To receive any questions from members of the public and replies thereto.
Minutes:
The following questions were asked by members of the public:
Paul Elstone
Question 1
Construction activities on St Georges Court started in August 2018. The public were told that due to additional groundwork requirements the build time would be 2 years. That was five and a half years ago.
The project is still not fully complete and with no visible sign of any of the 39 properties being occupied in the short term.
Can a date be provided as to when it is expected that the first residents will move in and the tax payers of MDDC will start to see any benefit from this disastrous development?
Response:
It is currently envisaged that the first housing tenants will be occupying St George’s Court by the end of March 2024.
Question 2
It is noted that currently two (2) of the properties at Haddon Heights Bampton have been sold that two (2) are currently shown as Sold Subject to Contract and five (5) remain available for sale.
These five (5) properties are shown with a market value of over £3 million.
When is it planned for this Council to take full ownership of any unsold properties, will this be before the 31st March 2024?
Response:
We are currently working to get the remaining units transferred by the 31/3/24
Question 3
How will this purchase be funded, will it be from reserves or loans?
Response:
Previous reports have indicated that this transfer will be funded from reserves.
Question 4
At the last Cabinet Meeting a request was made and supported, that information should be provided in advance of the meeting and in written form. This opposed to a verbal report being given referencing power point slides etc.
The reason for this request being it gave Cabinet Members more time to absorb what was being presented and then ask appropriate and meaningful questions.
The same also applies of course to members of the public and which would be fully in support of this new administrations stated intent of greater public engagement.
Of this Committees Agenda only one of the items has advanced information provided. This importantly not being the 3 Rivers Soft Closure key actions and dates etc.
Will the Audit Committee Chair take a similar position to Cabinet this by requesting written information including data in advance even at short notice if absolutely required.
Response:
It was felt that a verbal update would suffice as regular updates on the soft closure progress is being made to the Cabinet. Many of the tasks, contained in the closure programme, are by their very nature commercially confidential, so could only be included in a part 2 report. The Committee is assured by officers that sufficient progress is being made against a well-considered closure programme. This ensures both cost and risk exposure is minimised – a key part of the role of this Committee.
Barry Warren
My questions are prompted by item 7 on the agenda 3 Rivers soft closure timetable – verbal update.
The MDDC Constitution Article 2, paragraph 2.3 (b) advises on the role and function of all Councillors and includes these words ‘actively encourage community participation and citizen involvement in decision making.’
The Leader advised recently, in respect of restricted documents, that elected members represent the public and therefore the public do not need to see the documents.
Item 7 is to be a verbal update from an officer and so neither elected members nor members of the public will know what is to be reported. This prevents elected Members having the opportunity to consider the information which will be provided or have time to consider formulating relevant questions.
As the time scale for the major portion of the closure of 3 Rivers is now being driven by the need to get the accounts audited, which is a far quicker timeline than the original period of perhaps two years suggested by the S151 Officer.
This subject of 3 Rivers involves the potential loss of several millions of pounds of public money.
Do the Audit Committee consider a verbal report is going to allow proper consideration of the unknown information to be given?
How can the actions of Audit Committee accepting a verbal report be considered as actively encouraging community participation and citizen involvement in decision making.’?
Response
The decision to soft close 3 Rivers has already been made in a public forum. This is a verbal update that has been requested by the Committee to ensure that key steps/tasks are being planned and delivered in a timely fashion in order to minimise both financial and risk exposure to the Council. Which is clearly the role of this Committee.
The key rationale behind making this a verbal update is due to the currency of actions/decisions in order to give the Committee the most up to date information. Again, as I am sure many can understand there is a conflict between the Council’s intention to keep as much of this information in the public domain whilst also ensuring any commercially sensitive details are kept in part 2.
I can also confirm that the Cabinet will be formally updated on the company’s soft closure progress in their next financial monitoring report.
Responses provided to the two members of the public were provided by the Deputy Chief Executive (S151 Officer).