Agenda and draft minutes

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests that relate to business on the agenda and which have not already been included in the register of interests, before any discussion takes place on the item. Unless the interest is sensitive, you must also disclose the nature of the interest. In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, you must then leave the room and must not participate in any further discussion of the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest were made by Members.

To consider the report of the Strategic Director Corporate Resources.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Bialyk, moved the recommendations set out in the report, seconded by Councillor Wright.

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources presented the report, and responded to Members questions alongside the Head of Service- Commercial Assets in the following terms:

• there would be a financial payback after three years;
• having a customer service centre was a key priority;
• a Unitary Authority would lead to an increase in numbers of staff, but they would be working in other buildings and hybrid working;
• it was not currently possible for Councillors to look around the ground floor of Senate Court, but a tour could be held in the future;
• Senate Court was significantly more fit-for-purpose than the Civic Centre and was significantly lower on greenhouse gasses;
• he would need to speak to the property team at Senate Court to know what the maintenance costs would be;
• the tenants in Phase One of the Civic Centre would not need compensation due to the nature of their tenancy agreements, excluding the Children’s Centre;
• there had not yet been any discussion with developers regarding the future of the Civic Centre;
• relevant market information for the business rental market needed to be assembled for two to four years’ time;
• the tenant needed a decision urgently to acquire alternative premises;
• this meeting was to seek approval for a budget to agree the compensation package;
• it would be challenging to bring forward the report due in November;
• Oakwood House and Belle Isle would remain;
• the tenant would be able to apply to the Court if a decision was not made quickly;
• wishes for unisex toilets would be given to the architect;
• Section 25 had been served on the tenant at the earliest opportunity to allow negotiation;
• the decision needed to be made now due to the landlord of the premises the tenant was proposing to move to;
• the debt outstanding for Senate Court was £7.7 million;
• the Civic Centre would remain useable until 2027-28 but it is likely a considerable amount of money would be spent on repairs;

The Section 151 officer, in responding to Councillor Moore’s enquiry advised that the agreement with the Government regarding the funds was not a legal one, but would check prior to finalising the funds.

During the debate, Members made the following comments:

Councillor Hughes:

• there was a lot of uncertainty around the future unitary status;
• there had not been enough of a financial case presented;
• they could not see enough evidence that this money wasn’t being used for the new council following Local Government Reorganisation (LGR);
• they felt cornered to make a decision without facts and finances; and
• they did not have enough evidence to be supportive.

Councillor Fullam:

• enquired on who had made the decision that the Guildhall was no longer feasible;
• it was not known what the next Local Authority would be and the new legacy council would have to move from the Civic Centre to Senate Court;
• had alternative options been looked at; and
• when  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.