Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED – T H A T paragraph 4.24.5 titled Recorded Vote of the Council’s Constitution be replaced with the paragraph below:- A member present at the meeting may ask for the names for and against the motion or amendment or abstaining from voting to be taken down in writing and entered into the minutes. A request for a recorded vote will override a demand for a ballot. No. Reason for decision Having regard to the debate and the decision at the meeting. N.B. – It being noted that on screen the vote showed 49 electronic votes with three Members in the Chamber raising their hands in their support of the altered Motion.
RESOLVED – T H A T the final Governance and Audit Committee Annual Report 2022/23, be endorsed. Reason for decision Having regard to the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 and the requirement for consideration by Full Council.
RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 731), be endorsed subject to the Planning Public Speaking Guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Planning Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 732), be endorsed subject to the guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Chief Executive’s Emergency Powers as contained within the report be noted. Reason for decision Having regard to the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the position be noted and having regard to the fact that no responses to the consultation had been received. Reason for decision To comply with the Non-Domestic Ratepayers (Consultation) Regulations 1992 (Statutory Instrument No. 3171). No.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the changes to the relevant officer delegations as set out in paragraphs 2.2 to 2.6 of the report be approved and that Section 26 of the Constitution be amended accordingly. (2) T H A T the change to the relevant delegation as set out in paragraph 2.7 of the report be approved, subject to the reference at item 13(b) Corporate Fraud Enforcement Policy on the Council agenda being agreed. Reason for decisions (1&2) To update the Officer Delegation Scheme within the current Constitution.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the policy with regard to not granting any level of discount for unoccupied dwellings that have remained so for 6 months agreed for 2023-24, be agreed for 2024-25. (2) T H A T the long term empty property premium of 100% be agreed for the 2023-24 financial year and continue for such properties from 2024-25 that remain so for the period up to (but not including) 24 months. (3) T H A T from 1st April, 2024 a premium of 150% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 24 months or more. (4) T H A T from 1st April, 2025 a premium of 200% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 36 months or more. (5) T H A T the policy to introduce a premium of 100% on second homes for the 2024-25 financial year be agreed and reaffirmed. Reasons for decisions (1) The Council was required to determine its policy on discounts in relation to unoccupied dwellings as defined in classes A, B and C to the Council Tax (Prescribed Class of Dwellings) (Wales) Regulations 1998 each year. (2&4) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of long-term empty properties as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. No. (3) Upon reviewing the implementation of the premium for long term empty properties introduced from the start of 1st April 2023, it was felt that a straight increase to the premium levels as previously proposed, may counteract the intention of the policy, which was to bring long term empty properties back into use, if the level of charges due hindered necessary works required to make a dwelling habitable. As such it was felt that a stepped approach would be more in keeping with the policy to ensure that persistent long term empty properties were targeted. (5) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of second homes as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. CORPORATE FRAUD ENFORCEMENT POLICY (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. C220) together with the reference from Governance and Audit Committee of 11th December, 2023 (Minute No. 636) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Having regard to the contents of the report and the previous discussions at the meeting earlier in the meeting in respect of the report titled amendments to the Constitution, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the report and the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution be updated to reflect the changes referred to in the report and as considered earlier in the agenda under the Amendments to the Constitution report. Reason for decision To update the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution to reflect the changes outlined within the report and as considered under an earlier report in the agenda. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248 refers) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The Leader took the opportunity to remind Members that the initial draft had been considered by Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committees with the amended draft coming back to Cabinet and to the Corporate Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee. Members had stated that they had been pleased with the way the report had been presented which demonstrated how their feedback had been included, with Members also being able to easily see where the changes had been made. There being no further comments, it was No. RESOLVED – T H A T the draft Annual Delivery Plan 2024-25, as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248), be approved. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. DRAFT BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) The Leader advised that the proposals had been published at the end of the previous week, prior to the availability of Welsh Government ‘s settlement figures. There had been no changes to the overall settlement following that announcement but there was additional detail regarding the Standard Spending Assessment that was subsequently detailed in the supplementary information that had been distributed to all Members and published online prior to the Cabinet meeting on 29th February, 2024. The Council faced significant financial pressures in excess of £38m initially and had undertaken significant work to mitigate those pressures. As a result, it had not been possible to fund pay awards in full and there were limited resources to meet the full demands of care providers to fully meet demographic growth and the complexity of services required. A 3.4% increase in the grant received by the Council from Welsh Government alongside the proposed 6.7% increase in Council Tax fell short of meeting the additional costs. There would be a further UK budget announcement on the same day the report would be considered by Full Council, and it remained to be seen if there would be any further funding made available for Local Government, but it was not expected there would be any further matters for Council to consider on 6th March. Consultation on how to allocate the available resources had taken place, including a 4-week public budget consultation, consideration by the five Council Scrutiny Committees and the ‘Life in the Vale’ survey where residents were asked for their views on what they expected from the Council, where residents were supportive of the ambition to target resources to social care, affordable housing and schools and less supportive of any Council Tax increase and increase in discretionary charges by the rate of inflation. Council Tax levels in the Vale of Glamorgan were below the Welsh average and below the level of expected rises for many Authorities across Wales, with 10% or more having been proposed by some. No. There had been in-depth discussions at Scrutiny but no alternatives put forward prior to consideration at Full Council, where it was difficult to take proposals on board at that point and achieve a balanced budget as was the legal requirement for the Authority to do, but there would be a full debate at Full Council on the day. The proposal concerning charging for toilets at coastal areas had been removed as Members felt that was not something they could support and the £5k saving would be found elsewhere. The next year’s £7.7m savings programme was mostly tactical and looked at how to provide and deliver services more effectively, along with some transformational initiatives, as having another multi-million pound savings programme next year would be challenging. The Leader further commented that the Cabinet and officers had been working on the budget since June 2023. In July 2023 Cabinet had referred the Financial Strategy to all Scrutiny Committees and November had brought the refreshed Medium Term Financial Plan. Christmas had been cancelled for a lot of the officers and a number of Cabinet Members. The things that it had hoped to do were no longer possible until the funding gap could be reduced to a reasonable level. In January 2024 the draft budget was presented to all Scrutiny Committees which were attended by the Cabinet Members who had listened to the discussions. There were some things she said that were unpalatable, not liked and had reluctantly been accepted but one recommendation had been made which had been accepted by Cabinet that the proposed charges to Coastal toilets be removed. The budget this evening, she said, proposed for a balanced budget, which was required to be delivered by 11th March, considerations for which had included the money that the Council would receive from Council Tax and as the Council wanted to continue to support bus services and not make car parking charges on streets etc., a 6.7% Council Tax was being proposed. The budget was also she said based on supporting the Council’s most vulnerable. In referring to the recent Living in the Vale Survey she said the top priority for residents had been easy accessibility to care and health care, the second priority the ability to buy or rent a good quality home. The cost of living crisis had also not gone away, in the feedback received 60% of respondents said that they had chosen not to put the heating on at times, and 44% of them said that they could not pay an unexpected bill of £850, so if their boiler went that would be it. There were a number of pressures for the Council, pressures in terms of demography not just numbers of people but the complexity and scale of need, people's lives and lived experience were hugely diverse in the Vale and as a result the need was hugely diverse. Since the pandemic the Council was aware that older residents had become more isolated, more frail and required more care. Young people were struggling with anxiety and there were behavioural issues across the Vale with the Council having to consider a No. range of ways to meet such needs. Service redesigns were being considered and looking for ways to do things more effectively. Reviews of the street cleansing service, litter etc, would be undertaken as well as transformational change. The Leader referred to other areas of good work that had taken place, which had included reshaping of the Library services, Big Fresh was also delivering not only Universal Free School Meals to primary children, but also delivering a surplus that can be reinvested into schools. Income generation was being considered as well as generating income from fees and charges for non-statutory services. However although the financial position was difficult the Council, through its proposed budget, was still delivering many services. The Leader also referred to other aspects of Council provision such as each week 105 recycling rounds were out in the communities with each vehicle collecting from 550 properties a day. As a result over 850 articulated lorries full of material that could be sold or reused with this year forecasting income of between £1.2m and £1.4m from processing recycling at the new recycling facility. With the support of residents the Council had managed to deliver over a 70% recycling outcome being one of the top in Wales, one of the top in the UK and actually one of the top in Europe. The Council also managed 30 Feature Parks, 21 Recreation Grounds, 13 Conservation Parks, 88 Play Areas and 9 Skateboard areas and has 38 football pitches, 13 mini football pitches alongside rugby pitches, cricket, etc which are all still supported. Over the past 3 years the Council had delivered over 177,000 meters of active travel shared use being pedestrian and cycling paths. The Council offered child pedestrian training, delivered cycle shelters in schools and bought bikes for schools. 20 Car Parks were owned and controlled by the Vale with only two of the town centre car parks with a charge. The Leader further advised that 52,567 square meters of carriageway resurfacing had been undertaken in the year, 3,261 square meters of footway improvements and surface water gullies had been cleansed. The Leader concluded by stating that she would be happy to circulate some of the information recognising that the Council was still providing services. With regard to queries of measuring productivity that she had heard being said at meetings, she questioned how did you choose or measure how productive a care worker was, how did you look at productivity when you've had a child with severe learning needs. The Council would measure where it was appropriate to do so and she ended by presenting the budget to Council which was duly seconded by Councillor Brooks who reserved her right to speak later in the debate. Councillor Carroll commenced by saying the Labour Council was asking residents to pay more for less. He said Labour had failed to show leadership and manage budgets properly and was therefore imposing cuts to services and charging for things like garden waste collections. He drew attention to the multi-million pound bus station and enquired as to how much this Authority spent on diversity and inclusion. At the Healthy Living and Social Care Scrutiny Committee meeting Councillor Cave had made perfectly reasonable comments about the funding of bus services in the rural Vale but instead of No. addressing Councillor Cave's concerns, the Leader ‘s comments many residents had told him they considered to be a smear with Councillor Cave being accused of using inflammatory language. Perhaps he said the Leader could enlighten Council as to what aspect of Councillor Cave's remarks were considered inflammatory. He also referred to a recent report where the Leader had stated the 2% cut in National Insurance contributions announced in November by the Conservative UK Government was disappointing and that she had confirmed that this Council opposed tax cuts for millions of working people with he said his only assumption from those comments was that the Leader would oppose further tax cuts that had been announced that day. The 6.7% rise proposed he said fitted with his view of the Administration’s attitude that residents should pay more. The rise proposed significantly exceeded inflation with CPI currently standing at 4%. He felt the rise was not necessary as the Council had tens of millions of pounds in usable reserves including £10,177mn sat in the bank in the Council Fund as a percentage of the Authority's Revenue budget. If the Authority was to consider a real terms freeze in Council Tax and increase it in line with inflation at 4% it would cost £2,505m but given the amount held in Reserves it would be possible to go further than that and to cut Council Tax in real terms, which is what he said the Council should do. A 3% rise would cost £3.435m which he said would be below the rate of inflation. This real terms cut stood in stark contrast to the 6.7% rise proposed by Labour and would ease the pressures on working people across the Vale, so on behalf of the Conservative Group he proposed an amendment to the revenue budget which would transfer £3.435m from the Council's General Fund balances to support the base budget and he urged all Members to support the amendment. Councillor Charles, in seconding the amendment, said the additional income required by the Council could well be taken from Reserves which the taxpayers of the Vale of Glamorgan had already contributed to. She said she believed this could be the fairest way of raising the revenue instead of increasing the pressure on every household. The budget management of the Council had, in her view, been mismanaged by Labour backed up Llantwit Firsts and the people of the Vale of Glamorgan deserved better. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking to the amendment by Councillor Carroll whilst reserving his right to speak later on the proposed budget, asked after listening to the Conservatives uncosted amendment taking money out of the Reserves if £3.5m was taken out of the Reserves did the Conservative Group have any idea how to return it as it would obviously be using the exact same £3.5m next year and the year after and then the Council would be left with nothing in the Reserves. This was not the way to run a Council, stating that unfortunately the Conservatives had created the problems that were before the Council. In 2010 Britain's debt was £1 trillion and now it's £2.7 trillion so this was quite a shambles. What sort of ridiculous regime increased or cut one country's budget based on the spending of a government in another country. Taking a look at public spending in its entirety there was more spent per head in London than anywhere else. A little bit higher than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The spending per head in London, Scotland and No. Northern Ireland was 500 times higher annually almost 4%, even if Wales only received funding on an equal footing with these three it would be richer to the tune of £1.5 billion and this was the type of money which could transform the Vale’s local services and ensure that the Council did not need to increase Council Tax as has been suggested, but the we don't and this was leading to difficult decisions for all of us. Of course in Scotland the SNP Government had used part of the additional funding to freeze Council Tax realising the impact of the economic storm for families, but here with the challenging budget across Wales the ordinary people must pay more a lot more to maintain even basic services. Councillor Dr. Johnson ended by saying that he did not accept the figures presented by the Conservative Group which had not been costed in either a sensible or responsible manner which could be sustained. Councillor Wilson commented that he thought the amendment was pretty interesting, in that we would be looking at a 3% Council Tax increase at least where as in previous years the Conservatives had suggested no increase. He said that in his view the Conservative Group did not have the right to talk about financial mismanagement as Councillor Dr. Johnson had rightly said, we have got huge issues with our debt at the moment. Referring to 2008 where he said Labour helped out the banks and stopped people running out of money at cash points, which had happened in other places like Cyprus. We do not need any lessons from the Conservatives about financial management he said as in his view they didn’t have a clue how to manage the budget. Councillor Godfrey commented that if people were quoting facts then they should be correct and encapsulate the whole picture including the impact of the Ukraine war and BREXIT and he felt it quite wrong if people were not doing that. Councillor Hodges, in response to Councillor Godfrey’s comments, said yes the Ukraine war and Covid had a dramatic effect on balances as did Brexit but he felt that there was plenty of other mismanagement going on as well. Councillor Goodjohn considered that the amendment didn’t appear to be a very tactical solution to the Council’s issues and enquired of Councillor Carroll as to exactly what mismanagement of the budget issues there were in the Revenue proposals. He also asked the Conservative Leader to consider that taking from Reserves would quite frankly cause cash flow issues in the Council and what he would propose do in such situations as if there were cash flow issues in the Council people would have delays in getting vital services which would impact on their lives, being people's real lives here in the real world rather than some abstract idea. He also took the opportunity to remind Council of the current 10% inflation rate. Councillor Hodges, in drawing attention to Social Care costs, said if they were not funded what would happen going forward further, commenting that the NHS was already struggling because of mismanagement from the Conservative Government and its finances stating that he could not support No. the amendment as it had not been fully costed and would mean a cut in schools provision and social care. Councillor John said he could not believe what he was hearing from the Conservative Group referring to the months of discussion on the budget that had already taken place and that it was a good job the Council had reserves. He mentioned other Councils, in particular Monmouth Council, who he said did not have any Reserves to help them and their Council Tax had gone up to 7.5%. Councillor Franks, listening with interest to Councillor Carroll’s and the Conservative Members’ comments, said he felt that they were basically saying that apart from them no one else could financially manage the Council and referred to the catastrophic failures of Conservative Councils in England. The Leader, in response, said that in her view the amendment was completely preposterous in view of the financial position facing the Council and that she would be voting against the amendment. Councillor Perry said it was a shame that as Elected Members elected by the communities that there was a lack of togetherness. He said he applauded attempts to get rid of Council Tax or severely change it as, in his view, a land value tax would be much fairer. He said he would not be supporting the amendment because he believed that his residents would rather not spend money on new tyres and suspensions on their vehicles that they would rather if there were Reserves fix the roads and fix the other services and stop relying on volunteers to run services and stop cheering the minority getting wealthier and wealthier and have a more equitable society. Following a vote on the amendment the amendment was lost it being noted 12 were in favour, 38 against and one abstention. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking on the substantive Motion, said it had been interesting to hear the conversations taking place and that some people might almost be surprised to hear that he sympathised with the Leader of the Council in respect of the challenge before her, but that was why Plaid did not accept the propaganda about the Council being a great Council because the average person did not feel this. We as a Council needed to provide on demand services which were quickly rising as a result of lack of investment in preventative services. We needed to consider the relationship between the people that we served and the funding. Welsh Government added extra funding at the last minute and that increased £25m between the provisional and the final settlement £600,000 through to the Revenue Grant and around £500,000 through the introduction of the K Grant where we're expecting a loss and furthermore additional funding in the Housing Support Grant last week. How much was still unclear but the Council intended to keep Council Tax at the same level rather than considering a cut like last year when we received last minute funding which the Council put in its Reserves. This year we considered our energy savings to be too tight and so the money needed to go to the coffers for that rather than reducing Council Tax. There was no No. scrutiny, and he had been to all of the meetings, there was no scrutiny which would change the minds of those deciding Council Taxes and setting aside funding elsewhere in the budget. He had mentioned in the past how the Council looked after its bank balance before considering the public's needs and of course this year the figures before us showed some spend of the Reserves of £51m which was almost a half. Let's see if this was true because the same types of figures which were provided to us in the past had been incorrect. But he said there were challenges nonetheless. The public had seen a huge cost of living rise over the last years from energy costs, everyday shopping costs and housing costs, including 12.5% over the last two years for people in our Council houses. He understood that the budget was tight but said what was the purpose of Welsh Government providing extra funding for Councils in the final settlement if it was only put into Reserves. A number of things he said concerned him, he didn’t like the idea of the administrative fee for residents in parking permanent zones. Of course he stated the Council could provide any service if it forced people to pay for it. There was not enough money for fundamental core services for residents although he accepted that the situation was a difficult one, as was the case for all Councils, and he expressed his concern that the mix of cuts for Council’s consideration and the increase in Council Tax stating that between the both of them this was not acceptable and that he would be voting against the Motion. Councillor Brooks said the reality was that more and more Councils were being pushed to the financial brink. More Councils had issued a Section 114 Notice in the previous year than in the previous 30 years combined which she said was quite astounding. Welsh Government had quite rightly put the protection of public services at the front and centre of their budget, however the Council could not get away from the fact that their funding had been cut for the last 14 years from the Westminster Government leaving them with no alternative but to reduce their transfer funding for Local Authorities. The cost of living crisis came out as a significant issue in the recent survey with 42% of the population citing easily accessible care and health care closely followed by the buying or renting of good quality homes. These were the issues that really mattered to people and their priorities she said and she stood by the commitment to protect services which supported the Council’s most vulnerable residents. However, in conclusion she said difficult decisions had to be made to deliver a balanced and fair budget and she was pleased that the Council had been able to protect supported bus services as she felt many residents in rural and deprived communities relied on the bus services. Councillor Franks commented that the Council had heard about potholes being filled, a bit of resurfacing, grass being cut, road gullies being emptied, which was basically the standard work of all