The Minutes of the meetings of 14^th and 19^th May 2008 were taken as read and signed as correct record.

The Board was advised that a matter had arisen which required immediate attention by the Board because a decision was required before the date of the next meeting (Minute EXB16 refers), therefore pursuant to Section 100 B (4) and 100 E Local Government Act 1972, the Chairman ruled that the items be considered as a matter of urgency. 

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Corporate and Policy regarding the Annual Audit and Inspection letter prepared by the Council’s Audit Commission Relationship Manager and the District Auditor, Julian Farmer.

The letter provided an overall summary of the Audit Commission’s assessment of the Council, drawing on the findings and conclusions from the Audit of the Council and inspections that had been undertaken in the last year. It also drew from wider analysis of the Council’s performance and its improvement over the last year as measured through the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) Framework.

Mr. Farmer attended the meeting and addressed the Board on the overall summary of the Audit Commission’s assessment of the Council, focusing on the key messages set out in the letter, as detailed below:

·    the Council had continued to maintain its strong performance and had maintained its 4 star rating under the Audit Commissions CPA process with the Direction of Travel assessed as improving well during 2007;

·    the assessment identified some areas where further work was needed to bring the Council’s performance up to the standard of the best performing councils;

·    on the Council’s accounts for 2006/7 an unqualified audit opinion was issued along with an unqualified value for money conclusion; and

·    the Council continued to manage its use of resources effectively and as such was assessed as a level 3 organisation – performing well. Further scope to strengthen arrangements in several areas, particularly financial management, asset management and value for money had been noted.

Members commented on the excellent report stating that this was a credit to everyone at the Council.

The Board thanked Mr Farmer for his co-operation and hard work in his role of District auditor and wished him well in the future.

Mr Farmer extended his thanks to the Board and officers of the Council for their support.

RESOLVED: That

(1)          the annual audit and inspection letter be received; and

(2)          the annual audit and inspection letter be distributed to all Members of the Council.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Corporate and Policy which sought approval for the entering into legal commitments on the Queen’s Hall Studio including disposal of the freehold at nil consideration to Loose Music.

            At its meeting of 22 June 2006 the Executive Board Sub Committee granted an exclusivity agreement to Loose Music to enable them to put together a package to develop a music and arts education and entertainment project at Queen’s Hall Studio (Minute ES9/2006 refers).

            It was noted that the studio was quite distinct from the Queen’s Hall. Originally two separate buildings they were latterly joined by a link extension. The report related solely to the Studio and did not include either the link or the Queen’s Hall itself. The Studio was considered as a stand alone facility.

            In July 2007 the District Valuer (DV) was asked to consider the Capital Value of a long lease on the property. The DV’s opinion was that, had the building been in good order, its value would have been £238, 000 but in view of the capital investment required to put the building in good order of in excess £600, 000 it clearly had a negative value. The DV therefore recommended that the Council could consider disposing of the property for a nominal amount.

            In order to progress and secure the offer of Community Asset Grant funding, it was necessary to enter into an agreement with Loose Music by 25 April 2008 regarding the acquisition of the building. It was not possible to report this to a meeting of the Executive Board within the time available. The Chief Executive therefore, under power delegated to him under article 17.01(c) of the Constitution, and having consulted the Leader and Deputy Leader, amended the Articles of the Constitution on this occasion and in relation only to the proposal by Loose Music or any entity emerging from Loose Music to refurbish the Queen’s Hall Studio as a music studio.

This amendment was to add to 'Article 14 - Decision Making' a delegated power (as Article 14.10) which empowered him on behalf of the Council to authorise any Council officer to enter into legal commitments including disposal of freehold at nil consideration to Loose Music or any entity emerging from Loose Music in relation to Loose Music's proposal to refurbish the Queen's Hall Studio as a music studio. He thereby authorised the Strategic Director, Corporate and Policy and the Strategic Director, Environment and their subordinate officers to enter into legal commitments including disposal of the freehold of the Queen’s Hall Studio at nil consideration to Loose Music or any entity emerging from Loose Music in relation to Loose Music's proposal to refurbish the Queen's Hall Studio as a music studio ('the Proposal'). Such disposal was to be subject to claw-back provisions in the event that the land was used for purposes other than as a music studio.

The amendment to the Constitution (new 14.10) was made and this additional delegated power exercised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

            The Board received a report of the Chief Executive which informed Members of a request to change the name of Castlefields Ward to Castle Ward.

            A request had been received from the Leader and Labour Ward Councillors for the Castlefields Ward, to change the name of the Ward to ‘Castle Ward’.

            Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in the Health Act 2007 there was a provision for a Local Authority to change the name of an electoral area.

            The Council would need to pass a resolution following consultation with such persons as it considers appropriate on the proposed name. It was suggested that leaflets be sent to households in the Ward on the proposed name change and information on the issue be posted on the Council’s website.

            On completion of exercise a report would be prepared for submission to a Member Working Party, which would make a recommendation to Full Council in October 2008 who would make the final decision.

            RESOLVED: That

(1)       That Council be recommended to consult electors in the Castlefields Ward on the proposed change of name; and

(2)       A Working Party of Elected representatives be nominated to consider any representations received following the consultation.

The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Children and young People on the outcome of the recent Ofsted inspection of Adoption Services.

In August 2006, CSCI carried out an inspection of Halton’s Adoption Service. Prior to this it had been acknowledged that there were issues for the service to address and progress had already commenced on recruiting a suitable staff team, adding management capacity and developing practice.

Whilst this progress and the plans for the future were accepted as appropriate by the Inspectors, the outcome of the Inspection was that the service provided Poor outcomes.

As a result, the inspectors imposed 11 statutory requirements and made 31 recommendations. All statutory requirements were achieved within the timescales that were given and all the recommendations were worked on over the following months.

On 3^rd March 2008, prior to the Joint Area Review, Inspectors returned to Halton for a Random Inspection of the Adoption Service. The outcome of the inspection was that the overall quality rating of the service was Good. The inspection report noted that the agency had made considerable efforts to address previous issues and “the work undertaken by the agency had resulted in an improved service being provided to adopters, children, their birth parents and family”.

As a result of the inspection, there was 1 statutory requirement and 6 recommendations. The statutory requirement related to information held on the adoption service’s personnel and this was now being addressed. It was asked that the Officers be thanked for all their hard work in this field. The recommendations would be addressed over coming months.

RESOLVED: That

(1)       the contents of the report be noted; and

(2)       the Ofsted Inspection report be endorsed.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which provided an outline of the draft Primary Strategy for Change that had been developed as part of the Primary Capital Programme. 

The capital investment programme required approval by Council, however as the DCSF deadline required schools projects which would be undertaken within the first two years to be named by 16^th June 2008 the Board was asked to approve the schools programme for the purposes of the DCSF submission.  Full Council would then be asked to ratify the projects at their July meeting.

The aim of the Primary Capital Programme was to ensure primary schools play a lead role in the heart of their communities, through offering local services, providing a 21^st century learning environment particularly in ICT, development of world class standards and promoting personalisation, flexibility, diversity and choice.

            RESOLVED: That

(NB: Councillor Swain declared a personal interest in the following item due to being a Council nominated Board Member of Halton Housing Trust).

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Health and Community which sought approval to a joint funding agreement between Halton Borough Council and the Registered Social Landlords (RSL’s) operating within Halton for the provision of housing adaptations in the homes of disabled people.