair of the Planning Committee and Cllr Penny Rivers as Vice-Chair of the Planning Committee for the remainder of 2023/24.

To receive any motions submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 12.1.

The deadline for receipt of motions was 5pm on Thursday 6 July 2023.

No motions have been received.

29.1     There had been no motions submitted for debate.

To receive and note the Minutes of the Executive meetings held on 4 April 2023, 11 May 2023, and 6 June 2023.

30.1   On the recommendation of the Mayor, Council RESOLVED to receive and note the Minutes of the Meetings of the Executive held on  4 April, 11 May and 6 June 2023.

30.2   Cllr Gale had registered to speak in relation to the question she had asked at the Executive meeting on 4 April. She had asked the Leader to consider a policy requiring all SANG provided in Waverley to be fully funded and maintained for a minimum period of 80 years to avoid undue costs and expense falling on householders in new developments through higher levels of service charge. The Leader had responded that he would add this to the matters for the Executive to consider, subject to the outcome of the elections. Cllr Gale asked the Leader whether this was now being considered.

30.3   The Leader thanked Cllr Gale for reminding him of his commitment and this would be discussed at an Executive Briefing meeting in September ahead of more formal consideration by the Executive.

To receive and note the Minutes of the Licensing & Regulatory Committee meeting held on 27 February 2023.

31.1   On the recommendation of the Mayor, Council RESOLVED to receive and note the Minutes of the Meeting of the Licensing and Regulatory Committee held on 27 February 2023.

31.2   There were no Members registered to speak on matters set out in the Minutes.

.

To receive and note the Minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 13 March 2023.

32.1   On the recommendation of the Mayor, Council RESOLVED to receive and note the Minutes of the Meeting of the Audit Committee held on 13 March 2023.

32.2   There were no Members registered to speak on matters set out in the Minutes.

To receive and note the Minutes of the Standards and General Purposes Committee meeting held on 30 November 2022 and 7 June 2023.

33.1   On the recommendation of the Mayor, Council RESOLVED to receive and note the Minutes of the Meeting of the Standards and General Purposes Committee held on 30 November 2022  and 7 June 2023.

33.2   There were no Members registered to speak on matters set out in the Minutes.