Councils. However, what did surprise him a little bit was the quick reference to support for Education. He was not sure if he had misheard but that's what he thought he heard, but our support for education has led to a disastrous situation in our schools, we've also heard a mention about people's priorities that was good to be reminded, but he didn't think we heard mention of the consultation with the public which, if his memory served him right, did not support the proposed level of increase. No. He wondered why we had that omission. Whereas other facts were highlighted, he considered there to be an element of cherry-picking. In the previous year’s budget debate almost a year to the day, the Cabinet proposed a £2m plus cut in schools with Cabinet being warned at that time that this would have had a terrible impact on school budgets. This was disregarded by Labour Members who, in his view he said, cheerfully dismissed such warnings. The result had been over 20 schools now facing a deficit budget, of these 19 apparently indicated that there was no prospect of recovery within 3 years, however since then he understood that the situation had worsened, both in terms of the numbers of schools and the size of the deficits. He therefore asked how can we and the public have any faith in this year's budget process now seeing that this year's allocation to schools would basically be following last year's allocation. What was the situation going to be in a year's time for our schools? What was going to be the size of the deficits? How many schools were going to be facing at least 3 years in the red and to add to their problems he understood that schools were going to be asked to pay for school crossing patrols and for elements of grass cutting? We really do need to know what the impact would be on schools in 2024/25. What would be the accumulated overspend and what was the anticipated overspend in the following year and he welcomed comments from the Cabinet Member for Education on these points. Councillor Birch, advising that she would be unable to answer all of the points at the meeting that evening, said that all of the schools that had budget deficits had been assisted by the finance teams with schools unable to recover their deficits within 3 years being offered plans to restructure the debt that they had so that they could eventually balance their budgets. Going forward she could not say what the deficits would be like in three years’ time, rather she hoped that they would be balanced. Furthermore, Councillor Birch added that all that had been said during the debate had been about the difficulties of various events in the last few years and the toll that that had taken on budgets everywhere, so schools were not going to be immune from that. It was obvious that balancing budgets was going to be more difficult for some schools than others. In conclusion, the Leader referred to the number of times the budget process had been considered by Cabinet and Scrutiny however she was disappointed with the questions at Council when a lot of the discussion could have been held at the Scrutiny Committee meetings over the year with suggestions being put forward for consideration. In referring to the issues of diversity and inclusion that had been commented on during the debate, the Leader drew attention to the budget for Corporate Resources being only 5% of the overall total. Having regard to Reserves she said the detail was contained within the report although they had been rationalised. In referring to the comments relating to the 2% cut in National Insurance the Leader mentioned that if one was of retirement age they wouldn’t receive this cut. The Leader subsequently took the opportunity to repeat her earlier comments that the proposed budget was a budget to protect the most vulnerable and moved the recommendations within the report. No. The motion moved by the Leader and seconded by Councillor Brooks was subsequently voted upon. A recorded vote took place on the recommendations as contained within the reference and the report, as follows:- Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Rhiannon Birch x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Vincent Driscoll Anthony Ernest x Robert Fisher x Christopher Franks x No. Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Catherine Iannucci x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Sandra Perkes x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x No. Neil Thomas x Rhys Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 30 21 The vote being carried, it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T a Council Tax increase of 6.7% be approved. (2) T H A T the Revenue budget for 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 24/25 to 28/29 be approved. (3) T H A T the fees and charges presented for approval in January 2024, which stood unchanged following review by Scrutiny, be noted. (4) T H A T the information provided in the supplemental report to Cabinet th on 29 February 2024 regarding updated Standard Spending Assessment figures be endorsed. Reasons for decisions (1) Setting the annual rate of Council Tax was a key policy decision for Council. (2) Setting a balanced budget was a statutory responsibility and decision for Full Council. (3) To confirm fees and charges for 2024/25. (4) Having regard to the supplemental information which provided Full Council with the most up to date figures as part of its final budget deliberations. No. CAPITAL STRATEGY 2024/25 AND FINAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Appendix 1 to the report provided the Council's Capital Strategy for 2024/25. The Capital Strategy provided a framework which outlined how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to the provision of corporate objectives, along with an overview of how associated risk was managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. The report set out the Council’s proposed Final Capital Programme for the period 2024/25 to 2028/29 at Appendix 2. The Council was facing significant pressures in relation to price inflation and the cost-of-living crisis which had seen increases in the costs of materials and labour. This had had an impact on the current schemes within the Capital Programme and the funding available to fund new schemes within the Capital Programme. The total value of capital schemes over the next five years was £387.582m which included £25.376m for the Band B Sustainable Communities for Learning Programme (excluding the pipeline schemes) and £205.775m for the Housing Improvement Programme. Since the Draft Capital Programme proposals report in January, a number of changes had been made including the reprofile and allocation of decarbonisation schemes, City Deal reprofile, slippage from the 2023/24 Capital Programme into the 2024/25 Capital Programme and the Llanmaes match funding was no longer being removed from the five year proposals. The detail of these changes was covered later in the report. The Leader subsequently moved the recommendations in the report, which were seconded by Councillor Brooks, and there being no dissent it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Capital Strategy 2024/25, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (2) T H A T the final Capital Programme for the years 2024/25 to 2028/29, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (3) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for No. Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the: i. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Housing Improvement Programme as appropriate. ii. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Asset Renewal budgets as appropriate. iii. S106 funded schemes subject to Member consultation as required under the existing process. iv. Energy Management Schemes v. Building Strong Communities Fund schemes. vi. Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme (Previously 21st Century Schools schemes). vii. Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes. viii. Vale Regeneration Schemes. (4) T H A T the Chief Executive, Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, and Director of Learning and Skills in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to increase the Capital Programme for the long term solution in relation to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School when the feasibility studies had been concluded. It being noted that £300k had been ringfenced within reserves to carry out the scheme when feasibility studies had been undertaken. Reasons for decisions (1) To approve the Capital Strategy for 2024/25. (2) To set and approve future Capital Programmes to 2028/29. (3) To enable the Housing Capital budget, Asset Renewal budgets, S106 schemes, Energy Management Schemes, Building Stronger Communities Fund, Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme, Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes, and Vale Regeneration schemes to be managed effectively. (4) To enable the long term solution to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School to proceed when the feasibility studies had been concluded. TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2024/25 AND UPDATE 2023/24 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The interim report outlined the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management Strategy detailed in Appendix 1 and provided an update on the Council’s Treasury Management operations for the period 1st April to 31st December, No. 2023. All activities were in accordance with the Council’s approved strategy on Treasury Management. Total external borrowing as of 31st December, 2023 was £145.479m at an average rate of 4.37%. New external borrowing totalling £5.000m was undertaken during the first 9 months of 2023/24 at a rate of 4.38% with utilised the special project rate for Housing Revenue Account schemes. The Council invested with the Debt Management Deposit Facility, Local Authorities, Treasury Bills, Money Market Funds together with Lloyds Bank Call Accounts. Total investments as of 31st December, 2023 stood at £50.495m at an average rate of 4.53% over the nine-month period. The Council had to ensure that the Prudential Code was complied with, which had been developed by CIPFA as a professional code of practice, last updated in December 2021. To demonstrate that the Council had fulfilled these objectives, the Code set out a list of Prudential and Treasury indicators that should be calculated together with other factors that had to be considered. These were included in Appendix 1 to the report as part of the Strategy. The Council also had a legal requirement to comply with the Welsh Government Guidance on Investments and had taken this guidance into consideration when developing the Strategy. New borrowing in the period to 2028/29 was expected to be £184.377m for new Capital Expenditure and a further £14.000m of borrowing to replace maturing loans and reflect the Council’s reducing ability to internally borrow over the period. Capital expenditure when financed by long term debt incurred two elements of cost, interest and repayment of the principal sum borrowed. The resources the Council must put aside in each year to repay the principal sum borrowed was known as Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) and the Council's policy for the calculation was detailed in the report. The Treasury Management Policy Statement for 2024/25 was attached at Appendix 2 to the report. The Leader, in referring to the recent training provided to all Members, and indeed training that was provided each year, on the subject, commented that she had found the training to be a really constructive training session which had also been recorded for Members to view it online. RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Treasury Management interim report for the period 1 st April st to 31 December, 2023 be approved. No. (2) T H A T the policy for making Minimum Revenue Provision in 2024/25 be approved. (3) T H A T the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management and Investment Strategy be approved, including the following specific resolutions (as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 [Minute No. C262]): • The Authorised Limit for External Debt be set at £240.969m for 2023/24, £271.200m for 2024/25, £303.939m for 2025/26 and £336.893m for 2026/27. • The Operational Boundary for External Debt be set at £226.147m for 2023/24, £255.687 for 2024/25, £287.406m for 2025/26 and £320.338m for 2026/27. • The Section 151 Officer be granted delegated authority within the total Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary as estimated for individual years to effect movement between the separately agreed limits for borrowing and other long term liabilities. • An upper limit of £0m for 2023/24, £10m for 2024/25, £10m in 2025/26 and £10m in 2026/27 be set for total principal sums invested for over 364 days. • The amount of projected borrowing that was fixed rate maturing in each period as a percentage of total projected borrowing that was fixed rate for 2024/25 be set as: Table 1 – Upper and lower Limits for fixed rate borrowing Upper Lower Limit Limit Under 12 months 20% 0% 12 months and within 24 months 20% 0% 24 months and within 5 years 30% 0% 5 years and within 10 years 40% 0% 10 years and above 100% 0% (4) T H A T Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. (5) T H A T the Treasury Management Policy Statement set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To agree the basis of the Minimum Revenue Provision calculation for 2024/25. No. (3-5) In order for the Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategy as prepared be approved as required by the Local Government Act 2003. PAY POLICY 2024/25 (REF) The Council had a statutory requirement under the Localism Act 2011 to prepare a pay policy statement for the new financial year 2024/25. The statement needed to be approved and published by 31st March, 2024. The document provided a framework for ensuring that employees were rewarded fairly and objectively, in accordance with the service needs of the Council and that there was openness and transparency in relation to the process. It being a straightforward report the Leader moved the recommendations which were seconded by Councillor Brooks. Prior to putting the recommendations to Full Council the Mayor asked if there were any points of clarification required by Members from the Head of Human Resources. There being no clarifications required and no further comments, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the Council’s Pay Policy as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 8th February, 2024 (Minute No C234) be approved. Reason for decision To respond to the legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 and to provide openness and accountability in relation to how the Council rewards its staff. N.B. All Chief Officers, save for the Head of Human Resources, left the meeting when this item was considered. The Head of Human Resources remained in the meeting, until the matter was to be voted upon, in order to provide any clarification required by Elected Members.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T it be noted that at its meeting on 14th December, 2023, Cabinet (the Executive) calculated the following amounts for the year 2024/25 in accordance with regulations made under Section 33(5) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:- (a) 63,397 being the amount calculated by Cabinet (the Executive) in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (Wales) Regulations 1995, as amended, as its council tax base for the year. (b) Part of the Council’s area Barry 21,193 Colwinston 378 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 2,998 Dinas Powys 4,032 Ewenny 450 Llancarfan 489 Llandough 969 Llandow 447 Llanfair 388 Llangan 477 Llanmaes 259 Llantwit Major 4,367 Michaelston 252 Penarth 11,790 Pendoylan 353 Penllyn 1,085 Peterston-Super-Ely 559 St. Athan 1,699 St. Brides Major 1,480 St. Donats 217 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 246 No. St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 761 Sully and Lavernock 2,828 Welsh St. Donats 330 Wenvoe 1,571 Wick 541 Total Council Tax Base Town and Community 60,159 Councils Rhoose 3,238 Total Council Tax Base 63,397 being the amounts calculated by Cabinet (the Executive), in accordance with regulation 6 of the Regulations, as amended, as the amounts of its council tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. (2) That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2024/25 in accordance with Sections 32 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992: (a) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £441,782,790 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (2) (a) to (d) and (2A) of the Act (including Town / Community Council Precepts totalling £3,652,477). (b) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £129,559,000 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (3) (a), (aa) and (c), and (3A) of the Act. (c) Amount by which the aggregate at (2)(a) above £312,223,790 exceeds the aggregate at (2)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year. (d) Aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates £209,491,342 will be payable for the year into its Council Fund in respect of redistributed non-domestic rates, revenue support grant, its council tax reduction scheme, additional grant or special grant less certain Discretionary Non-Domestic Rate Reliefs. (e) The amount at (2)(c) above less the amount at £1,620.46 (2)(d) above, all divided by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act as the basic amount of its council tax for the year. (f) Aggregate amount of all special items referred to in £3,652,447 Section 34(1) of the Act. No. (g) Amount at (2)(e) above less the result given by £1,562.85 dividing the amount at (2)(f) above by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates. (h) Part of the Council’s area £ Barry 1,624.05 Colwinston 1,615.39 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,674.76 Dinas Powys 1,598.23 Ewenny 1,613.96 Llancarfan 1,593.44 Llandough 1,628.85 Llandow 1,589.70 Llanfair 1,577.91 Llangan 1,587.07 Llanmaes 1,618.89 Llantwit Major 1,626.37 Michaelston 1,592.88 Penarth 1,650.37 Pendoylan 1,586.93 Penllyn 1,576.21 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,604.89 Rhoose 1,562.85 St. Athan 1,613.02 St. Brides Major 1,580.85 St. Donats 1,587.30 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,591.19 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,651.90 Sully and Lavernock 1,598.00 Welsh St. Donats 1,584.06 Wenvoe 1,588.87 Wick 1,579.49 being the amounts given by adding to the amount at (2)(g) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at (1)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34 (3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. No. (i) Part of the Council's Area Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,082.70 1,263.15 1,443.60 1,624.05 1,984.95 2,345.85 2,706.75 3,248.10 3,789.45 Colwinston 1,076.93 1,256.41 1,435.90 1,615.39 1,974.37 2,333.34 2,692.32 3,230.78 3,769.24 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,116.51 1,302.59 1,488.68 1,674.76 2,046.93 2,419.10 2,791.27 3,349.52 3,907.77 Dinas Powys 1,065.49 1,243.07 1,420.65 1,598.23 1,953.39 2,308.55 2,663.72 3,196.46 3,729.20 Ewenny 1,075.97 1,255.30 1,434.63 1,613.96 1,972.62 2,331.28 2,689.93 3,227.92 3,765.91 Llancarfan 1,062.29 1,239.34 1,416.39 1,593.44 1,947.54 2,301.64 2,655.73 3,186.88 3,718.03 Llandough 1,085.90 1,266.88 1,447.87 1,628.85 1,990.82 2,352.78 2,714.75 3,257.70 3,800.65 Llandow 1,059.80 1,236.43 1,413.07 1,589.70 1,942.97 2,296.23 2,649.50 3,179.40 3,709.30 Llanfair 1,051.94 1,227.26 1,402.59 1,577.91 1,928.56 2,279.20 2,629.85 3,155.82 3,681.79 Llangan 1,058.05 1,234.39 1,410.73 1,587.07 1,939.75 2,292.43 2,645.12 3,174.14 3,703.16 Llanmaes 1,079.26 1,259.14 1,439.01 1,618.89 1,978.64 2,338.40 2,698.15 3,237.78 3,777.41 Llantwit Major 1,084.25 1,264.95 1,445.66 1,626.37 1,987.79 2,349.20 2,710.62 3,252.74 3,794.86 Michaelston 1,061.92 1,238.91 1,415.89 1,592.88 1,946.85 2,300.83 2,654.80 3,185.76 3,716.72 Penarth 1,100.25 1,283.62 1,467.00 1,650.37 2,017.12 2,383.87 2,750.62 3,300.74 3,850.86 Pendoylan 1,057.95 1,234.28 1,410.60 1,586.93 1,939.58 2,292.23 2,644.88 3,173.86 3,702.84 Penllyn 1,050.81 1,225.94 1,401.08 1,576.21 1,926.48 2,276.75 2,627.02 3,152.42 3,677.82 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,069.93 1,248.25 1,426.57 1,604.89 1,961.53 2,318.17 2,674.82 3,209.78 3,744.74 Rhoose 1,041.90 1,215.55 1,389.20 1,562.85 1,910.15 2,257.45 2,604.75 3,125.70 3,646.65 St. Athan 1,075.35 1,254.57 1,433.80 1,613.02 1,971.47 2,329.92 2,688.37 3,226.04 3,763.71 St. Brides Major 1,053.90 1,229.55 1,405.20 1,580.85 1,932.15 2,283.45 2,634.75 3,161.70 3,688.65 St. Donats 1,058.20 1,234.57 1,410.93 1,587.30 1,940.03 2,292.77 2,645.50 3,174.60 3,703.70 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,060.79 1,237.59 1,414.39 1,591.19 1,944.79 2,298.39 2,651.98 3,182.38 3,712.78 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,101.27 1,284.81 1,468.36 1,651.90 2,018.99 2,386.08 2,753.17 3,303.80 3,854.43 Sully and Lavernock 1,065.33 1,242.89 1,420.44 1,598.00 1,953.11 2,308.22 2,663.33 3,196.00 3,728.67 Welsh St. Donats 1,056.04 1,232.05 1,408.05 1,584.06 1,936.07 2,288.09 2,640.10 3,168.12 3,696.14 Wenvoe 1,059.25 1,235.79 1,412.33 1,588.87 1,941.95 2,295.03 2,648.12 3,177.74 3,707.36 Wick 1,052.99 1,228.49 1,403.99 1,579.49 1,930.49 2,281.49 2,632.48 3,158.98 3,685.48 being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at (2)(g) and (2)(h) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5 (1/1A) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands. (3). That it be noted that for the year 2024/25 the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:- No. £ Valuation Bands A B C D E F G H I 235.11 274.30 313.48 352.67 431.04 509.41 587.78 705.34 822.90 Part of the Council's Area £ Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,317.81 1,537.45 1,757.08 1,976.72 2,415.99 2,855.26 3,294.53 3,953.44 4,612.35 Colwinston 1,312.04 1,530.71 1,749.38 1,968.06 2,405.41 2,842.75 3,280.10 3,936.12 4,592.14 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,351.62 1,576.89 1,802.16 2,027.43 2,477.97 2,928.51 3,379.05 4,054.86 4,730.67 Dinas Powys 1,300.60 1,517.37 1,734.13 1,950.90 2,384.43 2,817.96 3,251.50 3,901.80 4,552.10 Ewenny 1,311.08 1,529.60 1,748.11 1,966.63 2,403.66 2,840.69 3,277.71 3,933.26 4,588.81 Llancarfan 1,297.40 1,513.64 1,729.87 1,946.11 2,378.58 2,811.05 3,243.51 3,892.22 4,540.93 Llandough 1,321.01 1,541.18 1,761.35 1,981.52 2,421.86 2,862.19 3,302.53 3,963.04 4,623.55 Llandow 1,294.91 1,510.73 1,726.55 1,942.37 2,374.01 2,805.64 3,237.28 3,884.74 4,532.20 Llanfair 1,287.05 1,501.56 1,716.07 1,930.58 2,359.60 2,788.61 3,217.63 3,861.16 4,504.69 Llangan 1,293.16 1,508.69 1,724.21 1,939.74 2,370.79 2,801.84 3,232.90 3,879.48 4,526.06 Llanmaes 1,314.37 1,533.44 1,752.49 1,971.56 2,409.68 2,847.81 3,285.93 3,943.12 4,600.31 Llantwit Major 1,319.36 1,539.25 1,759.14 1,979.04 2,418.83 2,858.61 3,298.40 3,958.08 4,617.76 Michaelston 1,297.03 1,513.21 1,729.37 1,945.55 2,377.89 2,810.24 3,242.58 3,891.10 4,539.62 Penarth 1,335.36 1,557.92 1,780.48 2,003.04 2,448.16 2,893.28 3,338.40 4,006.08 4,673.76 Pendoylan 1,293.06 1,508.58 1,724.08 1,939.60 2,370.62 2,801.64 3,232.66 3,879.20 4,525.74 Penllyn 1,285.92 1,500.24 1,714.56 1,928.88 2,357.52 2,786.16 3,214.80 3,857.76 4,500.72 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,305.04 1,522.55 1,740.05 1,957.56 2,392.57 2,827.58 3,262.60 3,915.12 4,567.64 Rhoose 1,277.01 1,489.85 1,702.68 1,915.52 2,341.19 2,766.86 3,192.53 3,831.04 4,469.55 St. Athan 1,310.46 1,528.87 1,747.28 1,965.69 2,402.51 2,839.33 3,276.15 3,931.38 4,586.61 St. Brides Major 1,289.01 1,503.85 1,718.68 1,933.52 2,363.19 2,792.86 3,222.53 3,867.04 4,511.55 St. Donats 1,293.31 1,508.87 1,724.41 1,939.97 2,371.07 2,802.18 3,233.28 3,879.94 4,526.60 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super- Ely 1,295.90 1,511.89 1,727.87 1,943.86 2,375.83 2,807.80 3,239.76 3,887.72 4,535.68 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,336.38 1,559.11 1,781.84 2,004.57 2,450.03 2,895.49 3,340.95 4,009.14 4,677.33 Sully and Lavernock 1,300.44 1,517.19 1,733.92 1,950.67 2,384.15 2,817.63 3,251.11 3,901.34 4,551.57 Welsh St. Donats 1,291.15 1,506.35 1,721.53 1,936.73 2,367.11 2,797.50 3,227.88 3,873.46 4,519.04 Wenvoe 1,294.36 1,510.09 1,725.81 1,941.54 2,372.99 2,804.44 3,235.90 3,883.08 4,530.26 Wick 1,288.10 1,502.79 1,717.47 1,932.16 2,361.53 2,790.90 3,220.26 3,864.32 4,508.38 (4) That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at (2)(i) and (3) above , The Vale of Glamorgan County Borough Council, in accordance with Section 30 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of Council Tax for the year 2024/25. No. (5) T H A T discount for prompt payment of the Council Tax be not granted. (6) T H A T the Common Seal be affixed to the said Council Tax. (7) T H A T notices of the making of the said Council Taxes signed by the Chief Executive be given by advertisement in the local press under Section 38 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Reason for decisions (1-7) In order to set the Council Tax for 2024/25.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C167, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. NOMINATIONS FOR THE ROLES OF INDEPENDENT BOARD MEMBER REPRESENTING LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO THE CARDIFF AND VALE UNIVERSITY HEALTH BOARD AND THE NATIONAL JOINT COMMITTEE FOR THE NATIONAL ADOPTION SERVICE AND FOSTER WALES (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C170, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. FINAL HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT (HRA) BUDGET PROPOSALS 2024/25, RENT SETTING 2024/2025 AND HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUSINESS PLAN 2024/25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C196, 11th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. INITIAL BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 PROPOSALS FOR CONSULTATION (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C206, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C207, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. ACQUISITION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C222, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART I) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C224, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART II) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C228, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C248, 22nd February, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
These were received from Councillors Mark Hooper and Belinda Loveluck- Edwards.
