Minutes 25 July 2024

1.

INTRODUCTION AND APOLOGIES

Introductions made and apologies noted as above. 

Chair advised he would provide an update on the civic pride initiative under the Public Realm agenda item.  He asked if in future the agenda could have lead/speaker initials against each agenda item.

Ruth suggested a separate agenda item at the end of every meeting so that any agenda items for the next meeting could be put forward.

Agenda

Agenda

2.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION

The Chair asked for a reminder to be sent to those who had not completed their Conflict of Interest Declaration Form.  He advised he had been unable to open the form and asked if this could also be recirculated.

Susan Tasker

3.

MINUTES OF LAST MEETING

The minutes were agreed as a true record.

4.

ACTIONS FROM LAST MEETING

DMIC Visuals - Shane advised he had now received the pack.  It is a large document but he would look to share. The Chair suggested we need to produce less data and more analysis, rather than having all the data.  Shane advised he would give an update on the RIBA pack and next steps.

The Chair advised as observed at the last meeting, we need a vision and outline to identify and understand the purpose and they type of occupier before we build, e.g. designers, manufacturing facilities, etc.

Cllr Hartnett advised that Dudley have just finished their digital centre. They have enhanced their offer by linking up with Warwick University, which may be something to consider to enhance our offer.  The Chair agreed and acknowledged that having a link with academia is important but we need to define what the DMIC will be and the sort of people we want to educate and train there.

Julia agreed education is important and the college would be keen to link in and be involved in those conversations as to how this might work.  We have apprentices going into the digital and manufacturing sectors.  There was general consensus to making a link with a college/university but that we need to identify what will go there.  Pete advised we did go down a lot of routes, for example, working with colleges and companies who have a big base in Redditch so that we can build on this.

Shane referred the Board to the strategic business case that was submitted to Central Government.  A lot of planning has gone into the needs of this centre.  We are reporting on a set of outputs to Central Government on this which are linked to the business case and will be monitored on those outputs.

We are currently at RIBA Stage 2 before we design the building for planning application. A lot of work has been undertaken on the use of the building and strategy on the final product and how it will be used to benefit the town. We will have a new Assistant Director joining us in a few weeks and she has been involved in some of these discussions.

The Chair asked if the original vision and the approved business case for the DMIC could be distilled into how the Government were persuaded to fund this.  Shane advised he was not sure this could be distilled without losing key details but agreed to circulate the Executive Summary. This was agreed.

Penny advised the business case is also on the Towns Deal Board website. She suggested if the Comms Team would be able to provide something to explain this which could also go on the website as a tool for communicating with the public.  Ruth advised she and Shane would take this away as an action to work with the Comms Team.

Julia advised she knew the background to the project but would struggle to explain this and agreed we need something to be able to articulate this for ourselves and to the public.

Shane

 Shane

Ruth/Shane/ Comms Team

Govin advised he was a lead for the unit for CLG and DBT and the towns funding as part of the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government and Department of Business & Trade.  The Department had given partial funding for the DMIC and it is useful to flag the essence of why funding was given.  The business case was submitted with an agreed set of objectives and Central Government allocated £8m to the project marked against a set of objectives/outputs. 

The Chair thanked Govin for this information and asked if details could be circulated of what DLUHC is going to require so that people can look at this further. Govin advised he could flag the outputs and give background for this.

Shane advised we will report back to Central Government on the outputs. These include new start ups in the town and additional office space. These 2 metrics are key and form the basis of the strategic business case.

Govin

Redditch Library

The Chair advised we were going to hold a workshop but this hasn’t happened. The Executive meeting will seek to reach a decision and there will be consequences from that.

Cllr Hartnett advised the workshop hadn’t happened due to the general election. It was intended to hold a workshop but it would be after Executive on Monday.  He advised every council meeting starts as open but there are restricted papers that would be considered in a closed meeting.

