Agenda and minutes

[To receive any apologies for absence]. 

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Louise Miles, Cllr Val Evans and Cllr Susan Roberts MBE.

Cllr Carol Hyatt was officially substituting for Cllr Louise Miles. 

It was advised that Cllr Udey Singh would attend the meeting but would arrive late.  

[To receive any declarations of interest]. 

There were no declarations of interest.

[To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 14 June 2022 as a correct record]. 

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 June 2022 be approved as a correct record. 

[To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2022 as a correct record.]

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2022 be approved as a correct record. 

[To consider the Performance and Budget Monitoring 2022-2023 position as reported to Cabinet on 7 September 2022].

The Director of Strategy introduced the Performance and Budget Monitoring 2022-2023 report.  The report set out the performance against the Our City: Our Plan indicators for quarter 1, 2022-2023.  Some of the indicators were the specific responsibility of the Council whereas others linked more broadly into wider systemic issues which the City were facing.  There were 61 performance indicators within the Our City: Our Plan framework.  Three Quarters of the 57 of the indicators which could be updated in quarter 1, showed improvement or sustained strong performance.  There were also some areas where performance could be improved such as youth employment and Wolves at Work 18-24.  A key part of the approach was to link performance with key financial and budget information. 

The Chief Accountant referred to section 4 of the report.  They were currently forecasting a potential overspend of £5.4 million.  This was predominately down to the proposed pay award, which was out for consultation with the Unions.  When the budget had been set earlier in the year, they had made provision for a 2% rise, whereas the proposed pay award was in excess of the forecast figure and consequently was causing a budget pressure.  There had also been additional costs due to inflation and this pressure was captured in the forecast detailed in appendix 2.  Work was ongoing to see how the Council could address the in year cost pressures.   This would include looking at underspends across the Council and reviewing budgets held corporately, which had been set aside for new initiatives.  The review meant it could lead to new initiatives being delayed or not coming to fruition.  An update to Cabinet would be provided in the Quarter 2 report to Cabinet in November.

A Panel Member remarked that the report stated that the attainment 8 score was average, she asked what the average was.  The Director of Strategy promised to send the information through to the Board. 

The Vice-Chair referred to paragraph 3.2 in the report, which used the word austerity.  He was not aware of any official austerity at the present time and so asked why the word had been used.  He also asked if some of the reserves the Council held, amounting to £70 million could be allocated to areas which were in need of more resource.  The Chief Accountant responded that the £13.7 million in the General Reserves Budget was about 5% of the net budget, which was considered to be good practice.  The other reserves were going to be considered by the Specific Reserves Scrutiny Working Group and so Members would have an opportunity to make recommendations during the course of that meeting.   

A Panel Member commented that paragraph 3.78 of the main report referred to a recent study naming Wolverhampton as one of the top three places in the country to launch a new business.  She asked when the study was undertaken and what metrics the report was based on.   She asked about the establishment of the new businesses support programme which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

[To consider the latest Forward Plan of Key Decisions].

The Vice-Chair suggested that the Strategic Asset Plan coming before Cabinet in January 2023 could be an item for pre-decision scrutiny.  In addition, he asked for it to be considered if the Housing Asset Management Strategy could be scrutinised by the Residents, Housing and Scrutiny Panel before it went to Cabinet in February 2023.  He asked about the plans for the Black Country Plan which was no longer on the agenda for the forthcoming Cabinet Meeting, which he assumed was due to Dudley pulling out.  He commented that the plan had the UK Shared Prosperity fund scheduled to come to the Cabinet Resources Panel in the following week, but it was not listed on the agenda for that meeting.  He asked for clarification on the Leisure PFI Contract which had been on the forward plan but was no longer listed. 

The Chief Operating Officer responded that there was a report due to come to the Resources and Equalities Scrutiny Panel in December on Strategic Assets and so he would ensure that information on the Strategic Asset Plan formed part of the item.  A report updating the Council’s position on the Black Country Plan would be coming to Cabinet in the near future.  Dudley had signalled their intent to withdraw and it would be going to their Cabinet meeting for the official decision.   The Leisure PFI contract had been on the forward plan but there was a delay with obtaining approval from the Treasury.  It would be added back onto the forward plan as soon as possible.    