The following declarations of interest were received: Councillor J. Aviet Agenda Item No. 13(d) - Draft Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29 and Agenda Item No. 15(c) – Final Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budget Proposals 2024/25, Rent Setting 2024/2025 and Housing Revenue Account Business Plan 2024/25. Councillor Aviet had a personal interest in the matters as No. she was a Council tenant, however she did not have a prejudicial interest having regard to paragraph 19.3.3 (ii) (A) of the Council’s Code of Conduct. Councillor J. Aviet Agenda Item No. 13(g) – Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Aviet had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was a Council employee however, she had a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee to speak and vote on matters relating to employee terms and conditions. Councillor Ian Buckley Agenda Item No. 13(g) Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Buckley had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee of the Authority. Councillor Buckley left the meeting when this item was to be discussed. Councillor G. Bruce Agenda Item No. 13(g) Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Bruce had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee of the Authority. Councillor Bruce left the meeting when this item was to be discussed. Councillor Charles Champion Agenda Item No. 13(g) Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Champion had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee of the Authority. Councillor Champion left the meeting when this item was to be discussed. Councillor Emma Goodjohn Agenda Item 13(d) – Draft Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29. Councillor Goodjohn had a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee to speak and vote on general matters relating to Community Centres. No. Councillor H.C. Hamilton Agenda Item 13(g) – Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Hamilton had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee however, he had a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee to speak and vote on matters relating to employee terms and conditions. Councillor W.A. Hennessy Agenda Item No. 13(d) – Draft Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29 and 15(c) Councillor Hennessy had a personal interest in the matters as he was a Council tenant, however he did not have a prejudicial interest having regard to paragraph 19.3.3 (ii) (A) of the Council’s Code of Conduct. Councillor Hennessy also declared that he had a dispensation from the Standards Committee to speak and vote on general matters relating to Community Centres as referenced in the reports. Councillor J. Lynch-Wilson Agenda Item No 13(d) – Draft Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29. Councillor Lynch-Wilson declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item as she was Chair of the Paul Lewis Community Centre in St. Athan. Councillor Lynch Wilson also declared a personal interest in the matters as she was a Council tenant, however she did not have a prejudicial interest having regard to paragraph 19.3.3 (ii) (A) of the Council’s Code of Conduct. Councillor H.M. Payne Agenda Item No. 13(g) – Pay Policy 2024/25. She had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee however, she had a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee to speak and vote on matters relating to employee terms and conditions. No. Councillor H.M. Payne Councillor Payne made a personal but not prejudicial interest in relation to Item 15(c) – Final Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budget Proposals 2024/25, Rent Setting 2024/2025 and Housing Revenue Account Business Plan 2024/25 in that she was an officer of Llamau. Councillor H.M. Payne Councillor Payne made a personal but not prejudicial interest in relation to Item 15(i) – Draft Vale of Glamorgan Council Annual Delivery Plan 2024-25, in that she was an officer of Llamau. Councillor M.R. Wilkinson Agenda Item No 13(d) – Draft Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 to 2028/29 and She had a personal interest in the matters as a Council tenant however she did not have a prejudicial interest having regard to paragraph 19.3.3 (ii) (A) of the Council’s Code of Conduct. Councillor M.R. Wilkinson Agenda Item No. 13(g) – Pay Policy 2024/25. Councillor Wilkinson had a personal and prejudicial interest as a family member was an employee however she had a dispensation granted by the Standards Committee to speak and vote on matters relating to employee terms and conditions.
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the three Special meetings held on 20th November, 2023; the meeting held on 4th December, 2023 and the two Special meetings held on 15th January, 2024 be approved as a correct record.
The following questions were submitted and replied to as shown, in accordance with the protocol agreed by Council on 5th May, 2010. (i) Question from Ms. P. Graham As the Senedd has legislated that Local Authorities can now adopt proportional representation, there is an opportunity to create a reformed, fairer and more diverse electoral system. In order for this to be in place for the next local elections, this would need to be passed by 15th November, 2024. Will the Council, along with others in Wales, be willing to consult on bringing our local democracy into the modern era and consider adopting the Single Transferable Vote? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources It would be useful if I set out, in brief the legislative basis for determining the voting system for each Council or principal area. No. In summary, Principal Councils can choose which voting system they wish to use: either a simple majority system (or “first past the post”) or the single transferable vote system. Each Council will continue to use first past the post unless it decides to change it in accordance with the legislation. Before doing so the Council must consult local government electors, Community Councils and any other interested parties. Such a change would require a resolution supported by a two-thirds majority of the Full Council. Such a resolution must be considered at a meeting specially convened for the purpose, with written notice given at least 21 days before the meeting. If a Council exercises its power to change the voting system, the Council must notify the Welsh Ministers and the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales of the change. After receiving a notification, the Welsh Ministers may direct the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales to conduct an initial review of the area of the Council. This information has been circulated to all Group Leaders by the Electoral Registration Officer, initially in the form of a briefing note in November 2022 and subsequently a letter outlining the above information was also circulated to all Councillors in October of last year. There have been no calls for the matter to be considered by Council (as required and as set out above, were the voting system to be changed) and accordingly there are no plans to bring the matter before Council at the time of responding to this question. (ii) Question from Mr. A. Salhab Is the Council investing in any way, such as pension fund, that supports the war on Gaza? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council pays into the Cardiff and Vale Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) Fund which is administered by Cardiff Council. This is one of the 8 LGPS funds in Wales. As part of the LGPS funding principles, investments are not made in organisations that manufacture controversial weapons. Controversial weapons are described as weapons that have a disproportionate and indiscriminate impact on civilian populations, sometimes even years after a conflict has ended. The Pension Scheme investments are supported and monitored by a Pensions Committee and Pensions Board and audited on an annual basis via both internal and external auditors. No. (iii) Question from Mr. S. Thorne What is Council’s overall revenue from the sale of recycling materials? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services Since the full implementation of the source separated recycling service, the waste team is now preparing for resale and reuse, all separately collected recyclable materials. Between the main new Resource Recovery Facility on Atlantic Trading Estate and the Waste Transfer Station at Cowbridge, the service area has brought in an income of £1,062,338.26 up to the end of January, with material still on site awaiting sale. The service estimates that at year end the income will be between £1.2 and £1.4m for the financial year 2023/24. (iv) Question from Mr. R. Curtis Residents and visitors to the Vale of Glamorgan are increasingly becoming aware of sea and beach pollution due to sewage overflows and want action to resolve this appalling issue. The Old Harbour and Watchtower Bays are used by cold water swimmers, paddle boarders and kayakers. It’s also home to many species of precious wildlife. Sadly, it is also home to combined sewer outflows, which pump untreated waste out into the water when there’s been heavy rain or storms. These outflow pollution events are becoming more and more frequent because of climate change and new-builds putting extra demand on old plumbing systems. Following the first ever testing of the water quality at Watch House Bay, it has become one of the few beaches in Wales with a "poor" rating with the Vale of Glamorgan even having to "advise against bathing in the water!. But what the public really want and need is action to stop the pollution in the first place. They need to work effectively with both Natural Resources Wales and Welsh Water. Therefore, what is the Vale of Glamorgan Council doing to stop this pollution and to protect both our seas and beaches for future generations? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council is very aware of the impact of pollution on bathing water quality and the environment generally. At the full Council meeting of 18th July, 2022, answers were given to two public questions concerning the operation of sewage treatment plants / sewage pumping stations within the vicinity of Watch House Bay (known local as Watch Tower Bay). As explained at the time, the Council has no jurisdiction over these facilities. Responsibility for them lies with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW), and their operations are regulated by Natural Resources Wales (NRW), via Environmental Permits. These permits prescribe specific limits on certain environmental discharges. As was also No. advised, there will be occasions where unplanned discharges from combined sewer outfalls can occur and such discharges are investigated by NRW and depending on the reasons for the breach, enforcement action could follow. One of the weaknesses in seeking to improve the water quality at this location in 2022, was that no regular water quality monitoring was taking place, as the beach was not designated for bathing. The responses at that time explained how the Council’s officers were working with local bathing groups in applying to have Watch House Bay designated as a bathing beach. This was very important, as whilst beach users had witnessed sewage discharging onto this beach, the detailed effects of this on water quality over the bathing season was not known. This application was successful and bathing water quality sampling commenced at Watch House Bay for the 2023 bathing season. At Watch House Bay, 3 of the 20 readings taken gave most cause for concern and seemed to be linked to heavy rainfall at the sampling times. As the quality standard is based on a statistical measure of all samples taken over a rolling four-year period, these 3 poor results over the short measurement period of 1 year, meant that Watch House Bay obtained the poor bathing classification. Ogmore Beach has also been designated as a ‘poor’ bathing water, and the results were also similar in that a small number of very high pollution readings affected the overall classification. In the case of a ‘poor’ water quality reading for a bathing season, Regulation 13 of the Bathing Waters Regulations 2013 requires the Vale of Glamorgan Council, in this case, to issue advice against bathing at that bathing waters, and to take such management measures as it considers adequate, with a view to preventing bathers’ exposure to pollution. This means signs being installed at both Watch House Bay and Ogmore Beach for 2024 advising the public against bathing. The beach will however remain open for residents and visitors to enjoy. Whilst it is accepted that advising against bathing for 2024 is not a positive position; for the bathing season following the classification, Regulation 13 also imposes a duty on the appropriate agency, in this case NRW to: (i) Take or cause to be taken appropriate agency management measures at the bathing water to prevent, reduce or eliminate (as appropriate) the causes of pollution; (ii) Take, or cause to be taken appropriate agency management measures at the bathing water as it considers adequate with a view to preventing bathers’ exposure to pollution; (iii) Notify the local authority that controls the bathing water; and (iv) Identify the reasons why the bathing water failed to achieve a classification of “sufficient”. No. Therefore, there is now a legal requirement on the Regulator to seek to improve the quality of bathing water at this beach and also at Ogmore, and the Council intends to work in partnership with NRW, DCWW and any other organisations discharging foul water into these beaches, to ensure these improvements are made. In pursuance of this, in April this year the Council’s Environment and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee will consider a report detailing the bathing water quality issues at all bathing beaches within the Vale of Glamorgan in 2023 and review what plans NRW and DCWW have to improve those beaches that are not currently classified as either good or excellent. NRW and DCWW officers will be in attendance at this meeting and there will be an opportunity for the public to take an active part in discussions. It is important to note that regrettably improvements will not happen overnight. In certain cases, significant investment will be required to even lessen the incidences of combined sewerage systems discharging into the sea. However, this is the start of a process that the Council and its technical officers are very much involved in. I can also assure you that the Council will do everything it can to effectively scrutinise this issue given the unacceptable impact of pollution on our coastline.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T paragraph 4.24.5 titled Recorded Vote of the Council’s Constitution be replaced with the paragraph below:- A member present at the meeting may ask for the names for and against the motion or amendment or abstaining from voting to be taken down in writing and entered into the minutes. A request for a recorded vote will override a demand for a ballot. No. Reason for decision Having regard to the debate and the decision at the meeting. N.B. – It being noted that on screen the vote showed 49 electronic votes with three Members in the Chamber raising their hands in their support of the altered Motion.
The below Notice of Motion, moved by Councillor Dr. Johnson and seconded by Councillor Hodges at the meeting, was debated. AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION 4.24.5 Council welcomes the introduction of electronic voting, which allows Members to vote promptly on matters under discussion, and is usually quicker than a roll-call. However, such a roll-call of Members provides transparency to other Councillors and the public about Councillors’ votes. Under the current Constitution, six Members are required to request a recorded vote, when the technology allows us to receive this information without such an archaic procedure. In order to improve transparency, Council amends Article 4.24.5 of the Constitution as follows: ‘4.24.5 Recorded Vote A member may ask for the names for and against the motion or amendment or abstaining from voting to be taken down in writing and entered into the No. minutes.’ In presenting the motion Councillor Dr. Johnson advised that prior to the pandemic it had been easy enough to know exactly what was happening in a meeting, all Members at that time were present in the Chamber and people would raise their hand as necessary to vote. The Council’s Constitution states that in order for a record to be kept of a vote at a meeting six Members were required to request a recorded vote be taken. Whilst undertaking remote meetings and with no facility to record a vote electronically, for a number of years 54 Members names would be read out to hear each response which was time consuming. As the Council now had the facility for electronic voting the motion was therefore being put forward. The Leader of the Council together with other Group Leaders and Members of the Council who spoke at the meeting were supportive of the motion. However, for consistency purposes and in line with the Constitution the Leader advised that she had consulted the Monitoring Officer on a suggested alteration to the motion. The Leader of the Council put forward an alteration to the Motion as below, which was seconded by Councillor Brooks and accepted by Councillor Dr. Johnson, with the consent of the Meeting – “A member present at the meeting may ask for the names for and against the motion or amendment or abstaining from voting to be taken down in writing and entered into the minutes. A request for a recorded vote will override a demand for a ballot.“ A recorded vote took place on the above alteration proposed by the Leader of the Council as follows:- Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Rhiannon Birch x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x No. Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Vincent Driscoll x Anthony Ernest x Robert Fisher x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Catherine Iannucci x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x No. Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Sandra Perkes x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Rhys Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 52 The vote being carried, it was RESOLVED – T H A T paragraph 4.24.5 titled Recorded Vote of the Council’s Constitution be replaced with the paragraph below:- A member present at the meeting may ask for the names for and against the motion or amendment or abstaining from voting to be taken down in writing and entered into the minutes. A request for a recorded vote will override a demand for a ballot. No. Reason for decision Having regard to the debate and the decision at the meeting. N.B. – It being noted that on screen the vote showed 49 electronic votes with three Members in the Chamber raising their hands in their support of the altered Motion.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the final Governance and Audit Committee Annual Report 2022/23, be endorsed. Reason for decision Having regard to the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 and the requirement for consideration by Full Council.
The Leader presented the report, advising that Members of the Governance and Audit Committee had considered and endorsed the Final Governance and Audit Committee Annual Report 2022/23 at the meeting on 11th December, 2023 (Minute No. 635 refers). The draft report had been presented to Governance and Audit Committee on 18th September, 2023 and Members’ comments were included at paragraphs 1.2 of the covering report and 3.2 of the main report. The report demonstrated how the Committee had met its terms of reference as per the Council’s Constitution as set out by the Local Government Measure 2011 and the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021. It had achieved this by concentrating on its core responsibilities during the year. RESOLVED – T H A T the final Governance and Audit Committee Annual Report 2022/23, be endorsed. Reason for decision Having regard to the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 and the requirement for consideration by Full Council.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 731), be endorsed subject to the Planning Public Speaking Guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Planning Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
The Leader commenced by advising that in December 2014 the Council resolved that a Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee be approved. A review of the Guide had recently taken place and a suggested amended Guide, at Appendix A to the report had been presented to the Planning Committee for its endorsement and referral to Full Council for final determination, subject to any amendments or recommendations by the Committee. The Guide had also been updated following implementation of the Council's updated Multi-Location Meetings Policy that was agreed by Cabinet on 7th September, 2023. With no comments, questions or suggestions raised by the Planning Committee they had resolved that the Guide be endorsed and referred to Full Council for final determination. The No. Leader moved the recommendations which were seconded by Councillor Brooks. During consideration of the revised Guide Councillor Mahoney stated that in his view Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council who were not Members of the Planning Committee should be afforded more than three minutes to speak at the meeting to make representations. A number of Members of the Council said they concurred with the suggestion that the number of minutes be increased to five minutes. The Leader, in stating that this amendment would be in line with the Council’s Constitution, also suggested that the Chair of the Planning Committee in liaison with Planning Committee Members be requested to consider reviewing the Guide on a more regular basis in order that any further suggestions to the Guide could be made as appropriate. RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 731), be endorsed subject to the Planning Public Speaking Guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Planning Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 732), be endorsed subject to the guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
The purpose of the report was to advise Members of the review that had been undertaken and to submit an updated Public Rights of Way (PROW) Sub- Committee Guide to Public Speaking (the Guide), which was available to promote the public speaking function at meetings of the Planning Committee Sub-Committee. The Guide took effect on 17th August, 2015. Following implementation of the Council’s updated Multi-Location Meetings Policy, which had been agreed by Cabinet on 7th September, 2023, a review had taken place of the Guide. In undertaking the review, officer consultation had been undertaken as outlined on the covering page of the report, and the Guide had been amended to better align to public speaking arrangements in place for the Planning Committee. Having regard to the discussions in the meeting in respect of the Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee, it was suggested by Councillor Dr. Johnson that the Public Rights of Way Public Speaking Guide be also No. amended to include five minutes speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council who were not Members of the Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee. The Leader concurred with this suggested amendment, with it subsequently being RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Guide to Public Speaking at Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee, attached at Appendix A to the report to Planning Committee on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. 732), be endorsed subject to the guide being amended to read that public speaking time for Elected Members of the Vale of Glamorgan Council not on the Public Rights of Way Sub-Committee be increased from three minutes to five minutes. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report, discussions at the meeting and in line with the Council’s Constitution.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Chief Executive’s Emergency Powers as contained within the report be noted. Reason for decision Having regard to the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Chief Executive’s Emergency Powers as contained within the report be noted. Reason for decision Having regard to the Council’s Constitution.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the position be noted and having regard to the fact that no responses to the consultation had been received. Reason for decision To comply with the Non-Domestic Ratepayers (Consultation) Regulations 1992 (Statutory Instrument No. 3171). No.
In order to comply with the Non-Domestic Ratepayers (Consultation) Regulations 1992 (Statutory Instrument No. 3171) an advertisement inviting non-domestic ratepayers to inspect the Council’s expenditure proposals and to submit representations on the same was placed in the Western Mail on 23rd February, 2024. Copies of the Council’s expenditure proposals had been forwarded to local non-domestic ratepayers, who had been invited to submit any comments by 12.00 noon on 6th March, 2024. Following the Leader advising Council that no responses had been received in respect of the consultation, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the position be noted and having regard to the fact that no responses to the consultation had been received. Reason for decision To comply with the Non-Domestic Ratepayers (Consultation) Regulations 1992 (Statutory Instrument No. 3171). No.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the changes to the relevant officer delegations as set out in paragraphs 2.2 to 2.6 of the report be approved and that Section 26 of the Constitution be amended accordingly. (2) T H A T the change to the relevant delegation as set out in paragraph 2.7 of the report be approved, subject to the reference at item 13(b) Corporate Fraud Enforcement Policy on the Council agenda being agreed. Reason for decisions (1&2) To update the Officer Delegation Scheme within the current Constitution.