Public Realm

The Chair advised we discussed at the last meeting that nothing much had happened on the public realm works and asked for an update. Penny advised the action recorded was to check if WCC Highways had been liaised with. She advised they had but was not sure if there was a specific issue that this related to. She would give an update on the agenda how the project is progressing and was not aware of any issues.

5.

5a

PROJECTS PROGRESS UPDATE

Digital Manufacturing and Innovation Centre

As discussed above.

5b

Library Redevelopment

The Chair asked if the choice was ‘If we pursue the original scheme, it may not meet the original timescale anyway’ versus ‘Don’t demolish and arrange a consolidation of council activities around the town and then pursue multi-use of the library building thereafter’.

He was aware that the current administration was against moving the library and previous administration was in support. There was discussion at the last meeting to enable the new administration to be aware of the consequences of taking a new route.

Cllr Hartnett advised there would be a Full Council meeting after Executive on Monday. There are a series of recommendations to not move the library and demolish the building and to tell WCC we don’t want the library moved into the Town Hall.  There will be a formal vote on Monday.

Claire advised the decision that needs to be made on Monday will determine what this Board needs to think about in terms of next steps, so it is a bit premature to have that discussion now. Members will make a decision on Monday which may have a knock-on effect.  She suggested we can support the Board to hold a further meeting soon after to discuss this.

The Chair agreed that we should try and convene a short meeting of the Towns Board after Monday’s decision and decide what to do then.

Chris Bloore agreed with Claire’s comments. He had reached out to the new Secretary of State re the funding timelines and how long we have to spend the money and whether we can get an extension on the timeline for new projects, particularly as there had been changes locally.

Petro asked if Members decide on Monday that RBC doesn’t want the library to move into the Town Hall, do we then have to wait for WCC to make a decision.  Cllr Hartnett advised we own the Town Hall and we don’t want the library to move.

Claire advised in answer to that question, the towns funding was a condition of the library being able to move into the Town Hall and a continuation of the library was important. The project relies on RBC giving the library a home. Members will decide on Monday whether that home will be provided. If no, by default we won’t be able to meet the conditions of the towns funding. We would need to tell WCC as the statutory provider of the library function that the Town Hall is no longer available. WCC would then have to determine if they keep the library where it is or other.

Claire asked Chris in advance of the next meeting whether he would be able to facilitate a meeting on the timescales and changes outside of the Towns Deal Board meeting.  She asked if this could be looked at and who would be best to have those conversations.

Further meeting to be arranged

Chris Bloore MP

5c

Public Realm

As discussed above.  Penny advised she had spoken to the project manager and they will start on site on Monday. Ringway will be on site this weekend to set up the compound and storage area.

The Chair advised he had noted the planters located in the town which were very welcome in improving the environment in Church Green and beyond.  He took the opportunity to brief the Board on the civic pride initiative under this item.

We have capital monies from Central Government but if we don’t spend money to raise civic pride, all these projects will be for nought.  He had met with the Environmental Services team and would have a subsequent meeting with Simon Parry to look at what we are doing currently on grass cutting and maintaining the fabric of the town. From feedback received, there have been radical budget reductions which have led to a reduction in how often services are carried out. We have problems with lamp posts not being maintained or replaced and the gantries not being painted and weeds in the gutter.  This is about the look and feel of the town, which doesn’t compare well with others, such as Telford.

He had walked around the Redditch townscape and there are some low rent premises in the main street and there is no night time economy. He asked if there was some way to divert 1-2% of this additional funding into the town so that the Board and the Council can have a more cohesive view of the town rather than establishing new projects. We need to paint railings, clear rubbish and clear weeds.

Any highway issues have to be reported via WCC and he had raised a number of tickets in the past few days to get lamp posts replaced, the gantries painted and broken signs repairs.  These are small individual actions but will help support in raising the standard and the look and feel of the town to generate pride from the public, and the Council and Towns Board need to provide leadership on that. Cllr Hartnett advised we are a two-tier authority but agreed with this and advised we want a town to be proud of and to encourage investment.

