To receive any apologies for absence.

Due to the recent passing of HM The Queen, those present observed a minutes silence.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor G Jones, Councillor Bhangra was attending the meeting as substitute. Councillor Hilton had also submitted his apologies, as one of the Cabinet Members invited to attend the meeting on the call in form.

Councillor Werner said that Councillor Bond would be late to the meeting.

To receive any declarations of interest.

The Chairman, Councillor Clark, said that he had previously been a member of Cabinet and had also attended meetings of the RBWM Property Company in his role as Cabinet Member for Highways and Infrastructure. He had also sat on the Maidenhead Development Management Committee when the application on St Cloud Way was considered. None of these interests were prejudicial and the Chairman confirmed that he was attending the meeting with an open mind.

Councillor Bhangra and Councillor Walters also confirmed that they had been present at the Maidenhead Development Management Committee meeting where the planning application on St Cloud Way had been considered.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 25^th July 2022.

Councillor Price said that on the performance management reports, the Panel had pointed out that they felt some of the information was not accurate. Councillor Price felt that the correct information would be supplied as an action, but this was not reflected in the minutes.

Councillor Werner agreed that this was what he thought was said at the meeting.

Mark Beeley, Democratic Services Officer, said that he was happy to look at the recording of the meeting and amend the minutes if appropriate.

ACTION – Mark Beeley to amend the minutes to accurately reflect the discussion, if appropriate.

Councillor Walters asked what the situation was on the homes bonus scheme.

Adele Taylor, Executive Director of Resources, confirmed that the council was still unaware of what would be happening with the new homes bonus scheme.

The Chairman commented on an action point for the RBWM Property Company, where the Panel had requested to be informed of who the legal advisors for the company were.

Ian Brazier-Dubber, Managing Director of RBWM Property Company, confirmed that the legal advisor was Gowling LLP, who were a nationally recognised top ten law firm.

Mark Beeley added that all updates from actions would be circulated in the actions table to Members of the Panel in advance of the next meeting in November.

Councillor Price said that a report had been considered at the last meeting which contained a number of small changes, it had been suggested that these changes could be highlighted to the Panel in future. She asked if this would be happening.

The Chairman agreed with this and reiterated the idea, which would save Panel Members time.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting held on 25^th July 2022 were approved as a true and accurate record.

1)    After the Chair opens the meeting the members who asked for the decision to be called in will be asked to explain their reasons for the request and what they feel should be reviewed;

2)    On matters of particular relevance to a particular ward, ward division Members who are not signatories to a call-in have the opportunity to make comments on the call-in at the meeting, such speeches not to exceed five minutes each. Ward Members will take no further part in the discussion or vote. Ward Members must register their request to speak by contacting the Head of Governance by 12 noon on the day prior to the relevant hearing;

3)    The relevant Cabinet Member for the portfolio (or holders if more than one is relevant) will then be invited to make any comments;

4)    The relevant Executive Director or his representative will advise the Panel on the background and context of the decision and its importance to achieving Service priorities;

5)    Panel Members will ask questions of Members and officers in attendance;

6)    The Cabinet Member(s) will be invited to make any final comments on the matter;

7)    The Panel votes on a decision.

Councillor L Jones was one of the Panel Members who had called in the decision for review. She said that officers recommendation on the Cabinet report had not been accepted and the reasons why this had not been accepted were not detailed or transparent. The decision taken by Cabinet was to sell at a loss, this was taken without considering any other options of sale. The council had an obligation to achieve best value, Councillor L Jones said that she would have preferred to see the report withdrawn at the time, with a future report containing detail of all of the options which could be taken. It was hoped that the Panel would be able to understand why the decision had been made and to refer the matter back to Cabinet for reconsideration.

Councillor Price added that a resident had spoken at the Cabinet meeting and offered another alternative, which was to convert the site into three studio apartments.

Councillor Shelim said that Cedar Tree House was important during the pandemic, however times had changed and the situation had moved on. The house was in the wrong place and there had been a number of complaints about the location, he wanted to support the decision made by Cabinet.

A public speaker, Karin Falkentoft, addressed the Panel. She lived in the property adjoining Cedar Tree House and there were a number of other residents in close proximity to the property. Karin Falkentoft supported the recommendation made by Cabinet, that the house should be sold as a family home. The original proposal which had been suggested by officers would be detrimental to local residents. She was not aware of anyone who felt that making the site into seven units was financially the correct choice. It was important to listen to local residents and businesses.