The Leader took the opportunity to advise Council that the Constitution was reviewed as and when required in order to ensure good governance and consistency of approach. The Leader highlighted the number of proposed changes as reflected in the Executive Summary of the report and subsequently moved, seconded by Councillor Brooks, the recommendations as contained within the report. RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the changes to the relevant officer delegations as set out in paragraphs 2.2 to 2.6 of the report be approved and that Section 26 of the Constitution be amended accordingly. (2) T H A T the change to the relevant delegation as set out in paragraph 2.7 of the report be approved, subject to the reference at item 13(b) Corporate Fraud Enforcement Policy on the Council agenda being agreed. Reason for decisions (1&2) To update the Officer Delegation Scheme within the current Constitution.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the policy with regard to not granting any level of discount for unoccupied dwellings that have remained so for 6 months agreed for 2023-24, be agreed for 2024-25. (2) T H A T the long term empty property premium of 100% be agreed for the 2023-24 financial year and continue for such properties from 2024-25 that remain so for the period up to (but not including) 24 months. (3) T H A T from 1st April, 2024 a premium of 150% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 24 months or more. (4) T H A T from 1st April, 2025 a premium of 200% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 36 months or more. (5) T H A T the policy to introduce a premium of 100% on second homes for the 2024-25 financial year be agreed and reaffirmed. Reasons for decisions (1) The Council was required to determine its policy on discounts in relation to unoccupied dwellings as defined in classes A, B and C to the Council Tax (Prescribed Class of Dwellings) (Wales) Regulations 1998 each year. (2&4) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of long-term empty properties as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. No. (3) Upon reviewing the implementation of the premium for long term empty properties introduced from the start of 1st April 2023, it was felt that a straight increase to the premium levels as previously proposed, may counteract the intention of the policy, which was to bring long term empty properties back into use, if the level of charges due hindered necessary works required to make a dwelling habitable. As such it was felt that a stepped approach would be more in keeping with the policy to ensure that persistent long term empty properties were targeted. (5) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of second homes as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. CORPORATE FRAUD ENFORCEMENT POLICY (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. C220) together with the reference from Governance and Audit Committee of 11th December, 2023 (Minute No. 636) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Having regard to the contents of the report and the previous discussions at the meeting earlier in the meeting in respect of the report titled amendments to the Constitution, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the report and the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution be updated to reflect the changes referred to in the report and as considered earlier in the agenda under the Amendments to the Constitution report. Reason for decision To update the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution to reflect the changes outlined within the report and as considered under an earlier report in the agenda. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248 refers) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The Leader took the opportunity to remind Members that the initial draft had been considered by Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committees with the amended draft coming back to Cabinet and to the Corporate Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee. Members had stated that they had been pleased with the way the report had been presented which demonstrated how their feedback had been included, with Members also being able to easily see where the changes had been made. There being no further comments, it was No. RESOLVED – T H A T the draft Annual Delivery Plan 2024-25, as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248), be approved. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. DRAFT BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) The Leader advised that the proposals had been published at the end of the previous week, prior to the availability of Welsh Government ‘s settlement figures. There had been no changes to the overall settlement following that announcement but there was additional detail regarding the Standard Spending Assessment that was subsequently detailed in the supplementary information that had been distributed to all Members and published online prior to the Cabinet meeting on 29th February, 2024. The Council faced significant financial pressures in excess of £38m initially and had undertaken significant work to mitigate those pressures. As a result, it had not been possible to fund pay awards in full and there were limited resources to meet the full demands of care providers to fully meet demographic growth and the complexity of services required. A 3.4% increase in the grant received by the Council from Welsh Government alongside the proposed 6.7% increase in Council Tax fell short of meeting the additional costs. There would be a further UK budget announcement on the same day the report would be considered by Full Council, and it remained to be seen if there would be any further funding made available for Local Government, but it was not expected there would be any further matters for Council to consider on 6th March. Consultation on how to allocate the available resources had taken place, including a 4-week public budget consultation, consideration by the five Council Scrutiny Committees and the ‘Life in the Vale’ survey where residents were asked for their views on what they expected from the Council, where residents were supportive of the ambition to target resources to social care, affordable housing and schools and less supportive of any Council Tax increase and increase in discretionary charges by the rate of inflation. Council Tax levels in the Vale of Glamorgan were below the Welsh average and below the level of expected rises for many Authorities across Wales, with 10% or more having been proposed by some. No. There had been in-depth discussions at Scrutiny but no alternatives put forward prior to consideration at Full Council, where it was difficult to take proposals on board at that point and achieve a balanced budget as was the legal requirement for the Authority to do, but there would be a full debate at Full Council on the day. The proposal concerning charging for toilets at coastal areas had been removed as Members felt that was not something they could support and the £5k saving would be found elsewhere. The next year’s £7.7m savings programme was mostly tactical and looked at how to provide and deliver services more effectively, along with some transformational initiatives, as having another multi-million pound savings programme next year would be challenging. The Leader further commented that the Cabinet and officers had been working on the budget since June 2023. In July 2023 Cabinet had referred the Financial Strategy to all Scrutiny Committees and November had brought the refreshed Medium Term Financial Plan. Christmas had been cancelled for a lot of the officers and a number of Cabinet Members. The things that it had hoped to do were no longer possible until the funding gap could be reduced to a reasonable level. In January 2024 the draft budget was presented to all Scrutiny Committees which were attended by the Cabinet Members who had listened to the discussions. There were some things she said that were unpalatable, not liked and had reluctantly been accepted but one recommendation had been made which had been accepted by Cabinet that the proposed charges to Coastal toilets be removed. The budget this evening, she said, proposed for a balanced budget, which was required to be delivered by 11th March, considerations for which had included the money that the Council would receive from Council Tax and as the Council wanted to continue to support bus services and not make car parking charges on streets etc., a 6.7% Council Tax was being proposed. The budget was also she said based on supporting the Council’s most vulnerable. In referring to the recent Living in the Vale Survey she said the top priority for residents had been easy accessibility to care and health care, the second priority the ability to buy or rent a good quality home. The cost of living crisis had also not gone away, in the feedback received 60% of respondents said that they had chosen not to put the heating on at times, and 44% of them said that they could not pay an unexpected bill of £850, so if their boiler went that would be it. There were a number of pressures for the Council, pressures in terms of demography not just numbers of people but the complexity and scale of need, people's lives and lived experience were hugely diverse in the Vale and as a result the need was hugely diverse. Since the pandemic the Council was aware that older residents had become more isolated, more frail and required more care. Young people were struggling with anxiety and there were behavioural issues across the Vale with the Council having to consider a No. range of ways to meet such needs. Service redesigns were being considered and looking for ways to do things more effectively. Reviews of the street cleansing service, litter etc, would be undertaken as well as transformational change. The Leader referred to other areas of good work that had taken place, which had included reshaping of the Library services, Big Fresh was also delivering not only Universal Free School Meals to primary children, but also delivering a surplus that can be reinvested into schools. Income generation was being considered as well as generating income from fees and charges for non-statutory services. However although the financial position was difficult the Council, through its proposed budget, was still delivering many services. The Leader also referred to other aspects of Council provision such as each week 105 recycling rounds were out in the communities with each vehicle collecting from 550 properties a day. As a result over 850 articulated lorries full of material that could be sold or reused with this year forecasting income of between £1.2m and £1.4m from processing recycling at the new recycling facility. With the support of residents the Council had managed to deliver over a 70% recycling outcome being one of the top in Wales, one of the top in the UK and actually one of the top in Europe. The Council also managed 30 Feature Parks, 21 Recreation Grounds, 13 Conservation Parks, 88 Play Areas and 9 Skateboard areas and has 38 football pitches, 13 mini football pitches alongside rugby pitches, cricket, etc which are all still supported. Over the past 3 years the Council had delivered over 177,000 meters of active travel shared use being pedestrian and cycling paths. The Council offered child pedestrian training, delivered cycle shelters in schools and bought bikes for schools. 20 Car Parks were owned and controlled by the Vale with only two of the town centre car parks with a charge. The Leader further advised that 52,567 square meters of carriageway resurfacing had been undertaken in the year, 3,261 square meters of footway improvements and surface water gullies had been cleansed. The Leader concluded by stating that she would be happy to circulate some of the information recognising that the Council was still providing services. With regard to queries of measuring productivity that she had heard being said at meetings, she questioned how did you choose or measure how productive a care worker was, how did you look at productivity when you've had a child with severe learning needs. The Council would measure where it was appropriate to do so and she ended by presenting the budget to Council which was duly seconded by Councillor Brooks who reserved her right to speak later in the debate. Councillor Carroll commenced by saying the Labour Council was asking residents to pay more for less. He said Labour had failed to show leadership and manage budgets properly and was therefore imposing cuts to services and charging for things like garden waste collections. He drew attention to the multi-million pound bus station and enquired as to how much this Authority spent on diversity and inclusion. At the Healthy Living and Social Care Scrutiny Committee meeting Councillor Cave had made perfectly reasonable comments about the funding of bus services in the rural Vale but instead of No. addressing Councillor Cave's concerns, the Leader ‘s comments many residents had told him they considered to be a smear with Councillor Cave being accused of using inflammatory language. Perhaps he said the Leader could enlighten Council as to what aspect of Councillor Cave's remarks were considered inflammatory. He also referred to a recent report where the Leader had stated the 2% cut in National Insurance contributions announced in November by the Conservative UK Government was disappointing and that she had confirmed that this Council opposed tax cuts for millions of working people with he said his only assumption from those comments was that the Leader would oppose further tax cuts that had been announced that day. The 6.7% rise proposed he said fitted with his view of the Administration’s attitude that residents should pay more. The rise proposed significantly exceeded inflation with CPI currently standing at 4%. He felt the rise was not necessary as the Council had tens of millions of pounds in usable reserves including £10,177mn sat in the bank in the Council Fund as a percentage of the Authority's Revenue budget. If the Authority was to consider a real terms freeze in Council Tax and increase it in line with inflation at 4% it would cost £2,505m but given the amount held in Reserves it would be possible to go further than that and to cut Council Tax in real terms, which is what he said the Council should do. A 3% rise would cost £3.435m which he said would be below the rate of inflation. This real terms cut stood in stark contrast to the 6.7% rise proposed by Labour and would ease the pressures on working people across the Vale, so on behalf of the Conservative Group he proposed an amendment to the revenue budget which would transfer £3.435m from the Council's General Fund balances to support the base budget and he urged all Members to support the amendment. Councillor Charles, in seconding the amendment, said the additional income required by the Council could well be taken from Reserves which the taxpayers of the Vale of Glamorgan had already contributed to. She said she believed this could be the fairest way of raising the revenue instead of increasing the pressure on every household. The budget management of the Council had, in her view, been mismanaged by Labour backed up Llantwit Firsts and the people of the Vale of Glamorgan deserved better. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking to the amendment by Councillor Carroll whilst reserving his right to speak later on the proposed budget, asked after listening to the Conservatives uncosted amendment taking money out of the Reserves if £3.5m was taken out of the Reserves did the Conservative Group have any idea how to return it as it would obviously be using the exact same £3.5m next year and the year after and then the Council would be left with nothing in the Reserves. This was not the way to run a Council, stating that unfortunately the Conservatives had created the problems that were before the Council. In 2010 Britain's debt was £1 trillion and now it's £2.7 trillion so this was quite a shambles. What sort of ridiculous regime increased or cut one country's budget based on the spending of a government in another country. Taking a look at public spending in its entirety there was more spent per head in London than anywhere else. A little bit higher than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The spending per head in London, Scotland and No. Northern Ireland was 500 times higher annually almost 4%, even if Wales only received funding on an equal footing with these three it would be richer to the tune of £1.5 billion and this was the type of money which could transform the Vale’s local services and ensure that the Council did not need to increase Council Tax as has been suggested, but the we don't and this was leading to difficult decisions for all of us. Of course in Scotland the SNP Government had used part of the additional funding to freeze Council Tax realising the impact of the economic storm for families, but here with the challenging budget across Wales the ordinary people must pay more a lot more to maintain even basic services. Councillor Dr. Johnson ended by saying that he did not accept the figures presented by the Conservative Group which had not been costed in either a sensible or responsible manner which could be sustained. Councillor Wilson commented that he thought the amendment was pretty interesting, in that we would be looking at a 3% Council Tax increase at least where as in previous years the Conservatives had suggested no increase. He said that in his view the Conservative Group did not have the right to talk about financial mismanagement as Councillor Dr. Johnson had rightly said, we have got huge issues with our debt at the moment. Referring to 2008 where he said Labour helped out the banks and stopped people running out of money at cash points, which had happened in other places like Cyprus. We do not need any lessons from the Conservatives about financial management he said as in his view they didn’t have a clue how to manage the budget. Councillor Godfrey commented that if people were quoting facts then they should be correct and encapsulate the whole picture including the impact of the Ukraine war and BREXIT and he felt it quite wrong if people were not doing that. Councillor Hodges, in response to Councillor Godfrey’s comments, said yes the Ukraine war and Covid had a dramatic effect on balances as did Brexit but he felt that there was plenty of other mismanagement going on as well. Councillor Goodjohn considered that the amendment didn’t appear to be a very tactical solution to the Council’s issues and enquired of Councillor Carroll as to exactly what mismanagement of the budget issues there were in the Revenue proposals. He also asked the Conservative Leader to consider that taking from Reserves would quite frankly cause cash flow issues in the Council and what he would propose do in such situations as if there were cash flow issues in the Council people would have delays in getting vital services which would impact on their lives, being people's real lives here in the real world rather than some abstract idea. He also took the opportunity to remind Council of the current 10% inflation rate. Councillor Hodges, in drawing attention to Social Care costs, said if they were not funded what would happen going forward further, commenting that the NHS was already struggling because of mismanagement from the Conservative Government and its finances stating that he could not support No. the amendment as it had not been fully costed and would mean a cut in schools provision and social care. Councillor John said he could not believe what he was hearing from the Conservative Group referring to the months of discussion on the budget that had already taken place and that it was a good job the Council had reserves. He mentioned other Councils, in particular Monmouth Council, who he said did not have any Reserves to help them and their Council Tax had gone up to 7.5%. Councillor Franks, listening with interest to Councillor Carroll’s and the Conservative Members’ comments, said he felt that they were basically saying that apart from them no one else could financially manage the Council and referred to the catastrophic failures of Conservative Councils in England. The Leader, in response, said that in her view the amendment was completely preposterous in view of the financial position facing the Council and that she would be voting against the amendment. Councillor Perry said it was a shame that as Elected Members elected by the communities that there was a lack of togetherness. He said he applauded attempts to get rid of Council Tax or severely change it as, in his view, a land value tax would be much fairer. He said he would not be supporting the amendment because he believed that his residents would rather not spend money on new tyres and suspensions on their vehicles that they would rather if there were Reserves fix the roads and fix the other services and stop relying on volunteers to run services and stop cheering the minority getting wealthier and wealthier and have a more equitable society. Following a vote on the amendment the amendment was lost it being noted 12 were in favour, 38 against and one abstention. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking on the substantive Motion, said it had been interesting to hear the conversations taking place and that some people might almost be surprised to hear that he sympathised with the Leader of the Council in respect of the challenge before her, but that was why Plaid did not accept the propaganda about the Council being a great Council because the average person did not feel this. We as a Council needed to provide on demand services which were quickly rising as a result of lack of investment in preventative services. We needed to consider the relationship between the people that we served and the funding. Welsh Government added extra funding at the last minute and that increased £25m between the provisional and the final settlement £600,000 through to the Revenue Grant and around £500,000 through the introduction of the K Grant where we're expecting a loss and furthermore additional funding in the Housing Support Grant last week. How much was still unclear but the Council intended to keep Council Tax at the same level rather than considering a cut like last year when we received last minute funding which the Council put in its Reserves. This year we considered our energy savings to be too tight and so the money needed to go to the coffers for that rather than reducing Council Tax. There was no No. scrutiny, and he had been to all of the meetings, there was no scrutiny which would change the minds of those deciding Council Taxes and setting aside funding elsewhere in the budget. He had mentioned in the past how the Council looked after its bank balance before considering the public's needs and of course this year the figures before us showed some spend of the Reserves of £51m which was almost a half. Let's see if this was true because the same types of figures which were provided to us in the past had been incorrect. But he said there were challenges nonetheless. The public had seen a huge cost of living rise over the last years from energy costs, everyday shopping costs and housing costs, including 12.5% over the last two years for people in our Council houses. He understood that the budget was tight but said what was the purpose of Welsh Government providing extra funding for Councils in the final settlement if it was only put into Reserves. A number of things he said concerned him, he didn’t like the idea of the administrative fee for residents in parking permanent zones. Of course he stated the Council could provide any service if it forced people to pay for it. There was not enough money for fundamental core services for residents although he accepted that the situation was a difficult one, as was the case for all Councils, and he expressed his concern that the mix of cuts for Council’s consideration and the increase in Council Tax stating that between the both of them this was not acceptable and that he would be voting against the Motion. Councillor Brooks said the reality was that more and more Councils were being pushed to the financial brink. More Councils had issued a Section 114 Notice in the previous year than in the previous 30 years combined which she said was quite astounding. Welsh Government had quite rightly put the protection of public services at the front and centre of their budget, however the Council could not get away from the fact that their funding had been cut for the last 14 years from the Westminster Government leaving them with no alternative but to reduce their transfer funding for Local Authorities. The cost of living crisis came out as a significant issue in the recent survey with 42% of the population citing easily accessible care and health care closely followed by the buying or renting of good quality homes. These were the issues that really mattered to people and their priorities she said and she stood by the commitment to protect services which supported the Council’s most vulnerable residents. However, in conclusion she said difficult decisions had to be made to deliver a balanced and fair budget and she was pleased that the Council had been able to protect supported bus services as she felt many residents in rural and deprived communities relied on the bus services. Councillor Franks commented that the Council had heard about potholes being filled, a bit of resurfacing, grass being cut, road gullies being emptied, which was basically the standard work of all Councils. However, what did surprise him a little bit was the quick reference to support for Education. He was not sure if he had misheard but that's what he thought he heard, but our support for education has led to a disastrous situation in our schools, we've also heard a mention about people's priorities that was good to be reminded, but he didn't think we heard mention of the consultation with the public which, if his memory served him right, did not support the proposed level of increase. No. He wondered why we had that omission. Whereas other facts were highlighted, he considered there to be an element of cherry-picking. In the previous year’s budget debate almost a year to the day, the Cabinet proposed a £2m plus cut in schools with Cabinet being warned at that time that this would have had a terrible impact on school budgets. This was disregarded by Labour Members who, in his view he said, cheerfully dismissed such warnings. The result had been over 20 schools now facing a deficit budget, of these 19 apparently indicated that there was no prospect of recovery within 3 years, however since then he understood that the situation had worsened, both in terms of the numbers of schools and the size of the deficits. He therefore asked how can we and the public have any faith in this year's budget process now seeing that this year's allocation to schools would basically be following last year's allocation. What was the situation going to be in a year's time for our schools? What was going to be the size of the deficits? How many schools were going to be facing at least 3 years in the red and to add to their problems he understood that schools were going to be asked to pay for school crossing patrols and for elements of grass cutting? We really do need to know what the impact would be on schools in 2024/25. What would be the accumulated overspend and what was the anticipated overspend in the following year and he welcomed comments from the Cabinet Member for Education on these points. Councillor Birch, advising that she would be unable to answer all of the points at the meeting that evening, said that all of the schools that had budget deficits had been assisted by the finance teams with schools unable to recover their deficits within 3 years being offered plans to restructure the debt that they had so that they could eventually balance their budgets. Going forward she could not say what the deficits would be like in three years’ time, rather she hoped that they would be balanced. Furthermore, Councillor Birch added that all that had been said during the debate had been about the difficulties of various events in the last few years and the toll that that had taken on budgets everywhere, so schools were not going to be immune from that. It was obvious that balancing budgets was going to be more difficult for some schools than others. In conclusion, the Leader referred to the number of times the budget process had been considered by Cabinet and Scrutiny however she was disappointed with the questions at Council when a lot of the discussion could have been held at the Scrutiny Committee meetings over the year with suggestions being put forward for consideration. In referring to the issues of diversity and inclusion that had been commented on during the debate, the Leader drew attention to the budget for Corporate Resources being only 5% of the overall total. Having regard to Reserves she said the detail was contained within the report although they had been rationalised. In referring to the comments relating to the 2% cut in National Insurance the Leader mentioned that if one was of retirement age they wouldn’t receive this cut. The Leader subsequently took the opportunity to repeat her earlier comments that the proposed budget was a budget to protect the most vulnerable and moved the recommendations within the report. No. The motion moved by the Leader and seconded by Councillor Brooks was subsequently voted upon. A recorded vote took place on the recommendations as contained within the reference and the report, as follows:- Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Rhiannon Birch x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Vincent Driscoll Anthony Ernest x Robert Fisher x Christopher Franks x No. Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Catherine Iannucci x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Sandra Perkes x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x No. Neil Thomas x Rhys Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 30 21 The vote being carried, it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T a Council Tax increase of 6.7% be approved. (2) T H A T the Revenue budget for 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 24/25 to 28/29 be approved. (3) T H A T the fees and charges presented for approval in January 2024, which stood unchanged following review by Scrutiny, be noted. (4) T H A T the information provided in the supplemental report to Cabinet th on 29 February 2024 regarding updated Standard Spending Assessment figures be endorsed. Reasons for decisions (1) Setting the annual rate of Council Tax was a key policy decision for Council. (2) Setting a balanced budget was a statutory responsibility and decision for Full Council. (3) To confirm fees and charges for 2024/25. (4) Having regard to the supplemental information which provided Full Council with the most up to date figures as part of its final budget deliberations. No. CAPITAL STRATEGY 2024/25 AND FINAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Appendix 1 to the report provided the Council's Capital Strategy for 2024/25. The Capital Strategy provided a framework which outlined how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to the provision of corporate objectives, along with an overview of how associated risk was managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. The report set out the Council’s proposed Final Capital Programme for the period 2024/25 to 2028/29 at Appendix 2. The Council was facing significant pressures in relation to price inflation and the cost-of-living crisis which had seen increases in the costs of materials and labour. This had had an impact on the current schemes within the Capital Programme and the funding available to fund new schemes within the Capital Programme. The total value of capital schemes over the next five years was £387.582m which included £25.376m for the Band B Sustainable Communities for Learning Programme (excluding the pipeline schemes) and £205.775m for the Housing Improvement Programme. Since the Draft Capital Programme proposals report in January, a number of changes had been made including the reprofile and allocation of decarbonisation schemes, City Deal reprofile, slippage from the 2023/24 Capital Programme into the 2024/25 Capital Programme and the Llanmaes match funding was no longer being removed from the five year proposals. The detail of these changes was covered later in the report. The Leader subsequently moved the recommendations in the report, which were seconded by Councillor Brooks, and there being no dissent it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Capital Strategy 2024/25, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (2) T H A T the final Capital Programme for the years 2024/25 to 2028/29, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (3) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for No. Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the: i. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Housing Improvement Programme as appropriate. ii. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Asset Renewal budgets as appropriate. iii. S106 funded schemes subject to Member consultation as required under the existing process. iv. Energy Management Schemes v. Building Strong Communities Fund schemes. vi. Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme (Previously 21st Century Schools schemes). vii. Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes. viii. Vale Regeneration Schemes. (4) T H A T the Chief Executive, Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, and Director of Learning and Skills in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to increase the Capital Programme for the long term solution in relation to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School when the feasibility studies had been concluded. It being noted that £300k had been ringfenced within reserves to carry out the scheme when feasibility studies had been undertaken. Reasons for decisions (1) To approve the Capital Strategy for 2024/25. (2) To set and approve future Capital Programmes to 2028/29. (3) To enable the Housing Capital budget, Asset Renewal budgets, S106 schemes, Energy Management Schemes, Building Stronger Communities Fund, Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme, Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes, and Vale Regeneration schemes to be managed effectively. (4) To enable the long term solution to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School to proceed when the feasibility studies had been concluded. TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2024/25 AND UPDATE 2023/24 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The interim report outlined the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management Strategy detailed in Appendix 1 and provided an update on the Council’s Treasury Management operations for the period 1st April to 31st December, No. 2023. All activities were in accordance with the Council’s approved strategy on Treasury Management. Total external borrowing as of 31st December, 2023 was £145.479m at an average rate of 4.37%. New external borrowing totalling £5.000m was undertaken during the first 9 months of 2023/24 at a rate of 4.38% with utilised the special project rate for Housing Revenue Account schemes. The Council invested with the Debt Management Deposit Facility, Local Authorities, Treasury Bills, Money Market Funds together with Lloyds Bank Call Accounts. Total investments as of 31st December, 2023 stood at £50.495m at an average rate of 4.53% over the nine-month period. The Council had to ensure that the Prudential Code was complied with, which had been developed by CIPFA as a professional code of practice, last updated in December 2021. To demonstrate that the Council had fulfilled these objectives, the Code set out a list of Prudential and Treasury indicators that should be calculated together with other factors that had to be considered. These were included in Appendix 1 to the report as part of the Strategy. The Council also had a legal requirement to comply with the Welsh Government Guidance on Investments and had taken this guidance into consideration when developing the Strategy. New borrowing in the period to 2028/29 was expected to be £184.377m for new Capital Expenditure and a further £14.000m of borrowing to replace maturing loans and reflect the Council’s reducing ability to internally borrow over the period. Capital expenditure when financed by long term debt incurred two elements of cost, interest and repayment of the principal sum borrowed. The resources the Council must put aside in each year to repay the principal sum borrowed was known as Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) and the Council's policy for the calculation was detailed in the report. The Treasury Management Policy Statement for 2024/25 was attached at Appendix 2 to the report. The Leader, in referring to the recent training provided to all Members, and indeed training that was provided each year, on the subject, commented that she had found the training to be a really constructive training session which had also been recorded for Members to view it online. RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Treasury Management interim report for the period 1 st April st to 31 December, 2023 be approved. No. (2) T H A T the policy for making Minimum Revenue Provision in 2024/25 be approved. (3) T H A T the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management and Investment Strategy be approved, including the following specific resolutions (as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 [Minute No. C262]): • The Authorised Limit for External Debt be set at £240.969m for 2023/24, £271.200m for 2024/25, £303.939m for 2025/26 and £336.893m for 2026/27. • The Operational Boundary for External Debt be set at £226.147m for 2023/24, £255.687 for 2024/25, £287.406m for 2025/26 and £320.338m for 2026/27. • The Section 151 Officer be granted delegated authority within the total Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary as estimated for individual years to effect movement between the separately agreed limits for borrowing and other long term liabilities. • An upper limit of £0m for 2023/24, £10m for 2024/25, £10m in 2025/26 and £10m in 2026/27 be set for total principal sums invested for over 364 days. • The amount of projected borrowing that was fixed rate maturing in each period as a percentage of total projected borrowing that was fixed rate for 2024/25 be set as: Table 1 – Upper and lower Limits for fixed rate borrowing Upper Lower Limit Limit Under 12 months 20% 0% 12 months and within 24 months 20% 0% 24 months and within 5 years 30% 0% 5 years and within 10 years 40% 0% 10 years and above 100% 0% (4) T H A T Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. (5) T H A T the Treasury Management Policy Statement set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To agree the basis of the Minimum Revenue Provision calculation for 2024/25. No. (3-5) In order for the Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategy as prepared be approved as required by the Local Government Act 2003. PAY POLICY 2024/25 (REF) The Council had a statutory requirement under the Localism Act 2011 to prepare a pay policy statement for the new financial year 2024/25. The statement needed to be approved and published by 31st March, 2024. The document provided a framework for ensuring that employees were rewarded fairly and objectively, in accordance with the service needs of the Council and that there was openness and transparency in relation to the process. It being a straightforward report the Leader moved the recommendations which were seconded by Councillor Brooks. Prior to putting the recommendations to Full Council the Mayor asked if there were any points of clarification required by Members from the Head of Human Resources. There being no clarifications required and no further comments, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the Council’s Pay Policy as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 8th February, 2024 (Minute No C234) be approved. Reason for decision To respond to the legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 and to provide openness and accountability in relation to how the Council rewards its staff. N.B. All Chief Officers, save for the Head of Human Resources, left the meeting when this item was considered. The Head of Human Resources remained in the meeting, until the matter was to be voted upon, in order to provide any clarification required by Elected Members.
COUNCIL TAX PREMIUMS ON LONG TERM EMPTY PROPERTIES AND SECOND HOMES (REF) The Leader presented the report, the purpose of which was to seek approval for the policy to be adopted for Council Tax Long Term Empty Properties and Second Homes for 2024-25. A number of people had responded to the consultation held in 2022 which had informed the previous year’s Council decision. Since that time, the number of identified second homes had risen from 402 to 508. The Leader said that there were grants available through the Council to anyone with a house to bring back into use for people in the Vale of Glamorgan who needed homes. There was currently a sizeable shortfall of available homes, and it was right to encourage the bringing back of empty properties into use by local people. It was however, recognised that there were exceptions, such as probate, which could affect the time it would take to bring a property back into use. Councillor Mahoney enquired as to the process in determining how long a property had been empty for, how the process worked and how the process would be monitored. Councillor Dr. Johnson commented that he was in agreement with the Policy as the proposal sought for an additional payment as to the longer the No. properties remained empty. He stated that he had called for additional premiums on second homes for a number of years, commenting that after the introduction of a levy he hoped to see if this would have an impact in reducing the number of homes deemed as second homes. However if it didn’t he said the Council would at least have the money to use for other residents of the Vale. The Leader, in response, said that there were a range of different exemptions and that the Council Tax Team would be more than willing to explain the exemptions to people and that a full response to Members regarding how this would be monitored could be provided after the meeting. However, the Leader also commented it may be useful if the Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee wished to call for a report at a later date on the process and how the exemptions worked. It was subsequently, RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the policy with regard to not granting any level of discount for unoccupied dwellings that have remained so for 6 months agreed for 2023-24, be agreed for 2024-25. (2) T H A T the long term empty property premium of 100% be agreed for the 2023-24 financial year and continue for such properties from 2024-25 that remain so for the period up to (but not including) 24 months. (3) T H A T from 1st April, 2024 a premium of 150% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 24 months or more. (4) T H A T from 1st April, 2025 a premium of 200% be introduced for long term empty properties that have remained as such for a continuous period of 36 months or more. (5) T H A T the policy to introduce a premium of 100% on second homes for the 2024-25 financial year be agreed and reaffirmed. Reasons for decisions (1) The Council was required to determine its policy on discounts in relation to unoccupied dwellings as defined in classes A, B and C to the Council Tax (Prescribed Class of Dwellings) (Wales) Regulations 1998 each year. (2&4) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of long-term empty properties as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. No. (3) Upon reviewing the implementation of the premium for long term empty properties introduced from the start of 1st April 2023, it was felt that a straight increase to the premium levels as previously proposed, may counteract the intention of the policy, which was to bring long term empty properties back into use, if the level of charges due hindered necessary works required to make a dwelling habitable. As such it was felt that a stepped approach would be more in keeping with the policy to ensure that persistent long term empty properties were targeted. (5) The Council was required to determine its policy regarding premiums in respect of second homes as defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act1992 as inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. CORPORATE FRAUD ENFORCEMENT POLICY (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 25th January, 2024 (Minute No. C220) together with the reference from Governance and Audit Committee of 11th December, 2023 (Minute No. 636) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Having regard to the contents of the report and the previous discussions at the meeting earlier in the meeting in respect of the report titled amendments to the Constitution, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the report and the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution be updated to reflect the changes referred to in the report and as considered earlier in the agenda under the Amendments to the Constitution report. Reason for decision To update the Officer Delegation Scheme and relevant provisions within the current Constitution to reflect the changes outlined within the report and as considered under an earlier report in the agenda. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248 refers) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The Leader took the opportunity to remind Members that the initial draft had been considered by Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committees with the amended draft coming back to Cabinet and to the Corporate Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee. Members had stated that they had been pleased with the way the report had been presented which demonstrated how their feedback had been included, with Members also being able to easily see where the changes had been made. There being no further comments, it was No. RESOLVED – T H A T the draft Annual Delivery Plan 2024-25, as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 22nd February, 2024 (Minute No. C248), be approved. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. DRAFT BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) The Leader advised that the proposals had been published at the end of the previous week, prior to the availability of Welsh Government ‘s settlement figures. There had been no changes to the overall settlement following that announcement but there was additional detail regarding the Standard Spending Assessment that was subsequently detailed in the supplementary information that had been distributed to all Members and published online prior to the Cabinet meeting on 29th February, 2024. The Council faced significant financial pressures in excess of £38m initially and had undertaken significant work to mitigate those pressures. As a result, it had not been possible to fund pay awards in full and there were limited resources to meet the full demands of care providers to fully meet demographic growth and the complexity of services required. A 3.4% increase in the grant received by the Council from Welsh Government alongside the proposed 6.7% increase in Council Tax fell short of meeting the additional costs. There would be a further UK budget announcement on the same day the report would be considered by Full Council, and it remained to be seen if there would be any further funding made available for Local Government, but it was not expected there would be any further matters for Council to consider on 6th March. Consultation on how to allocate the available resources had taken place, including a 4-week public budget consultation, consideration by the five Council Scrutiny Committees and the ‘Life in the Vale’ survey where residents were asked for their views on what they expected from the Council, where residents were supportive of the ambition to target resources to social care, affordable housing and schools and less supportive of any Council Tax increase and increase in discretionary charges by the rate of inflation. Council Tax levels in the Vale of Glamorgan were below the Welsh average and below the level of expected rises for many Authorities across Wales, with 10% or more having been proposed by some. No. There had been in-depth discussions at Scrutiny but no alternatives put forward prior to consideration at Full Council, where it was difficult to take proposals on board at that point and achieve a balanced budget as was the legal requirement for the Authority to do, but there would be a full debate at Full Council on the day. The proposal concerning charging for toilets at coastal areas had been removed as Members felt that was not something they could support and the £5k saving would be found elsewhere. The next year’s £7.7m savings programme was mostly tactical and looked at how to provide and deliver services more effectively, along with some transformational initiatives, as having another multi-million pound savings programme next year would be challenging. The Leader further commented that the Cabinet and officers had been working on the budget since June 2023. In July 2023 Cabinet had referred the Financial Strategy to all Scrutiny Committees and November had brought the refreshed Medium Term Financial Plan. Christmas had been cancelled for a lot of the officers and a number of Cabinet Members. The things that it had hoped to do were no longer possible until the funding gap could be reduced to a reasonable level. In January 2024 the draft budget was presented to all Scrutiny Committees which were attended by the Cabinet Members who had listened to the discussions. There were some things she said that were unpalatable, not liked and had reluctantly been accepted but one recommendation had been made which had been accepted by Cabinet that the proposed charges to Coastal toilets be removed. The budget this evening, she said, proposed for a balanced budget, which was required to be delivered by 11th March, considerations for which had included the money that the Council would receive from Council Tax and as the Council wanted to continue to support bus services and not make car parking charges on streets etc., a 6.7% Council Tax was being proposed. The budget was also she said based on supporting the Council’s most vulnerable. In referring to the recent Living in the Vale Survey she said the top priority for residents had been easy accessibility to care and health care, the second priority the ability to buy or rent a good quality home. The cost of living crisis had also not gone away, in the feedback received 60% of respondents said that they had chosen not to put the heating on at times, and 44% of them said that they could not pay an unexpected bill of £850, so if their boiler went that would be it. There were a number of pressures for the Council, pressures in terms of demography not just numbers of people but the complexity and scale of need, people's lives and lived experience were hugely diverse in the Vale and as a result the need was hugely diverse. Since the pandemic the Council was aware that older residents had become more isolated, more frail and required more care. Young people were struggling with anxiety and there were behavioural issues across the Vale with the Council having to consider a No. range of ways to meet such needs. Service redesigns were being considered and looking for ways to do things more effectively. Reviews of the street cleansing service, litter etc, would be undertaken as well as transformational change. The Leader referred to other areas of good work that had taken place, which had included reshaping of the Library services, Big Fresh was also delivering not only Universal Free School Meals to primary children, but also delivering a surplus that can be reinvested into schools. Income generation was being considered as well as generating income from fees and charges for non-statutory services. However although the financial position was difficult the Council, through its proposed budget, was still delivering many services. The Leader also referred to other aspects of Council provision such as each week 105 recycling rounds were out in the communities with each vehicle collecting from 550 properties a day. As a result over 850 articulated lorries full of material that could be sold or reused with this year forecasting income of between £1.2m and £1.4m from processing recycling at the new recycling facility. With the support of residents the Council had managed to deliver over a 70% recycling outcome being one of the top in Wales, one of the top in the UK and actually one of the top in Europe. The Council also managed 30 Feature Parks, 21 Recreation Grounds, 13 Conservation Parks, 88 Play Areas and 9 Skateboard areas and has 38 football pitches, 13 mini football pitches alongside rugby pitches, cricket, etc which are all still supported. Over the past 3 years the Council had delivered over 177,000 meters of active travel shared use being pedestrian and cycling paths. The Council offered child pedestrian training, delivered cycle shelters in schools and bought bikes for schools. 