The Chair advised he had spoken to Highways and they will only respond to individual members of the public raising a ticket and don’t provide management information to the borough.  At WCC there is a Liaison Officer who will liaise with Elected Members and a summary of works in the town could be provided.

Cllr Hartnett advised he had requested a County Liaison Group.  The Chair advised he would find out more about that and advise Cllr Hartnett.

Penny referred to the Chair’s point about money being diverted.  It may be more of a case for fellow Council officers to advise but there are a lot of restrictions on how the money through the Towns Deal Board can be spent and it might already be allocated.  The Chair advised that was his assumption and recognised the difference between capital and revenue funding.

Adrian advised that other areas carry out street audits to identify issues with litter, landscaping, etc so it is documented and suggested working with the BID, which has another 5 years, to identify some of the challenges. There are some quick wins to improve the look and feel of the town. The audits would act as evidence to seek funding. The Association of Town & City Management has a programme. 

The Chair agreed this would be worthwhile and suggested he could discuss with Cllr Hartnett and Adrian.  Cllr Hartnett advised he would take this back to the relevant officers.  The Chair advised he would be speaking to Simon Parry in the next week as to how this can be achieved.

Claire suggested an action for officers in supporting Cllr Hartnett and speak to Penny to link up with WCC Highways to try and remove some of those barriers for purpose of this group. If we can take that away and feedback at the next meeting.

Petro advised he was the new Chair of the Culture Compact. In terms of civic pride, this might be something the Compact can look at in conjunction and in collaboration with the Board and the BID. Some of the work we are doing would coincide with this. Pete advised we are waiting for confirmation as to what will happen with the cultural funding but there is some flexibility and an opportunity to link the two together.

The Chair agreed with this and whether we can include Petro in the civic pride meeting with himself, Cllr Hartnett and Adrian as mentioned earlier. Petro agreed he would be happy to do that.

Cllr Hartnett/

Brian

 Brian/

Cllr Hartnett

Claire Felton

Note

6.

Community Hub/Town Hall Update

As discussed above.

7.

Railway Station Quarter Update

Penny advised there was a request from the last meeting to be clear on milestones with the Railway Station programme.  The milestones are dependent on an agreement with Severn Trent Water on the sewer diversion. As soon as we have a programme, she would provide the key milestone dates we are working to.  WCC are continuing to progress proposals for Redditch station which we consulted on in summer 2023 but the sewer diversion would need to happen before that is done.

Following the question raised by Cllr Hartnett at the last meeting, she had contacted the West Midlands Executive who referred her to the West Midlands Railway Investment Strategy. The strategy proposes to increase the frequency of trains to 3 per hour once the Midlands Hub is completed, so looking at early 2030s and by the 2040s to have 4 trains an hour.  There are no plans to introduce an express service from Redditch to Birmingham and not aware of any previous plans for an express service.

Cllr Hartnett advised Redditch is close to Birmingham but it take 40 minutes to get there, whereas it only takes 20 minutes from Bromsgrove which has less stops.  There are obstacles but to encourage investment and ease of flow at peak times, it was a wish to have an express service that would have limited stops.  There had been tentative discussions in the past but grateful for the increased number of trains. Penny advised it was all related to capacity created by the Hub.

Chris thanked Penny for the update. He had spoken to John Hobbs about progress on the station and feel we are making progress and in a better situation. Similar to Rachel previously, he felt 2030 was too far away and it should be possible to get nearer to a couple of years away.  He had tried to raise the issues with the Transport team and to look at opening the middle platform which would require disabled access.  He would continue to push this with a view to bringing this forward. He would be meeting the trains board next week and would update the Board at the next meeting and share what he had requested in writing so the Board is aware.

Penny

Chris Bloore MP

8.

UKSPF Update

Georgina referred to the report circulated for the first quarter of this financial year. We have started spending the year 3 funding from the Government.