Councillor Johnson, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Opportunity, said that the option of three separate flats would be considered along with the potential conversion to a single family dwelling. This was not clear from the draft Cabinet minutes but this was what had been discussed at the meeting. Councillor Johnson was happy for the decision to go back to Cabinet for consideration and that the option for three separate flats would be a consideration. He felt that it was likely to remain as a single family dwelling but all potential sale options should be explored. The sale of Cedar Tree House was at a time of optimum market value.

Councillor Werner felt that the council was faced with the consequences of a financial mistake. The decision needed to be considered thoroughly by Cabinet and he supported the proposal made by Councillor L Jones that the matter was referred back to Cabinet for consideration. It was important that if the council needed to dispose of this asset that it was done so at optimum market value or kept within the council’s property portfolio.

Councillor Sharpe said the Panel needed to consider why Cedar  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

For discussion of the Part II appendix.

Members had no further comments on the Part II appendix.

Mark Beeley explained that the call in on St Cloud Way would be initially considered in Part I, allowing a public speaker to address the Panel and initial comments from Members to be made. The Panel would then move to Part II for the rest of the discussion.

Councillor L Jones questioned whether the sale of the St Cloud Way site needed to take place at the current time, if it applied with the council’s adopted plans and strategies and if the council was getting best value, in terms of finance and the demand for affordable housing.

A public speaker, Mr Andrew Hill, addressed the Panel. He understood that the meeting would move to Part II but private details of the site had been reported in the press. He had a number of questions for officers:

·         Was the land currently owned by the council?

·         Was the decision to put the land forward for planning permission one taken in conjunction with officers or Members of RBWM?

·         Did officers agree that for the press and public to be legitimately excluded from Part II discussions, that the answer needed to be ‘no’ to the two questions above?

·         Did the meeting contain any information which had to be disclosed under the Companies Act?

·         Officers needed to ensure that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information, Mr Hill asked for confirmation that this was the case.

Emma Duncan, Monitoring Officer and Director of Law, Strategy and Public Health, said that residents were entitled to ask questions at meetings and officers were not obliged to reveal anything which could prejudice the position of the council. She suggested that officers sought legal advice before answers were provided to Mr Hill’s questions. Part II was necessary for private discussions, irrelevant of whether some details had been leaked to the press. Emma Duncan was satisfied that the right exemption had been applied in this case.

The Chairman said that a response to the questions raised would be provided to Mr Hill after the meeting.

ACTION – Answers to Mr Hill’s questions to be provided after the meeting.

Councillor Johnson said that he was extremely disappointed that information had been leaked to the media, Part II information was confidential for a reason. An unprecedented amount of information and reports had been shared in Part I. This was the third piece of information leaked to the media, all of which was related geographically to St Cloud Way. It damaged the council and also trust in elected Members, along with the relationship the council had with businesses and organisations. Councillor Johnson had assurances from the Conservative Group that they had not leaked the information, it was disappointing that someone wanted to undermine the position of the local authority.

Councillor L Jones felt that the comments made were not needed in scrutiny. She did not feel it was appropriate to have this conversation at the meeting.

The Chairman understood the genuine concerns raised by Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

To consider passing the following resolution:-

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act."

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion took place on the grounds that they involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

1)    After the Chair opens the meeting the members who asked for the decision to be called in will be asked to explain their reasons for the request and what they feel should be reviewed;

2)    On matters of particular relevance to a particular ward, ward division Members who are not signatories to a call-in have the opportunity to make comments on the call-in at the meeting, such speeches not to exceed five minutes each. Ward Members will take no further part in the discussion or vote. Ward Members must register their request to speak by contacting the Head of Governance by 12 noon on the day prior to the relevant hearing;

3)    The relevant Cabinet Member for the portfolio (or holders if more than one is relevant) will then be invited to make any comments;

4)    The relevant Executive Director or his representative will advise the Panel on the background and context of the decision and its importance to achieving Service priorities;

5)    Panel Members will ask questions of Members and officers in attendance;

6)    The Cabinet Member(s) will be invited to make any final comments on the matter;

7)    The Panel votes on a decision.

RESOLVED: That the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel took no further action, therefore the decision could be implemented immediately.