20 Car Parks were owned and controlled by the Vale with only two of the town centre car parks with a charge. The Leader further advised that 52,567 square meters of carriageway resurfacing had been undertaken in the year, 3,261 square meters of footway improvements and surface water gullies had been cleansed. The Leader concluded by stating that she would be happy to circulate some of the information recognising that the Council was still providing services. With regard to queries of measuring productivity that she had heard being said at meetings, she questioned how did you choose or measure how productive a care worker was, how did you look at productivity when you've had a child with severe learning needs. The Council would measure where it was appropriate to do so and she ended by presenting the budget to Council which was duly seconded by Councillor Brooks who reserved her right to speak later in the debate. Councillor Carroll commenced by saying the Labour Council was asking residents to pay more for less. He said Labour had failed to show leadership and manage budgets properly and was therefore imposing cuts to services and charging for things like garden waste collections. He drew attention to the multi-million pound bus station and enquired as to how much this Authority spent on diversity and inclusion. At the Healthy Living and Social Care Scrutiny Committee meeting Councillor Cave had made perfectly reasonable comments about the funding of bus services in the rural Vale but instead of No. addressing Councillor Cave's concerns, the Leader ‘s comments many residents had told him they considered to be a smear with Councillor Cave being accused of using inflammatory language. Perhaps he said the Leader could enlighten Council as to what aspect of Councillor Cave's remarks were considered inflammatory. He also referred to a recent report where the Leader had stated the 2% cut in National Insurance contributions announced in November by the Conservative UK Government was disappointing and that she had confirmed that this Council opposed tax cuts for millions of working people with he said his only assumption from those comments was that the Leader would oppose further tax cuts that had been announced that day. The 6.7% rise proposed he said fitted with his view of the Administration’s attitude that residents should pay more. The rise proposed significantly exceeded inflation with CPI currently standing at 4%. He felt the rise was not necessary as the Council had tens of millions of pounds in usable reserves including £10,177mn sat in the bank in the Council Fund as a percentage of the Authority's Revenue budget. If the Authority was to consider a real terms freeze in Council Tax and increase it in line with inflation at 4% it would cost £2,505m but given the amount held in Reserves it would be possible to go further than that and to cut Council Tax in real terms, which is what he said the Council should do. A 3% rise would cost £3.435m which he said would be below the rate of inflation. This real terms cut stood in stark contrast to the 6.7% rise proposed by Labour and would ease the pressures on working people across the Vale, so on behalf of the Conservative Group he proposed an amendment to the revenue budget which would transfer £3.435m from the Council's General Fund balances to support the base budget and he urged all Members to support the amendment. Councillor Charles, in seconding the amendment, said the additional income required by the Council could well be taken from Reserves which the taxpayers of the Vale of Glamorgan had already contributed to. She said she believed this could be the fairest way of raising the revenue instead of increasing the pressure on every household. The budget management of the Council had, in her view, been mismanaged by Labour backed up Llantwit Firsts and the people of the Vale of Glamorgan deserved better. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking to the amendment by Councillor Carroll whilst reserving his right to speak later on the proposed budget, asked after listening to the Conservatives uncosted amendment taking money out of the Reserves if £3.5m was taken out of the Reserves did the Conservative Group have any idea how to return it as it would obviously be using the exact same £3.5m next year and the year after and then the Council would be left with nothing in the Reserves. This was not the way to run a Council, stating that unfortunately the Conservatives had created the problems that were before the Council. In 2010 Britain's debt was £1 trillion and now it's £2.7 trillion so this was quite a shambles. What sort of ridiculous regime increased or cut one country's budget based on the spending of a government in another country. Taking a look at public spending in its entirety there was more spent per head in London than anywhere else. A little bit higher than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The spending per head in London, Scotland and No. Northern Ireland was 500 times higher annually almost 4%, even if Wales only received funding on an equal footing with these three it would be richer to the tune of £1.5 billion and this was the type of money which could transform the Vale’s local services and ensure that the Council did not need to increase Council Tax as has been suggested, but the we don't and this was leading to difficult decisions for all of us. Of course in Scotland the SNP Government had used part of the additional funding to freeze Council Tax realising the impact of the economic storm for families, but here with the challenging budget across Wales the ordinary people must pay more a lot more to maintain even basic services. Councillor Dr. Johnson ended by saying that he did not accept the figures presented by the Conservative Group which had not been costed in either a sensible or responsible manner which could be sustained. Councillor Wilson commented that he thought the amendment was pretty interesting, in that we would be looking at a 3% Council Tax increase at least where as in previous years the Conservatives had suggested no increase. He said that in his view the Conservative Group did not have the right to talk about financial mismanagement as Councillor Dr. Johnson had rightly said, we have got huge issues with our debt at the moment. Referring to 2008 where he said Labour helped out the banks and stopped people running out of money at cash points, which had happened in other places like Cyprus. We do not need any lessons from the Conservatives about financial management he said as in his view they didn’t have a clue how to manage the budget. Councillor Godfrey commented that if people were quoting facts then they should be correct and encapsulate the whole picture including the impact of the Ukraine war and BREXIT and he felt it quite wrong if people were not doing that. Councillor Hodges, in response to Councillor Godfrey’s comments, said yes the Ukraine war and Covid had a dramatic effect on balances as did Brexit but he felt that there was plenty of other mismanagement going on as well. Councillor Goodjohn considered that the amendment didn’t appear to be a very tactical solution to the Council’s issues and enquired of Councillor Carroll as to exactly what mismanagement of the budget issues there were in the Revenue proposals. He also asked the Conservative Leader to consider that taking from Reserves would quite frankly cause cash flow issues in the Council and what he would propose do in such situations as if there were cash flow issues in the Council people would have delays in getting vital services which would impact on their lives, being people's real lives here in the real world rather than some abstract idea. He also took the opportunity to remind Council of the current 10% inflation rate. Councillor Hodges, in drawing attention to Social Care costs, said if they were not funded what would happen going forward further, commenting that the NHS was already struggling because of mismanagement from the Conservative Government and its finances stating that he could not support No. the amendment as it had not been fully costed and would mean a cut in schools provision and social care. Councillor John said he could not believe what he was hearing from the Conservative Group referring to the months of discussion on the budget that had already taken place and that it was a good job the Council had reserves. He mentioned other Councils, in particular Monmouth Council, who he said did not have any Reserves to help them and their Council Tax had gone up to 7.5%. Councillor Franks, listening with interest to Councillor Carroll’s and the Conservative Members’ comments, said he felt that they were basically saying that apart from them no one else could financially manage the Council and referred to the catastrophic failures of Conservative Councils in England. The Leader, in response, said that in her view the amendment was completely preposterous in view of the financial position facing the Council and that she would be voting against the amendment. Councillor Perry said it was a shame that as Elected Members elected by the communities that there was a lack of togetherness. He said he applauded attempts to get rid of Council Tax or severely change it as, in his view, a land value tax would be much fairer. He said he would not be supporting the amendment because he believed that his residents would rather not spend money on new tyres and suspensions on their vehicles that they would rather if there were Reserves fix the roads and fix the other services and stop relying on volunteers to run services and stop cheering the minority getting wealthier and wealthier and have a more equitable society. Following a vote on the amendment the amendment was lost it being noted 12 were in favour, 38 against and one abstention. Councillor Dr. Johnson, speaking on the substantive Motion, said it had been interesting to hear the conversations taking place and that some people might almost be surprised to hear that he sympathised with the Leader of the Council in respect of the challenge before her, but that was why Plaid did not accept the propaganda about the Council being a great Council because the average person did not feel this. We as a Council needed to provide on demand services which were quickly rising as a result of lack of investment in preventative services. We needed to consider the relationship between the people that we served and the funding. Welsh Government added extra funding at the last minute and that increased £25m between the provisional and the final settlement £600,000 through to the Revenue Grant and around £500,000 through the introduction of the K Grant where we're expecting a loss and furthermore additional funding in the Housing Support Grant last week. How much was still unclear but the Council intended to keep Council Tax at the same level rather than considering a cut like last year when we received last minute funding which the Council put in its Reserves. This year we considered our energy savings to be too tight and so the money needed to go to the coffers for that rather than reducing Council Tax. There was no No. scrutiny, and he had been to all of the meetings, there was no scrutiny which would change the minds of those deciding Council Taxes and setting aside funding elsewhere in the budget. He had mentioned in the past how the Council looked after its bank balance before considering the public's needs and of course this year the figures before us showed some spend of the Reserves of £51m which was almost a half. Let's see if this was true because the same types of figures which were provided to us in the past had been incorrect. But he said there were challenges nonetheless. The public had seen a huge cost of living rise over the last years from energy costs, everyday shopping costs and housing costs, including 12.5% over the last two years for people in our Council houses. He understood that the budget was tight but said what was the purpose of Welsh Government providing extra funding for Councils in the final settlement if it was only put into Reserves. A number of things he said concerned him, he didn’t like the idea of the administrative fee for residents in parking permanent zones. Of course he stated the Council could provide any service if it forced people to pay for it. There was not enough money for fundamental core services for residents although he accepted that the situation was a difficult one, as was the case for all Councils, and he expressed his concern that the mix of cuts for Council’s consideration and the increase in Council Tax stating that between the both of them this was not acceptable and that he would be voting against the Motion. Councillor Brooks said the reality was that more and more Councils were being pushed to the financial brink. More Councils had issued a Section 114 Notice in the previous year than in the previous 30 years combined which she said was quite astounding. Welsh Government had quite rightly put the protection of public services at the front and centre of their budget, however the Council could not get away from the fact that their funding had been cut for the last 14 years from the Westminster Government leaving them with no alternative but to reduce their transfer funding for Local Authorities. The cost of living crisis came out as a significant issue in the recent survey with 42% of the population citing easily accessible care and health care closely followed by the buying or renting of good quality homes. These were the issues that really mattered to people and their priorities she said and she stood by the commitment to protect services which supported the Council’s most vulnerable residents. However, in conclusion she said difficult decisions had to be made to deliver a balanced and fair budget and she was pleased that the Council had been able to protect supported bus services as she felt many residents in rural and deprived communities relied on the bus services. Councillor Franks commented that the Council had heard about potholes being filled, a bit of resurfacing, grass being cut, road gullies being emptied, which was basically the standard work of all Councils. However, what did surprise him a little bit was the quick reference to support for Education. He was not sure if he had misheard but that's what he thought he heard, but our support for education has led to a disastrous situation in our schools, we've also heard a mention about people's priorities that was good to be reminded, but he didn't think we heard mention of the consultation with the public which, if his memory served him right, did not support the proposed level of increase. No. He wondered why we had that omission. Whereas other facts were highlighted, he considered there to be an element of cherry-picking. In the previous year’s budget debate almost a year to the day, the Cabinet proposed a £2m plus cut in schools with Cabinet being warned at that time that this would have had a terrible impact on school budgets. This was disregarded by Labour Members who, in his view he said, cheerfully dismissed such warnings. The result had been over 20 schools now facing a deficit budget, of these 19 apparently indicated that there was no prospect of recovery within 3 years, however since then he understood that the situation had worsened, both in terms of the numbers of schools and the size of the deficits. He therefore asked how can we and the public have any faith in this year's budget process now seeing that this year's allocation to schools would basically be following last year's allocation. What was the situation going to be in a year's time for our schools? What was going to be the size of the deficits? How many schools were going to be facing at least 3 years in the red and to add to their problems he understood that schools were going to be asked to pay for school crossing patrols and for elements of grass cutting? We really do need to know what the impact would be on schools in 2024/25. What would be the accumulated overspend and what was the anticipated overspend in the following year and he welcomed comments from the Cabinet Member for Education on these points. Councillor Birch, advising that she would be unable to answer all of the points at the meeting that evening, said that all of the schools that had budget deficits had been assisted by the finance teams with schools unable to recover their deficits within 3 years being offered plans to restructure the debt that they had so that they could eventually balance their budgets. Going forward she could not say what the deficits would be like in three years’ time, rather she hoped that they would be balanced. Furthermore, Councillor Birch added that all that had been said during the debate had been about the difficulties of various events in the last few years and the toll that that had taken on budgets everywhere, so schools were not going to be immune from that. It was obvious that balancing budgets was going to be more difficult for some schools than others. In conclusion, the Leader referred to the number of times the budget process had been considered by Cabinet and Scrutiny however she was disappointed with the questions at Council when a lot of the discussion could have been held at the Scrutiny Committee meetings over the year with suggestions being put forward for consideration. In referring to the issues of diversity and inclusion that had been commented on during the debate, the Leader drew attention to the budget for Corporate Resources being only 5% of the overall total. Having regard to Reserves she said the detail was contained within the report although they had been rationalised. In referring to the comments relating to the 2% cut in National Insurance the Leader mentioned that if one was of retirement age they wouldn’t receive this cut. The Leader subsequently took the opportunity to repeat her earlier comments that the proposed budget was a budget to protect the most vulnerable and moved the recommendations within the report. No. The motion moved by the Leader and seconded by Councillor Brooks was subsequently voted upon. A recorded vote took place on the recommendations as contained within the reference and the report, as follows:- Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Rhiannon Birch x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Vincent Driscoll Anthony Ernest x Robert Fisher x Christopher Franks x No. Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Catherine Iannucci x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Sandra Perkes x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x No. Neil Thomas x Rhys Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 30 21 The vote being carried, it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T a Council Tax increase of 6.7% be approved. (2) T H A T the Revenue budget for 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 24/25 to 28/29 be approved. (3) T H A T the fees and charges presented for approval in January 2024, which stood unchanged following review by Scrutiny, be noted. (4) T H A T the information provided in the supplemental report to Cabinet th on 29 February 2024 regarding updated Standard Spending Assessment figures be endorsed. Reasons for decisions (1) Setting the annual rate of Council Tax was a key policy decision for Council. (2) Setting a balanced budget was a statutory responsibility and decision for Full Council. (3) To confirm fees and charges for 2024/25. (4) Having regard to the supplemental information which provided Full Council with the most up to date figures as part of its final budget deliberations. No. CAPITAL STRATEGY 2024/25 AND FINAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. Appendix 1 to the report provided the Council's Capital Strategy for 2024/25. The Capital Strategy provided a framework which outlined how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to the provision of corporate objectives, along with an overview of how associated risk was managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. The report set out the Council’s proposed Final Capital Programme for the period 2024/25 to 2028/29 at Appendix 2. The Council was facing significant pressures in relation to price inflation and the cost-of-living crisis which had seen increases in the costs of materials and labour. This had had an impact on the current schemes within the Capital Programme and the funding available to fund new schemes within the Capital Programme. The total value of capital schemes over the next five years was £387.582m which included £25.376m for the Band B Sustainable Communities for Learning Programme (excluding the pipeline schemes) and £205.775m for the Housing Improvement Programme. Since the Draft Capital Programme proposals report in January, a number of changes had been made including the reprofile and allocation of decarbonisation schemes, City Deal reprofile, slippage from the 2023/24 Capital Programme into the 2024/25 Capital Programme and the Llanmaes match funding was no longer being removed from the five year proposals. The detail of these changes was covered later in the report. The Leader subsequently moved the recommendations in the report, which were seconded by Councillor Brooks, and there being no dissent it was RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Capital Strategy 2024/25, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (2) T H A T the final Capital Programme for the years 2024/25 to 2028/29, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C261), be approved. (3) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for No. Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the: i. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Housing Improvement Programme as appropriate. ii. 2024/25 to 2028/29 Asset Renewal budgets as appropriate. iii. S106 funded schemes subject to Member consultation as required under the existing process. iv. Energy Management Schemes v. Building Strong Communities Fund schemes. vi. Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme (Previously 21st Century Schools schemes). vii. Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes. viii. Vale Regeneration Schemes. (4) T H A T the Chief Executive, Head of Finance / Section 151 Officer, and Director of Learning and Skills in consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated authority to increase the Capital Programme for the long term solution in relation to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School when the feasibility studies had been concluded. It being noted that £300k had been ringfenced within reserves to carry out the scheme when feasibility studies had been undertaken. Reasons for decisions (1) To approve the Capital Strategy for 2024/25. (2) To set and approve future Capital Programmes to 2028/29. (3) To enable the Housing Capital budget, Asset Renewal budgets, S106 schemes, Energy Management Schemes, Building Stronger Communities Fund, Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme, Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes, and Vale Regeneration schemes to be managed effectively. (4) To enable the long term solution to the Successful Futures Centre at Pencoedtre High School to proceed when the feasibility studies had been concluded. TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2024/25 AND UPDATE 2023/24 (REF) Cabinet had considered the report on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) and had referred the same to Council for consideration and approval. The interim report outlined the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management Strategy detailed in Appendix 1 and provided an update on the Council’s Treasury Management operations for the period 1st April to 31st December, No. 2023. All activities were in accordance with the Council’s approved strategy on Treasury Management. Total external borrowing as of 31st December, 2023 was £145.479m at an average rate of 4.37%. New external borrowing totalling £5.000m was undertaken during the first 9 months of 2023/24 at a rate of 4.38% with utilised the special project rate for Housing Revenue Account schemes. The Council invested with the Debt Management Deposit Facility, Local Authorities, Treasury Bills, Money Market Funds together with Lloyds Bank Call Accounts. Total investments as of 31st December, 2023 stood at £50.495m at an average rate of 4.53% over the nine-month period. The Council had to ensure that the Prudential Code was complied with, which had been developed by CIPFA as a professional code of practice, last updated in December 2021. To demonstrate that the Council had fulfilled these objectives, the Code set out a list of Prudential and Treasury indicators that should be calculated together with other factors that had to be considered. These were included in Appendix 1 to the report as part of the Strategy. The Council also had a legal requirement to comply with the Welsh Government Guidance on Investments and had taken this guidance into consideration when developing the Strategy. New borrowing in the period to 2028/29 was expected to be £184.377m for new Capital Expenditure and a further £14.000m of borrowing to replace maturing loans and reflect the Council’s reducing ability to internally borrow over the period. Capital expenditure when financed by long term debt incurred two elements of cost, interest and repayment of the principal sum borrowed. The resources the Council must put aside in each year to repay the principal sum borrowed was known as Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) and the Council's policy for the calculation was detailed in the report. The Treasury Management Policy Statement for 2024/25 was attached at Appendix 2 to the report. The Leader, in referring to the recent training provided to all Members, and indeed training that was provided each year, on the subject, commented that she had found the training to be a really constructive training session which had also been recorded for Members to view it online. RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Treasury Management interim report for the period 1 st April st to 31 December, 2023 be approved. No. (2) T H A T the policy for making Minimum Revenue Provision in 2024/25 be approved. (3) T H A T the proposed 2024/25 Treasury Management and Investment Strategy be approved, including the following specific resolutions (as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 [Minute No. C262]): • The Authorised Limit for External Debt be set at £240.969m for 2023/24, £271.200m for 2024/25, £303.939m for 2025/26 and £336.893m for 2026/27. • The Operational Boundary for External Debt be set at £226.147m for 2023/24, £255.687 for 2024/25, £287.406m for 2025/26 and £320.338m for 2026/27. • The Section 151 Officer be granted delegated authority within the total Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary as estimated for individual years to effect movement between the separately agreed limits for borrowing and other long term liabilities. • An upper limit of £0m for 2023/24, £10m for 2024/25, £10m in 2025/26 and £10m in 2026/27 be set for total principal sums invested for over 364 days. • The amount of projected borrowing that was fixed rate maturing in each period as a percentage of total projected borrowing that was fixed rate for 2024/25 be set as: Table 1 – Upper and lower Limits for fixed rate borrowing Upper Lower Limit Limit Under 12 months 20% 0% 12 months and within 24 months 20% 0% 24 months and within 5 years 30% 0% 5 years and within 10 years 40% 0% 10 years and above 100% 0% (4) T H A T Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix 1 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. (5) T H A T the Treasury Management Policy Statement set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 29th February, 2024 (Minute No. C262) be approved. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To agree the basis of the Minimum Revenue Provision calculation for 2024/25. No. (3-5) In order for the Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategy as prepared be approved as required by the Local Government Act 2003. PAY POLICY 2024/25 (REF) The Council had a statutory requirement under the Localism Act 2011 to prepare a pay policy statement for the new financial year 2024/25. The statement needed to be approved and published by 31st March, 2024. The document provided a framework for ensuring that employees were rewarded fairly and objectively, in accordance with the service needs of the Council and that there was openness and transparency in relation to the process. It being a straightforward report the Leader moved the recommendations which were seconded by Councillor Brooks. Prior to putting the recommendations to Full Council the Mayor asked if there were any points of clarification required by Members from the Head of Human Resources. There being no clarifications required and no further comments, it was subsequently RESOLVED – T H A T the Council’s Pay Policy as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 8th February, 2024 (Minute No C234) be approved. Reason for decision To respond to the legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 and to provide openness and accountability in relation to how the Council rewards its staff. N.B. All Chief Officers, save for the Head of Human Resources, left the meeting when this item was considered. The Head of Human Resources remained in the meeting, until the matter was to be voted upon, in order to provide any clarification required by Elected Members.