The main thing to raise to the Board, as we get closer to the deadline we are having more frequent meetings with project deliverers. We have identified a couple of large underspends and there is a high risk that the funding won’t be spent.  There is an underspend of £100k around the DMIC100k.  When the UKSPF funding request was put together, there was an expectation that the build would start around December 2024/January 2025 and would come within the UKSPF funding but that will not happen now. It is likely build will start in April which will be too late for UKSPF funding.

There is also a £63k underspend around the town centre lighting.  We need a bat survey to be done and the Diocese won’t give consent to do the work until the survey has been done.  We had hoped to be able to do the survey in parallel with the Diocese making a decision but we don’t know how long it will take for a decision to be made. They survey has been done and we are waiting for information from this.

The risk is that we are sitting on an underspend of about £163k on UKSPF.  We anticipated this might happen but were expecting smaller amounts.

We need further discussions with project deliverers but need to get the Board’s view on having a quick process to agree how the underspend can be spent. The current decision-making process is quite lengthy and we will run out of time to reallocate funding. She asked if the Board would be happy for the Council to lead on those decisions and for the Board to endorse.

Ruth commented that, at a high level, it is possible that there will be other UKSPF projects across the country that won’t deliver. We need to spend the money relatively quickly and have a quick decision-making process.  She suggested this could be passed back to the Council Leader in consultation with Georgina or the Leader and Chair of TIP Board.  We may have to spend the money quickly. The Chair agreed with this.

Georgina advised the projects are continuing to be delivered. Delivery on people and skills started in year 3 and we have done one quarter.  There were no concerns around delivery of outputs/outcomes but it is about the underspend.

Adrian suggested it was worth considering how we submit interest in terms of projects that might be ready for a quick decision so we don’t delay it. There might be some great ideas that have not gone through the board, so useful for the process to be known.

Pete advised with skill resources we couldn’t get all the funding and there were other projects that weren’t successful so whether there was additional support for those projects that could start quickly.

Ruth advised specific projects will have specific outcomes and outputs so it is not just a case of picking up and slotting in other projects. Georgina will guide us on this. To follow on from Adrian’s and Pete’s point, she suggested liaising with Georgina to look at projects that are deliverable within the set timetable which can be discussed with the Council Leader so there is a record of Plan B ideas.

Georgina advised we do have outputs but the scheme is flexible in terms of changes and having a series of Plan Bs. The issue might be that a potential organisation might not want to put work into submitting a bid if there is no guarantee they will receive funding.

There are processes we need to go through. One option is to extend existing programmes. We could pull together proposals over the next few weeks and into the autumn and prioritise these but happy to promote beyond the Council with the caveat that money might not be available.

The Chair agreed we need a fast track decision making process if all in agreement and to help what you think represents good ideas so that we have a ready-made plan if needed.

Georgina

9.

Communications

Amelia advised there was an action to prepare a press release on the appointment of the new Chair but this had been delayed due to pre-election restrictions.  This is now under way.

She had worked closely with Susan since the last meeting to confirm the Board’s current make-up and to update the website. Everyone who makes up the Board should have received a request to submit a summary and bio. Amelia asked the Board to send to Susan Tasker if they had not already done so.

Place Marketing – Amelia advised this was underway and things were happening.

Ruth clarified her understanding that officers attending the Board were in a supporting role so wouldn’t be completing bios.

Note

Board

10.

AOB

£5m Arts & Cultural Funding – Ruth advised since the election we have not heard if the investment plan submitted has been successful and if the £5m will be released.  She asked Chris if he would be able to follow this matter up for us.

Chris asked Ruth if she could email him with the details and he would follow up.

With regard to a further meeting after Monday’s Council meeting, Ruth advised it was possible that officers might need to obtain further information.  It was agreed officers would liaise with Cllr Hartnett around the date of a further meeting and ask Susan/Anna to set up. The Chair agreed with this.

 Ruth/Chris Bloor

Ruth/Pete C/ Cllr Hartnett/

Susan

11.

Date of Next Meeting: 19^th September 2024