The Director of Strategy confirmed that the UK Shared Prosperity Fund item was now intended to come to Cabinet Resources Panel in November due to the WMCA not considering the item until October. 

There was a discussion about the Black Country Plan.  The Chief Operating Officer confirmed that the public hearing for Tong had been set as the 17 January 2023.  Members would be kept informed about the process. 

[To consider the Scrutiny Work Programme]. 

The Vice-Chair asked for the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Residents, Housing and Communities Scrutiny Panel to consider bringing the item on trees scheduled for the February 2023 meeting of the Panel to be brought forward to the November meeting. 

[To consider an item on City Centre Regeneration / Civic Halls]. 

[The public Cabinet Report titled “Amendment to Capital Programme” is attached.  A presentation will be given on the evening covering the subject area of City Centre Regeneration / Civic Halls]. 

Cabinet did make the following decisions on 7 September 2022 on the Amendment to Capital Programme item:-

1.    That the virement from the Capital Corporate Provision for Future  Programmes to the Civic Halls Refurbishment programme as outlined in the report be approved. 

2.    That the use of the Covid contingency for Civic Halls Refurbishment for general project purposes be approved.

 3.   That the Council be authorised to enter into a Deed of Variation with  AEG Presents to incorporate the additional works outlined in the report.

The Cabinet Member for Inclusive City Economy introduced the item on City Centre Regeneration / Civic Halls.  He was thrilled that the Civic Halls would soon be open to the public again with a world class operator in AEG. 

The Director of Regeneration stated that the Civic Halls had been built in 1938 and had been listed by the Secretary of State in 1992 on the advice of English Heritage.  The Council had a legal obligation to preserve the building.  It was vital to the City’s cultural economy.  It was an economic anchor and formed part of the Council’s Investment Prospectus.  The Investment Prospectus was commercially led, originally undertaken by CBRE in 2017 and updated in 2019.  ARUP had started work in 2022 to provide an independent commercial viewpoint of the opportunity areas within the City.  Handing over the Civic Halls to AEG to commercially run was fundamental to delivering the economic ambitions of the City and securing future investment.   He referred to a number of recent successfully delivered regeneration projects within the City such as the i9, i10 and art gallery refurbishment. 

The Director of Regeneration detailed the timetable of the Civic Halls refurbishment.  An initial light touch programme had commenced in March 2014.  The improvement project had began with the appointment of design and cost consultants Jacobs to produce design scope for a light touch refurbishment.  Their focus was on designing additional seating capacity, upgrading electrical and mechanical systems, asbestos removal, refreshed bars and improve accessibility.  In June 2015 Gleeds had been appointed as Project Managers to deliver the works.   It had been the intention to carry out works whilst the building was still operational and so it was agreed there would be periodic closures to allow the work to be undertaken.   In December 2015 the Civic Halls closed for phase one asbestos and electrical / mechanical works.  In July 2016, Cabinet Resources Panel agreed to appoint Shaylor to undertake light touch refurbishment.  In October 2016 the Halls reopened for 140 events including the Grand Slam of Darts. 

The Director of Regeneration stated that in January 2017, the Halls closed for phase two light refurbishment works.  It had been at this point where there was unforeseen asbestos which had to be removed as well as counter terrorism works due to recent events in 2017.  This led to further design changes and a full review of the project.  In October 2017, the Civic Halls reopened and 59 shows were put on before closing again in January 2018 for major works and since this time it had remained shut. 

The Director of Regeneration commented that a key date in the timeline was in January 2018. This was when Cabinet Resources Panel agreed a totally new project to commence for a full comprehensive restoration via a design and build contract with Shaylor Group.  In June 2018 the lessons learnt report was undertaken.  Management action and recommendations were implemented and Jacob and Gleebs were removed from the project.  In January 2019 new  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.