Part of an issue followed across 11 meetings
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T it be noted that at its meeting on 14th December, 2023, Cabinet (the Executive) calculated the following amounts for the year 2024/25 in accordance with regulations made under Section 33(5) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:- (a) 63,397 being the amount calculated by Cabinet (the Executive) in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (Wales) Regulations 1995, as amended, as its council tax base for the year. (b) Part of the Council’s area Barry 21,193 Colwinston 378 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 2,998 Dinas Powys 4,032 Ewenny 450 Llancarfan 489 Llandough 969 Llandow 447 Llanfair 388 Llangan 477 Llanmaes 259 Llantwit Major 4,367 Michaelston 252 Penarth 11,790 Pendoylan 353 Penllyn 1,085 Peterston-Super-Ely 559 St. Athan 1,699 St. Brides Major 1,480 St. Donats 217 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 246 No. St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 761 Sully and Lavernock 2,828 Welsh St. Donats 330 Wenvoe 1,571 Wick 541 Total Council Tax Base Town and Community 60,159 Councils Rhoose 3,238 Total Council Tax Base 63,397 being the amounts calculated by Cabinet (the Executive), in accordance with regulation 6 of the Regulations, as amended, as the amounts of its council tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. (2) That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2024/25 in accordance with Sections 32 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992: (a) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £441,782,790 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (2) (a) to (d) and (2A) of the Act (including Town / Community Council Precepts totalling £3,652,477). (b) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £129,559,000 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (3) (a), (aa) and (c), and (3A) of the Act. (c) Amount by which the aggregate at (2)(a) above £312,223,790 exceeds the aggregate at (2)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year. (d) Aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates £209,491,342 will be payable for the year into its Council Fund in respect of redistributed non-domestic rates, revenue support grant, its council tax reduction scheme, additional grant or special grant less certain Discretionary Non-Domestic Rate Reliefs. (e) The amount at (2)(c) above less the amount at £1,620.46 (2)(d) above, all divided by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act as the basic amount of its council tax for the year. (f) Aggregate amount of all special items referred to in £3,652,447 Section 34(1) of the Act. No. (g) Amount at (2)(e) above less the result given by £1,562.85 dividing the amount at (2)(f) above by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates. (h) Part of the Council’s area £ Barry 1,624.05 Colwinston 1,615.39 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,674.76 Dinas Powys 1,598.23 Ewenny 1,613.96 Llancarfan 1,593.44 Llandough 1,628.85 Llandow 1,589.70 Llanfair 1,577.91 Llangan 1,587.07 Llanmaes 1,618.89 Llantwit Major 1,626.37 Michaelston 1,592.88 Penarth 1,650.37 Pendoylan 1,586.93 Penllyn 1,576.21 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,604.89 Rhoose 1,562.85 St. Athan 1,613.02 St. Brides Major 1,580.85 St. Donats 1,587.30 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,591.19 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,651.90 Sully and Lavernock 1,598.00 Welsh St. Donats 1,584.06 Wenvoe 1,588.87 Wick 1,579.49 being the amounts given by adding to the amount at (2)(g) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at (1)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34 (3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. No. (i) Part of the Council's Area Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,082.70 1,263.15 1,443.60 1,624.05 1,984.95 2,345.85 2,706.75 3,248.10 3,789.45 Colwinston 1,076.93 1,256.41 1,435.90 1,615.39 1,974.37 2,333.34 2,692.32 3,230.78 3,769.24 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,116.51 1,302.59 1,488.68 1,674.76 2,046.93 2,419.10 2,791.27 3,349.52 3,907.77 Dinas Powys 1,065.49 1,243.07 1,420.65 1,598.23 1,953.39 2,308.55 2,663.72 3,196.46 3,729.20 Ewenny 1,075.97 1,255.30 1,434.63 1,613.96 1,972.62 2,331.28 2,689.93 3,227.92 3,765.91 Llancarfan 1,062.29 1,239.34 1,416.39 1,593.44 1,947.54 2,301.64 2,655.73 3,186.88 3,718.03 Llandough 1,085.90 1,266.88 1,447.87 1,628.85 1,990.82 2,352.78 2,714.75 3,257.70 3,800.65 Llandow 1,059.80 1,236.43 1,413.07 1,589.70 1,942.97 2,296.23 2,649.50 3,179.40 3,709.30 Llanfair 1,051.94 1,227.26 1,402.59 1,577.91 1,928.56 2,279.20 2,629.85 3,155.82 3,681.79 Llangan 1,058.05 1,234.39 1,410.73 1,587.07 1,939.75 2,292.43 2,645.12 3,174.14 3,703.16 Llanmaes 1,079.26 1,259.14 1,439.01 1,618.89 1,978.64 2,338.40 2,698.15 3,237.78 3,777.41 Llantwit Major 1,084.25 1,264.95 1,445.66 1,626.37 1,987.79 2,349.20 2,710.62 3,252.74 3,794.86 Michaelston 1,061.92 1,238.91 1,415.89 1,592.88 1,946.85 2,300.83 2,654.80 3,185.76 3,716.72 Penarth 1,100.25 1,283.62 1,467.00 1,650.37 2,017.12 2,383.87 2,750.62 3,300.74 3,850.86 Pendoylan 1,057.95 1,234.28 1,410.60 1,586.93 1,939.58 2,292.23 2,644.88 3,173.86 3,702.84 Penllyn 1,050.81 1,225.94 1,401.08 1,576.21 1,926.48 2,276.75 2,627.02 3,152.42 3,677.82 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,069.93 1,248.25 1,426.57 1,604.89 1,961.53 2,318.17 2,674.82 3,209.78 3,744.74 Rhoose 1,041.90 1,215.55 1,389.20 1,562.85 1,910.15 2,257.45 2,604.75 3,125.70 3,646.65 St. Athan 1,075.35 1,254.57 1,433.80 1,613.02 1,971.47 2,329.92 2,688.37 3,226.04 3,763.71 St. Brides Major 1,053.90 1,229.55 1,405.20 1,580.85 1,932.15 2,283.45 2,634.75 3,161.70 3,688.65 St. Donats 1,058.20 1,234.57 1,410.93 1,587.30 1,940.03 2,292.77 2,645.50 3,174.60 3,703.70 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,060.79 1,237.59 1,414.39 1,591.19 1,944.79 2,298.39 2,651.98 3,182.38 3,712.78 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,101.27 1,284.81 1,468.36 1,651.90 2,018.99 2,386.08 2,753.17 3,303.80 3,854.43 Sully and Lavernock 1,065.33 1,242.89 1,420.44 1,598.00 1,953.11 2,308.22 2,663.33 3,196.00 3,728.67 Welsh St. Donats 1,056.04 1,232.05 1,408.05 1,584.06 1,936.07 2,288.09 2,640.10 3,168.12 3,696.14 Wenvoe 1,059.25 1,235.79 1,412.33 1,588.87 1,941.95 2,295.03 2,648.12 3,177.74 3,707.36 Wick 1,052.99 1,228.49 1,403.99 1,579.49 1,930.49 2,281.49 2,632.48 3,158.98 3,685.48 being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at (2)(g) and (2)(h) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5 (1/1A) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands. (3). That it be noted that for the year 2024/25 the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:- No. £ Valuation Bands A B C D E F G H I 235.11 274.30 313.48 352.67 431.04 509.41 587.78 705.34 822.90 Part of the Council's Area £ Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,317.81 1,537.45 1,757.08 1,976.72 2,415.99 2,855.26 3,294.53 3,953.44 4,612.35 Colwinston 1,312.04 1,530.71 1,749.38 1,968.06 2,405.41 2,842.75 3,280.10 3,936.12 4,592.14 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,351.62 1,576.89 1,802.16 2,027.43 2,477.97 2,928.51 3,379.05 4,054.86 4,730.67 Dinas Powys 1,300.60 1,517.37 1,734.13 1,950.90 2,384.43 2,817.96 3,251.50 3,901.80 4,552.10 Ewenny 1,311.08 1,529.60 1,748.11 1,966.63 2,403.66 2,840.69 3,277.71 3,933.26 4,588.81 Llancarfan 1,297.40 1,513.64 1,729.87 1,946.11 2,378.58 2,811.05 3,243.51 3,892.22 4,540.93 Llandough 1,321.01 1,541.18 1,761.35 1,981.52 2,421.86 2,862.19 3,302.53 3,963.04 4,623.55 Llandow 1,294.91 1,510.73 1,726.55 1,942.37 2,374.01 2,805.64 3,237.28 3,884.74 4,532.20 Llanfair 1,287.05 1,501.56 1,716.07 1,930.58 2,359.60 2,788.61 3,217.63 3,861.16 4,504.69 Llangan 1,293.16 1,508.69 1,724.21 1,939.74 2,370.79 2,801.84 3,232.90 3,879.48 4,526.06 Llanmaes 1,314.37 1,533.44 1,752.49 1,971.56 2,409.68 2,847.81 3,285.93 3,943.12 4,600.31 Llantwit Major 1,319.36 1,539.25 1,759.14 1,979.04 2,418.83 2,858.61 3,298.40 3,958.08 4,617.76 Michaelston 1,297.03 1,513.21 1,729.37 1,945.55 2,377.89 2,810.24 3,242.58 3,891.10 4,539.62 Penarth 1,335.36 1,557.92 1,780.48 2,003.04 2,448.16 2,893.28 3,338.40 4,006.08 4,673.76 Pendoylan 1,293.06 1,508.58 1,724.08 1,939.60 2,370.62 2,801.64 3,232.66 3,879.20 4,525.74 Penllyn 1,285.92 1,500.24 1,714.56 1,928.88 2,357.52 2,786.16 3,214.80 3,857.76 4,500.72 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,305.04 1,522.55 1,740.05 1,957.56 2,392.57 2,827.58 3,262.60 3,915.12 4,567.64 Rhoose 1,277.01 1,489.85 1,702.68 1,915.52 2,341.19 2,766.86 3,192.53 3,831.04 4,469.55 St. Athan 1,310.46 1,528.87 1,747.28 1,965.69 2,402.51 2,839.33 3,276.15 3,931.38 4,586.61 St. Brides Major 1,289.01 1,503.85 1,718.68 1,933.52 2,363.19 2,792.86 3,222.53 3,867.04 4,511.55 St. Donats 1,293.31 1,508.87 1,724.41 1,939.97 2,371.07 2,802.18 3,233.28 3,879.94 4,526.60 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super- Ely 1,295.90 1,511.89 1,727.87 1,943.86 2,375.83 2,807.80 3,239.76 3,887.72 4,535.68 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,336.38 1,559.11 1,781.84 2,004.57 2,450.03 2,895.49 3,340.95 4,009.14 4,677.33 Sully and Lavernock 1,300.44 1,517.19 1,733.92 1,950.67 2,384.15 2,817.63 3,251.11 3,901.34 4,551.57 Welsh St. Donats 1,291.15 1,506.35 1,721.53 1,936.73 2,367.11 2,797.50 3,227.88 3,873.46 4,519.04 Wenvoe 1,294.36 1,510.09 1,725.81 1,941.54 2,372.99 2,804.44 3,235.90 3,883.08 4,530.26 Wick 1,288.10 1,502.79 1,717.47 1,932.16 2,361.53 2,790.90 3,220.26 3,864.32 4,508.38 (4) That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at (2)(i) and (3) above , The Vale of Glamorgan County Borough Council, in accordance with Section 30 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of Council Tax for the year 2024/25. No. (5) T H A T discount for prompt payment of the Council Tax be not granted. (6) T H A T the Common Seal be affixed to the said Council Tax. (7) T H A T notices of the making of the said Council Taxes signed by the Chief Executive be given by advertisement in the local press under Section 38 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Reason for decisions (1-7) In order to set the Council Tax for 2024/25.
The Leader, in presenting the report, said it should be very straightforward having had the discussions and vote earlier in the meeting in respect of the revenue budget earlier. The report set out the number of Band D equivalent properties within the Vale of Glamorgan being 663,360, outlined the precept by local area including the Town and Community Councils and included the details of the Police and Crime Commissioner precept as well. This was an annual report that was presented to Council as part of setting the Council Tax and was for Council approval and so moved the resolutions, which was seconded by Councillor Brooks. No. A recorded vote took place in respect of the recommendations contained within the report as below:- Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Rhiannon Birch x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Vincent Driscoll Anthony Ernest x Robert Fisher x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x No. Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Catherine Iannucci x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Sandra Perkes x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Rhys Thomas x No. Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 30 21 With the vote being carried, it was subsequently RESOLVED – (1) T H A T it be noted that at its meeting on 14th December, 2023, Cabinet (the Executive) calculated the following amounts for the year 2024/25 in accordance with regulations made under Section 33(5) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:- (a) 63,397 being the amount calculated by Cabinet (the Executive) in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (Wales) Regulations 1995, as amended, as its council tax base for the year. (b) Part of the Council’s area Barry 21,193 Colwinston 378 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 2,998 Dinas Powys 4,032 Ewenny 450 Llancarfan 489 Llandough 969 Llandow 447 Llanfair 388 Llangan 477 Llanmaes 259 Llantwit Major 4,367 Michaelston 252 Penarth 11,790 Pendoylan 353 Penllyn 1,085 Peterston-Super-Ely 559 St. Athan 1,699 St. Brides Major 1,480 St. Donats 217 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 246 No. St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 761 Sully and Lavernock 2,828 Welsh St. Donats 330 Wenvoe 1,571 Wick 541 Total Council Tax Base Town and Community 60,159 Councils Rhoose 3,238 Total Council Tax Base 63,397 being the amounts calculated by Cabinet (the Executive), in accordance with regulation 6 of the Regulations, as amended, as the amounts of its council tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. (2) That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2024/25 in accordance with Sections 32 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992: (a) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £441,782,790 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (2) (a) to (d) and (2A) of the Act (including Town / Community Council Precepts totalling £3,652,477). (b) Aggregate of the amounts which the Council £129,559,000 estimates for the items set out in Section 32 (3) (a), (aa) and (c), and (3A) of the Act. (c) Amount by which the aggregate at (2)(a) above £312,223,790 exceeds the aggregate at (2)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year. (d) Aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates £209,491,342 will be payable for the year into its Council Fund in respect of redistributed non-domestic rates, revenue support grant, its council tax reduction scheme, additional grant or special grant less certain Discretionary Non-Domestic Rate Reliefs. (e) The amount at (2)(c) above less the amount at £1,620.46 (2)(d) above, all divided by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act as the basic amount of its council tax for the year. (f) Aggregate amount of all special items referred to in £3,652,447 Section 34(1) of the Act. No. (g) Amount at (2)(e) above less the result given by £1,562.85 dividing the amount at (2)(f) above by the amount at (1)(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates. (h) Part of the Council’s area £ Barry 1,624.05 Colwinston 1,615.39 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,674.76 Dinas Powys 1,598.23 Ewenny 1,613.96 Llancarfan 1,593.44 Llandough 1,628.85 Llandow 1,589.70 Llanfair 1,577.91 Llangan 1,587.07 Llanmaes 1,618.89 Llantwit Major 1,626.37 Michaelston 1,592.88 Penarth 1,650.37 Pendoylan 1,586.93 Penllyn 1,576.21 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,604.89 Rhoose 1,562.85 St. Athan 1,613.02 St. Brides Major 1,580.85 St. Donats 1,587.30 St. Georges and St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,591.19 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,651.90 Sully and Lavernock 1,598.00 Welsh St. Donats 1,584.06 Wenvoe 1,588.87 Wick 1,579.49 being the amounts given by adding to the amount at (2)(g) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at (1)(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34 (3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate. No. (i) Part of the Council's Area Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,082.70 1,263.15 1,443.60 1,624.05 1,984.95 2,345.85 2,706.75 3,248.10 3,789.45 Colwinston 1,076.93 1,256.41 1,435.90 1,615.39 1,974.37 2,333.34 2,692.32 3,230.78 3,769.24 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,116.51 1,302.59 1,488.68 1,674.76 2,046.93 2,419.10 2,791.27 3,349.52 3,907.77 Dinas Powys 1,065.49 1,243.07 1,420.65 1,598.23 1,953.39 2,308.55 2,663.72 3,196.46 3,729.20 Ewenny 1,075.97 1,255.30 1,434.63 1,613.96 1,972.62 2,331.28 2,689.93 3,227.92 3,765.91 Llancarfan 1,062.29 1,239.34 1,416.39 1,593.44 1,947.54 2,301.64 2,655.73 3,186.88 3,718.03 Llandough 1,085.90 1,266.88 1,447.87 1,628.85 1,990.82 2,352.78 2,714.75 3,257.70 3,800.65 Llandow 1,059.80 1,236.43 1,413.07 1,589.70 1,942.97 2,296.23 2,649.50 3,179.40 3,709.30 Llanfair 1,051.94 1,227.26 1,402.59 1,577.91 1,928.56 2,279.20 2,629.85 3,155.82 3,681.79 Llangan 1,058.05 1,234.39 1,410.73 1,587.07 1,939.75 2,292.43 2,645.12 3,174.14 3,703.16 Llanmaes 1,079.26 1,259.14 1,439.01 1,618.89 1,978.64 2,338.40 2,698.15 3,237.78 3,777.41 Llantwit Major 1,084.25 1,264.95 1,445.66 1,626.37 1,987.79 2,349.20 2,710.62 3,252.74 3,794.86 Michaelston 1,061.92 1,238.91 1,415.89 1,592.88 1,946.85 2,300.83 2,654.80 3,185.76 3,716.72 Penarth 1,100.25 1,283.62 1,467.00 1,650.37 2,017.12 2,383.87 2,750.62 3,300.74 3,850.86 Pendoylan 1,057.95 1,234.28 1,410.60 1,586.93 1,939.58 2,292.23 2,644.88 3,173.86 3,702.84 Penllyn 1,050.81 1,225.94 1,401.08 1,576.21 1,926.48 2,276.75 2,627.02 3,152.42 3,677.82 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,069.93 1,248.25 1,426.57 1,604.89 1,961.53 2,318.17 2,674.82 3,209.78 3,744.74 Rhoose 1,041.90 1,215.55 1,389.20 1,562.85 1,910.15 2,257.45 2,604.75 3,125.70 3,646.65 St. Athan 1,075.35 1,254.57 1,433.80 1,613.02 1,971.47 2,329.92 2,688.37 3,226.04 3,763.71 St. Brides Major 1,053.90 1,229.55 1,405.20 1,580.85 1,932.15 2,283.45 2,634.75 3,161.70 3,688.65 St. Donats 1,058.20 1,234.57 1,410.93 1,587.30 1,940.03 2,292.77 2,645.50 3,174.60 3,703.70 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super-Ely 1,060.79 1,237.59 1,414.39 1,591.19 1,944.79 2,298.39 2,651.98 3,182.38 3,712.78 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,101.27 1,284.81 1,468.36 1,651.90 2,018.99 2,386.08 2,753.17 3,303.80 3,854.43 Sully and Lavernock 1,065.33 1,242.89 1,420.44 1,598.00 1,953.11 2,308.22 2,663.33 3,196.00 3,728.67 Welsh St. Donats 1,056.04 1,232.05 1,408.05 1,584.06 1,936.07 2,288.09 2,640.10 3,168.12 3,696.14 Wenvoe 1,059.25 1,235.79 1,412.33 1,588.87 1,941.95 2,295.03 2,648.12 3,177.74 3,707.36 Wick 1,052.99 1,228.49 1,403.99 1,579.49 1,930.49 2,281.49 2,632.48 3,158.98 3,685.48 being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at (2)(g) and (2)(h) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5 (1/1A) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands. (3). That it be noted that for the year 2024/25 the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:- No. £ Valuation Bands A B C D E F G H I 235.11 274.30 313.48 352.67 431.04 509.41 587.78 705.34 822.90 Part of the Council's Area £ Valuation Bands £ A B C D E F G H I Barry 1,317.81 1,537.45 1,757.08 1,976.72 2,415.99 2,855.26 3,294.53 3,953.44 4,612.35 Colwinston 1,312.04 1,530.71 1,749.38 1,968.06 2,405.41 2,842.75 3,280.10 3,936.12 4,592.14 Cowbridge with Llanblethian 1,351.62 1,576.89 1,802.16 2,027.43 2,477.97 2,928.51 3,379.05 4,054.86 4,730.67 Dinas Powys 1,300.60 1,517.37 1,734.13 1,950.90 2,384.43 2,817.96 3,251.50 3,901.80 4,552.10 Ewenny 1,311.08 1,529.60 1,748.11 1,966.63 2,403.66 2,840.69 3,277.71 3,933.26 4,588.81 Llancarfan 1,297.40 1,513.64 1,729.87 1,946.11 2,378.58 2,811.05 3,243.51 3,892.22 4,540.93 Llandough 1,321.01 1,541.18 1,761.35 1,981.52 2,421.86 2,862.19 3,302.53 3,963.04 4,623.55 Llandow 1,294.91 1,510.73 1,726.55 1,942.37 2,374.01 2,805.64 3,237.28 3,884.74 4,532.20 Llanfair 1,287.05 1,501.56 1,716.07 1,930.58 2,359.60 2,788.61 3,217.63 3,861.16 4,504.69 Llangan 1,293.16 1,508.69 1,724.21 1,939.74 2,370.79 2,801.84 3,232.90 3,879.48 4,526.06 Llanmaes 1,314.37 1,533.44 1,752.49 1,971.56 2,409.68 2,847.81 3,285.93 3,943.12 4,600.31 Llantwit Major 1,319.36 1,539.25 1,759.14 1,979.04 2,418.83 2,858.61 3,298.40 3,958.08 4,617.76 Michaelston 1,297.03 1,513.21 1,729.37 1,945.55 2,377.89 2,810.24 3,242.58 3,891.10 4,539.62 Penarth 1,335.36 1,557.92 1,780.48 2,003.04 2,448.16 2,893.28 3,338.40 4,006.08 4,673.76 Pendoylan 1,293.06 1,508.58 1,724.08 1,939.60 2,370.62 2,801.64 3,232.66 3,879.20 4,525.74 Penllyn 1,285.92 1,500.24 1,714.56 1,928.88 2,357.52 2,786.16 3,214.80 3,857.76 4,500.72 Peterston-Super-Ely 1,305.04 1,522.55 1,740.05 1,957.56 2,392.57 2,827.58 3,262.60 3,915.12 4,567.64 Rhoose 1,277.01 1,489.85 1,702.68 1,915.52 2,341.19 2,766.86 3,192.53 3,831.04 4,469.55 St. Athan 1,310.46 1,528.87 1,747.28 1,965.69 2,402.51 2,839.33 3,276.15 3,931.38 4,586.61 St. Brides Major 1,289.01 1,503.85 1,718.68 1,933.52 2,363.19 2,792.86 3,222.53 3,867.04 4,511.55 St. Donats 1,293.31 1,508.87 1,724.41 1,939.97 2,371.07 2,802.18 3,233.28 3,879.94 4,526.60 St. Georges & St. Brides-Super- Ely 1,295.90 1,511.89 1,727.87 1,943.86 2,375.83 2,807.80 3,239.76 3,887.72 4,535.68 St. Nicholas and Bonvilston 1,336.38 1,559.11 1,781.84 2,004.57 2,450.03 2,895.49 3,340.95 4,009.14 4,677.33 Sully and Lavernock 1,300.44 1,517.19 1,733.92 1,950.67 2,384.15 2,817.63 3,251.11 3,901.34 4,551.57 Welsh St. Donats 1,291.15 1,506.35 1,721.53 1,936.73 2,367.11 2,797.50 3,227.88 3,873.46 4,519.04 Wenvoe 1,294.36 1,510.09 1,725.81 1,941.54 2,372.99 2,804.44 3,235.90 3,883.08 4,530.26 Wick 1,288.10 1,502.79 1,717.47 1,932.16 2,361.53 2,790.90 3,220.26 3,864.32 4,508.38 (4) That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at (2)(i) and (3) above , The Vale of Glamorgan County Borough Council, in accordance with Section 30 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of Council Tax for the year 2024/25. No. (5) T H A T discount for prompt payment of the Council Tax be not granted. (6) T H A T the Common Seal be affixed to the said Council Tax. (7) T H A T notices of the making of the said Council Taxes signed by the Chief Executive be given by advertisement in the local press under Section 38 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. Reason for decisions (1-7) In order to set the Council Tax for 2024/25.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C167, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. NOMINATIONS FOR THE ROLES OF INDEPENDENT BOARD MEMBER REPRESENTING LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO THE CARDIFF AND VALE UNIVERSITY HEALTH BOARD AND THE NATIONAL JOINT COMMITTEE FOR THE NATIONAL ADOPTION SERVICE AND FOSTER WALES (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C170, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. FINAL HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT (HRA) BUDGET PROPOSALS 2024/25, RENT SETTING 2024/2025 AND HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUSINESS PLAN 2024/25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C196, 11th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. INITIAL BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 PROPOSALS FOR CONSULTATION (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C206, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C207, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. ACQUISITION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C222, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART I) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C224, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART II) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C228, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C248, 22nd February, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
