Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed the new members of this Committee; Councillors M Cook and A Cooper.

There were no apologies for absence.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 6 September 2022 were approved as a correct record.

(Moved by Councillor D Cook and seconded by Councillor A Cooper)

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chair reported that there were no further items to report which were not otherwise covered under later agenda items.

None at this time.

The Chair reported that at Full Council on 27^th September 2022 a motion was moved and carried as follows:

That the handling of communications to residents is brought to corporate scrutiny at the first available meeting and specifically how we handle communications to leaseholders. This should include looking at how leaseholders are made aware of their responsibility for payment for works required by Tamworth Borough Council as freeholder of their properties and their right to influence the Councils decisions, using the Gillway cases we’ve heard of tonight as our case study.

As this was the first available meeting following that Full Council meeting, the Chair invited members to raise any suggestions on how to take this matter forward, and following debate the Committee considered that it would be appropriate to form a working group of members to look at this matter.  During debate members highlighted the importance of:

1.    Analysing what had happened

2.    Looking into the language of the communications issued

3.    Working quickly and thoroughly.

It was agreed that the following members would form the working group which would report back to a future meeting of this Committee:

Councillor Sheree Peaple

Councillor Daniel Cook

Councillor Simon Goodall

Councillor Michelle Cook

Councillor Chris Cooke

Councillor John Harper

(Report of the Portfolio Holder for Skills, Planning, Economy & Waste)

Councillor Doyle introduced the report which provided Corporate Scrutiny Committee with an update on the proposed governance for the Gungate Regeneration programme and an early draft of the proposed terms of reference for any programme governance board prior to consideration by Cabinet.

The Head of Economic Development and Regeneration provided a brief overview of the proposals which were designed to reflect the governance arrangements in place for the Future High Street Fund project.  Feedback from the Committee was sought on the proposed arrangements prior to Cabinet consideration and decision.

The Committee sought clarification on:

1.    the proposed membership of the Programme Board and whether there were any proposals to include members of the Opposition on that.

2.    the proposed delegated authority levels set out in the draft Terms of Reference and how these differed from the arrangements in place for the Future High Street Fund.

The Committee RESOLVED to recommend to Cabinet that the Programme Board had a member of the Opposition on it (such member to be agreed by the two leaders of the opposition groups).

(Moved by Councillor D Cook and seconded by Councillor S Peaple)

The Committee RESOLVED that:

1.    it had reviewed and considered the draft terms of reference for the Gungate Regeneration programme

2.    it had made any comments and recommendations on how the draft terms of reference might be amended or changed prior to submission to Cabinet for approval.

(Moved by Councillor T Jay and seconded by Councillor M Cook)

The Committee thanked the Portfolio Holder and Officer for their attendance. 

(To receive a verbal update from the Head of Economic Development and Regeneration)

The Chair reminded members that a written report had been received by this Committee at its meeting in August and following that had requested that the Head of Economic Development and Regeneration attend a future meeting to respond to questions from the Committee.

The Head of Economic Development reported that the Tamworth Street Market was put out to tender in early 2021, and the contract was awarded for a five year term in June 2021 to LSD Promotions and since then LSD had made a number of changes to grow and change the market to attract a wider demographic to the market.

Clarifications were sought on the following areas:

1.    Whether LSD Promotions were meeting the broader contractual obligations, for example to provide events, where it was reported that there were some areas where performance needed to be examined in more detail, however there were areas where performance was going well, for example, in terms of food festivals delivered.

2.    Future changes to the town centre and the utilisation of St Editha’s Square for market trading and whether there would be more space for the market following Middle Entry redevelopment.  In respect of which the Head of Economic Development understood that future plans for St Editha’s could facilitate more market stalls, as well as some space near Middle Entry.

3.    How and when the contract would be reviewed where the Head of Economic Development reported that there was continuous review following the start of the new contract in summer 2021 and would expect to see a strong narrative within 18 months to two years.

4.    How were the three monthly meetings with the contractor progressing and whether these were fruitful, where the Officer responded that these had helped the Council’s understanding of the market and improved relationships with the market and the market operator.

5.    Whether there was planned to be any review of the street market strategy which had been developed pre-COVID, followed by the letting of the market operator contract during COVID, if there was considered to be a risk that the strategy did not reflect the current post-COVID position? The Head of Economic Development reported that review was always important and as developments within the town continued this could become clearer.

6.    Whether the removal of the canopy was expected to affect the market footfall, in particular at times of bad weather. It was reported that the removal of the canopy itself was not expected to impact the footfall in the market, given it was an outdoor street market.  All market traders were provided with individual covers for their stalls.

7.    Whether there were any plans to include performance art or music or other imaginative ideas as part of the market offering; both during events and more generally to help attract more people into the town.  It was noted that this was an area which the Head of Economic Regeneration could raise with the market operator.

RESOLVED that the Committee recommend to Cabinet that Cabinet instigate a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

(Discussion item – link to Forward Plan is attached)

Browse plans - Cabinet, 2022 :: Tamworth Borough Council

The Committee considered the Forward Plan and noted that the Health & Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee’s work plan included an item related to the Homelessness Strategic Update which was due for consideration at Cabinet on 1 December 2022.

The Committee requested that the Regulation Social Housing for the Council’s own stock be brought to this Committee and accordingly agreed to add it to this Committee’s work plan.

To provide any update on any working group

The Committee agreed that the working group to Review the Quarterly Performance Report be updated as follows:

Councillor T Jay

Councillor D Cook

Councillor C Cooke

Councillor A Cooper

(Discussion item)

The Committee agreed to consider the Action Log under this item going forwards.

The Committee updated the Work Plan as set out below:

Corporate Scrutiny Work Plan