VALE OF GLAMORGAN POLLING DISTRICT AND PLACES REVIEW 2023 (REF) It being noted that the use of the urgent decision procedure was a matter under the Constitution required to be presented to Full Council it was RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C167, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. NOMINATIONS FOR THE ROLES OF INDEPENDENT BOARD MEMBER REPRESENTING LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO THE CARDIFF AND VALE UNIVERSITY HEALTH BOARD AND THE NATIONAL JOINT COMMITTEE FOR THE NATIONAL ADOPTION SERVICE AND FOSTER WALES (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C170, 30th November, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. FINAL HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT (HRA) BUDGET PROPOSALS 2024/25, RENT SETTING 2024/2025 AND HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUSINESS PLAN 2024/25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C196, 11th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. INITIAL BUDGET 2024/25 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2024/25 TO 2028/29 PROPOSALS FOR CONSULTATION (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C206, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2024/25 TO 2028/29 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C207, 18th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. ACQUISITION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C222, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. No. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART I) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C224, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. VALE OF GLAMORGAN ENTERPRISE CENTRE (PART II) (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C228, 25th January, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution. DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2024-25 (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C248, 22nd February, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
Part of an issue followed across 8 meetings
The following responses to Member questions as contained within the agenda were presented: (i) Question from Councillor S. Lloyd-Selby A recent report showed that Wales is leading the way in the UK for recycling and thanks to the response from residents to recent waste collection changes, the Vale is No. among the best performing Councils. What steps will the Council take to further improve recycling rates across the Vale. Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services The recent publication of recycling rates for the UK, demonstrating how impressive the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s rates are in comparison, is encouraging and a testament to the hard work of our residents, who diligently take the time each week to separate their recyclable materials for collection. As a consequence of their hard work, we are on target to reach the National Recycling in Wales of 70% for 2024/25, but much work is still to be done if we are to meet the National goal of zero waste by 2050. In pursuance of improved performance, we will shortly be introducing 3-weekly residual waste collections for flats and apartments and improving recycling provision at these locations to capture more recycling where, unfortunately, participation remains low. Additionally, the service will be proactively monitoring black bag collections to identify areas / properties that do not recycle, or those where recycling levels could be increased. In addition, ‘Vape’ recycling will be introduced shortly, along with additional residual waste controls at the Council’s two recycling Centres, at Atlantic Trading Estate and Llandow. As Members may already be aware, from 1st April, 2024, Welsh Government is introducing new legislation to improve recycling rates at commercial premises (Workplace Recycling Regulations) where there will be a duty to separate all recycling from the waste stream, prior to collection. Businesses will no longer be able to just have residual waste collections, which will improve recycling rates and provide commercial opportunities for the Council as a commercial waste service provider. Across Wales, in the longer term, Welsh Government will be co-ordinating the implementation of a new Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), which is a take back scheme for drinks cans and bottles. Additionally, the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme for packing based on a “polluter pays” principle will be introduced in 2025/26. This will mean a reduction of packaging material and the Council will be reimbursed for collecting and recycling it. It is hoped that all of the new initiatives I have detailed will reduce waste and improve recycling rates even further. As ever though, our biggest reliance is on our residents; so I would like to take this opportunity, if I can, to thank them for their continued support as we seek to transition to a zero waste country in Wales. Supplemental Councillor Lloyd-Selby in response said it was good to hear about the progress that was being made echoing the thanks that had been given to residents for their hard work and the way that they had co-operated with the Council enquired as to what steps the Council was taking to support small businesses and charities in relation to the changes. No. The Cabinet Member in response said he was aware that officers from the department have been visiting lots of premises with the aim being to support organisations as much as possible and if any Member or organisation had any queries or concerns the department would be more than happy to visit them again and provide further advice. (ii) Question from Councillor C.P. Franks Members should be horrified about the contents of a report detailing major failings of the South the Wales Fire and Rescue Authority. Allegations of sexism and abusive behaviour towards staff had prompted the investigation which found "serious deficiencies in the service" after surveying 450 staff. The report concluded the service "tolerates" firefighters posting sexualised images in their uniform on the adult platform OnlyFans. Its authors said they "heard and saw examples of inappropriate comments made to and/or about women and/or about the way they look or dress". Will the Leader make a statement regarding the Fire Authority? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources I was a member of the panel that appointed Fenella Morris KC to undertake an independent review of South Wales Fire and Rescue Service. Panel members were clear in their view that the review should include consideration of organisational culture as well as specific incidents. The comprehensive independent review was published at the beginning of the year. SWFRSCultureReviewReport.pdf (southwales-fire.gov.uk) It was wide ranging and included multiple recommendations. It also sought to identify positives as well as challenges and stated: “We have been hugely impressed by the though tfulness, warmth, intelligence, pride, and commitment of the people we have met. These characteristics, combined with the fact that some useful steps are already being taken, provide the foundation for our optimism about the future of the SWFRS.” Following the publication Deputy Minister for Social Partnership, Hannah Blythyn said she felt the Service lacked the internal capacity or capability needed to oversee its own recovery and subsequently appointed Commissioners on 6th February to deliver the report recommendations. I met with the Commissioners last week to discuss their ongoing dialogue with Local Authorities. Supplemental Councillor Franks asked how inclusive had the Council become and why was there a failure to report this devastating matter to Council at the earliest opportunity, No. The Leader in response said that she was quite often questioned about things that were well outside the Council’s remit stating that her involvement in the matter had been through the WLGA advising that there would be reports and updates available as well as the meetings of the Ministers being made publicly available. It being noted that it was Welsh Government Ministers who would be responsible for delivering the outcomes of and the implementation of the recommendations. The Leader failed to see why the Council would be reporting such matters through Cabinet. (iii) Question from Councillor Ewan Goodjohn Could the Cabinet Member provide an update on the proposed new school building for Barry’s St Richard Gwyn High School? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Education, Arts and the Welsh Language The project is progressing to plan. The Council is currently liaising with Dwr Cymru Welsh Water to prepare a robust proposal for presentation to Planning Committee this spring. Subject to approval by the Planning Committee, the Sustainable Drainage Systems Approval Body (SAB) application will be issued and all required consents should be in place by June. Cabinet approval will then be sought to progress to the procurement stage. This will enable the project to be completed on schedule, by September 2025. Any delay to receiving the necessary authorisations will impact on the project completion date. Supplemental Councillor Goodjohn enquired, following the consultation that had been held on the new building at St Richard Gwyn of the steps that were being taken to deal with the underpass which he said had notoriously been a fearful place for students especially vulnerable students and which had been highlighted as the main concern in the consultation. The Cabinet Member stated that an active travel plan was being included which would also include the possibility of different forms of transport rather than children using the underpass which she was aware had been a problem in the past. (iv) Question from Councillor N.P. Hodges In 2017, the Vale of Glamorgan Council announced that the former toilet block on Barry Island would be turned into restaurants, with more detail provided in early 2018. It is now 2024. What is the timetable for these restaurants opening? Reply from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable Places Members will be aware that the former toilet bock on Barry Island was leased (a 999 year lease) to a development company, NextColour Ltd in 2019, that company now has responsibility for the repair, maintenance and condition of the site. No. The building was leased to the developer based on a comprehensive re- development of the listed building for a complimentary Food and Beverage offers to serve the visitors to Barry Island. Unfortunately, since the lease was signed there have been several external national issues which have affected the timeline of the development, these issues appearing to be outside the control of the developer including the impacts of both Brexit and the pandemic. Furthermore, the inflationary pressures which occurred following the pandemic and the sudden hike in interest rates following the UK Government’s fiscal event of Autumn 2022 significantly impacted upon the developer’s ability to bring forward the scheme that was planned. Nevertheless, the Council remain in discussions with Next Colour regarding a proposed redevelopment scheme and how this can be facilitated and supported including through the possibility of the Cardiff Capital Regions Sites and Premises fund. The Council also continues to consider the submitted Planning and Listed Building application for the building’s re-development, that seeks permission for restaurant and coffee shop uses. Finally, in consultation with the developer, the Council erected screening panels to secure the site and limit the current impact of the former toilet block while the necessary consents are put in place for the redevelopment. The Council remains hopeful that progress can be made towards an acceptable redevelopment scheme that will secure the long-term future of a listed building. Supplemental Councillor Hodges asked what really needs to happen to make this scheme progress to create jobs and improve our local economy? The Council he said had an appalling record in enabling schemes and asked the Cabinet Member for a comment. The Cabinet Member did not agree that the Council had an appalling record advising that this was an inherited scheme which had been fraught with difficulties but she absolutely agreed about the need to progress the development, she welcomed the continued dialogue with the developers and as it was considered to be one of the jewels in the crown on the Barry Island Resort she wanted to see it developed as soon possible. (v) Question from Councillor C. Iannucci Media reports portray the proposed the Barry Marina development as either an expensive white elephant or the answer to the town’s future regeneration. What are the expected outcomes and benefits of the scheme? Reply from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable Places The Barry Making Waves Levelling Up Project is intended to provide a catalyst to open up the Waterfront to leisure uses and create a great environment for both locals and visitors to Barry. The marina has been a concept in development since the mid-2000s and the original master planning for the regeneration of the Waterfront. The nearly £20m of funding supports a package of projects over £30m No. including a new watersports centre on The Mole and the conversion of the historic Dock Offices into a space for businesses and employment. This will create the conditions for further growth and investment, facilitating a high- quality environment and the opportunity to improve local prosperity. The projects will see the regeneration of one of the final significant post-industrial brownfield sites within the Waterfront area, opening it up to the public and improving access to the water via a new marina bringing the Waterfront to life for visitors and residents alike. It will also see significant investment in the heritage and history of Barry through the refurbishment of the iconic Dock Offices for employment purposes. (vi) Question from Councillor A.M. Collins What action are the Council and Newydd Housing Association taking to reduce fly- tipping in and around the bin-store on Kingsland Crescent and in surrounding lanes? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services Officers of the Council have been in discussions with Newydd Housing Association on this matter for some time and as a result of a recent meeting, new recycling bins have recently been installed on the estate to improve recycling provision and reduce waste. Additionally, for the immediate term, Newydd has taken out a service contract with a third party service provider, to temporarily increase the frequencies of waste collections whilst education programmes for their residents are completed. The Council’s Recycling Officers are supporting Newydd throughout this process. As well as the recycling and waste measures, Newydd has agreed to purchase and install CCTV cameras to combat fly tipping and manage abuse, and the Council’s Enforcement Team will be supporting them with compliance. Supplemental Referring to complaints from residents Councillor Collins said they had advised her that they been given conflicting information about where they could put their rubbish and had been fined as a result. Cllr Collins enquired if it would be possible for a meeting to be arranged to discuss / ensure information was aligned to prevent this from happening further and any further fines being issued? The Cabinet Member said that a meeting was due to be arranged shortly with the Cabinet Member for Housing Services to discuss the issue further. The Cabinet Member also asked Councillor Collins to write to him with the details of individual resident issues in order that responses could be provided. (vii) Question from Councillor B. Loveluck-Edwards Residents across the Vale from Dyfan and the Bendricks to our rural communities have long campaigned with us to safeguard local bus routes. Can the Cabinet Member confirm that £470k has been allocated to maintain local bus routes reinforcing the Council’s commitment to public transport and project zero in the most financially challenging of times. No. Reply from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable Places I can advise, that subject to Welsh Government Ministerial sign off, bus service contracts will be awarded by the Council in order to maintain existing bus provision from the 1st April, 2024. The Council has sought to maintain its supported local bus service budget of £470k, and our officers have applied for significant additional funding from Welsh Government through the Bus Services Support Grant and the Bus Network Fund. Timetables will remain as existing in general, although there may be some minor changes in order to serve new areas or to improve service reliability and further to that I've actually received notification this afternoon which is obviously a bit too late to actually include within this response and basically that following those recent tenders by the South East Wales Regional Authorities and others throughout Wales, the Welsh Government announced the new funding for 2024/25 going forward which is obviously now called the Bus Network Fund and that will cover all services tendered because we had to retender all our services despite those significant increase in prices which was a huge challenge to us as a local Authority and other Local Authorities so we're actually in the process of formally awarding those new contracts for various services but I think what I will do to save some time tonight, and there is quite a bit of detail within that, is I'll send out a bit of a briefing note to all Members which will include then all the service numbers details so that we've all got that information. So I'll send that out over the next day or so. . (viii) Question from Councillor Dr. I.J. Johnson What progress has been made towards the County of Sanctuary status which was agreed as a goal by this Council in April last year? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources Since the Motion to Council last year a range of activity has been undertaken with regards county of sanctuary status as follows: • The Council has become a City of Sanctuary Local Authority Network member. • The Council has reached out to a range of other Local Authorities to understand their experiences and approaches in order to help shape the Council’s approach. • Membership of the Local Authority Network is the first of a series of steps to becoming a County of Sanctuary. The Council is currently developing a framework and the required action plan for progressing this work. This includes reaching out to networks and groups in the Vale of Glamorgan with lived experience and an internal sanctuary network has been established to No. collate the relevant work already undertaken / underway to support the strategy and action plan. • This phase of work is estimated to be completed in April 2024, with a view to launching in refugee week in June. • This work is referenced in the recently scrutinised draft Annual Delivery Plan which Council has considered this evening, “Progress our work as a County of Sanctuary to provide support, dignity and a welcome for current and future residents of the Vale”. • Following the development of the strategy and action plan, a panel of internal and external colleagues will consider these and make recommendations on their delivery. Once the criteria set out by City of Sanctuary have been met, Council of Sanctuary status can be awarded for a three year period. Supplemental Councillor Dr. Johnson whilst pleased to hear that work was progressing asked if a report could be taken to the appropriate committee suggesting the Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee, to explain the work undertaken and progress to date. The Leader in response said in terms of the progress that in April this year would probably be a suitable time to bring a report but she was also more than happy to update people as things went along because there were many people within the Vale that could do with Sanctuary for whatever reason and hopefully with the Council’s equality, diversity and inclusion work support for that would continue. (ix) Question from Councillor N. Marshallsea How many trees has the Council planted in the past twelve months and how many are planned in the coming financial year? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services So far this year the Council has planted 16,384 trees. These comprise, standard sized or larger trees, hedgerow saplings and whips. We currently plan to plant 8,000 – 10,000 trees in the 2024/2025 financial year, however this figure could increase as the Council’s Tree Strategy is currently out for public consultation and increased tree planting is a major principle of this Strategy. Supplemental Councillor Marshallsea asked whether the trees were native trees and what species they were. The Cabinet Member agreed to obtain the detail and provide the information to the Member in writing. No. (x) Question from Councillor H.M. Payne How many social housing properties are currently under development by the Council or Housing Association Partners and what are their expected delivery dates? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Public Sector Housing and Tenant Engagement I am pleased to advise that the Council currently has 216 units under construction at: Hayeswood Road, Barry – 53 units. Completion May 2024 Eagleswell Road, Llantwit Major – 90 units. Completion May 2024 Clos Holm View Phase 2, Barry – 31 units. Completion October 2024 Colcot Clinic, Barry – 12 units. Completion October 2024 Coldbrook Road East, Barry – 20 units. Completion March 2025 Olive Lodge, Barry – 10 units. Completion March 2025 The sites being developed by Housing Associations at the time of answering the question are as follows: Site Developer Number of Expected social rented completion units Haydock House, Barry Hafod Housing 16 Early 2024 Association Leckwith Car Sales, Hafod Housing 40 Spring 2024 Llandough Association 81-85 Holton Road, Hafod Housing 25 Spring 2025 Barry Association Gileston Road, St Athan Wales and West 18 August/September Housing Association 2024 Councillor Payne thanked the Cabinet Member for the response stating that she was happy that the Council as a collective, was building social housing to take people out of homelessness. (xi) Question from Councillor P. Drake Recent updates indicate progress in the delivery of infrastructure in the Waterfront development. What avenues are available to the Council should the developers fail to live up to their promises? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council issued Court proceedings for an injunction and the Consortium agreed a Consent Order which has now been approved by the Court. The Consent Order places legal limitations on the developers’ ability to sell and allow the occupation of No. the remaining unoccupied dwellings until such time as the Public Open Space is completed on site. If the provisions of the Consent Order are breached, then the Council can take swift recourse through the courts. As an aside myself, the Chief Executive and other senior officers have met every fortnight with the Consortium since last Autumn and will continue to do so until we are satisfied that progress is embedded. This forum is useful as it enables us to put residents’ concerns directly to the Consortium and seek assurances that progress will continue. It is time consuming but worth it. Councillor Drake, in response, advised that she would monitor the situation in the hope that the developers would deliver what they had committed to deliver. There were however, indications she said that that was indeed happening and that reports from the residents seemed to reflect that as well.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.