Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Anne Clarke, Rowan Clarke, Amanda Davis, Mary Dooley, Chris Kane, Duncan McGregor, Lisa Powell and Vicky Wapplington.

Members should declare the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and Non Statutory Interest as defined by the Members’ Code of Conduct in respect of:

a)  any business on the agenda

b)  any matters arising out of those items

and if appropriate, withdraw from the meeting at the relevant time.

To receive any announcements that the Chair of the Council may desire to lay before the meeting.

The Chair confirmed that his Civic Service had been held the previous Sunday and that it was very enjoyable.

To approve the Minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 21^st May 2025.

To approve the Minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 21^st May 2025.

Moved by Councillor Duncan Haywood and seconded by Councillor John Ritchie RESOLVED to note the minutes of the following meetings of Council as a true record:

(1)  the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 21^st May 2025; and

          (2) Annual Council held on 21^st May 2025.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 8, to allow members of the public to ask questions about the Council’s activities.  The following question was received:

(a)   Question submitted by Mr D Webb to the Portfolio Holder for Growth

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 8, Members of the Public were able to put questions about the Council’s activities.  The following question was received:

(a)    Question submitted by Mr Webb to Councillor Munro, Portfolio Holder for Growth:

“In light of the County Council’s Infrastructure Monitoring Reports and confirmation from a County Council planning officer that no SEND contributions were secured in the 2020/21 reporting year also, can the Council explain why it has not obtained any SEND contributions through planning developments in over five years and if this is a moral failure of the districts most vulnerable children?”

Councillor Munro responded using Microsoft PowerPoint which included the following information:

“The question posed by Mr Webb is a bit confusing as it specifically asks about the year 2020/2021, but then goes on to ask about the following five years and as it is framed assumes there are no further updates to the County’s infrastructure reports since the 2020/2021 he has made reference to Derbyshire County Council which is required to produce an annual Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS) under the provisionsof Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010 (as amended).

The last IFS that is available on DCC’s website is for the year 2022/2023, with superseding years also available to view. 

The IFS for 2021/2022 shows that DCC collected SEND contributions totalling £76,769.99 from only 1 of the 8 district and borough councils in the reporting period.  That being as shown next Amber Valley Council.

The IFS for 2022/2023 shows that DCC collected SEND contributions totalling £345,556.55 from only 2 of the 8 district and borough councils in this reporting period.

I can confirm that there was no SEND contributions collected specifically from Bolsover District Council in the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 periods published.

Notwithstanding this, the wider context of how, why and when SEND contributions are requested is important, as they are one of a number of S106 categories that the County Council seek from developers. DCC will only make requests for education contributions on major planning application categories for residential development, so where there is an evidential need to do so. Similarly, Bolsover DC will only consider these contributions in the planning balance when a specific request by DCC as the education authority is made 

To determine whether Bolsover District Council have met with the requests sought by DCC in relation to education and SEND the question posed we should look at all planning permissions granted in the past 4 years, rather than simply relying on the 2020/2021 or 2021/2022 IFS published by DCC.

In that context, in the 4 years inc. 2021/2022, 2022/2023, 2023/2024, and 2024/2025 there were 17 major planning applications for residential development determined by Bolsover District Council which may have generated a request from DCC for a SEND contribution.

2021/2022

1. 20/00166/FUL - DCC Ed response 14/05/2020 – no SEND contribution requested

2. 20/00185/OUT - DCC Ed response 22/06/2020 - no contributions sought

3. 20/00590/FUL – Conversion to 12 no. 1 bed flats  ...  view the full minutes text for item CL34-25/26

Council considered a report relating to the Political Balance of the Council and the Establishment of Committees which was presented by the Monitoring Officer.  The report informed Council of the Delegated Decisions (DD) relating to the Political Balance and Appointments to Committees and Advisory Groups which had been delegated to the Monitoring Officer in consultation with the group leaders at Annual Council. 

DD0239 was published on 30^th May 2025 and following a further change to the membership of the Standards Committee by the Independent Group DD0243 was published on 6^th June 2025.

Moved by Councillor Hales and seconded by Councillor Ritchie

RESOLVED that the political balance and appointments to Committees and

          Advisory Groups as detailed in the appendices of DD0239 and DD0243

          be noted.

Council considered a report presented by Councillor Peake relating to the Member Development Annual Report 2024/25 which provided details of the activities and training undertaken by members for that municipal year.

Moved by Councillor Peake and seconded by Councillor Ritchie RESOLVED that

          the Member Development Annual Report for 2024/25 be noted.

Council considered a report requesting approval for the establishment of an additional Procurement Officer which was presented by Councillor Moesby, Portfolio Holder for Resources.  The proposed increase in staffing was to ensure the team could sustain existing and increasing demands on the service but also the additional workload arising from the imposition of new statutory duties.

The Procurement Officer was previously Grade 6 which was being reviewed and it was anticipated the post would be a Grade 7 with salary range of £44,769 to £48,393 (subject to pending 2025/26 pay award).

Moved by Councillor Moesby and seconded by Councillor Munro

RESOLVED that approval be given for the addition of a Procurement Officer

          to the establishment.

Prior to consideration of this item Councillor Stevenson asked when during the meeting she could ask her questions of Portfolio Holders.  The Monitoring Officer confirmed that she would have the opportunity to ask questions when Portfolio Holders presented their reports on the agenda.  The Monitoring Officer confirmed that Members could not ask general questions of Portfolio Holders and that these had to relate to specific agenda items.

Council considered a report relating to the introduction of a Charging Schedule for Pre-application (Planning) advice presented by Councillor Munro, Portfolio Holder for Growth.  A report had been considered by Planning Committee on 16^th April 2025 and the 11^th June 2025 which included market research and service data analysis and the proposal to formalise the discretionary service of offering pre-application (planning) advice and to introduce a cost recovery fee for this.  Council was asked to endorse the recommendation of the Planning Committee to introduce the cost recovery fee for this service and the proposed charging schedule as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report.

Councillor Stevenson asked if the reserves in Bolsover District Council would be dispersed within the district for Bolsover residents prior to Local Government Reorganisation.  Councillor Munro stated that this question would be better addressed during the agenda item relating to Local Government Reorganisation as it has no bearing on the current item.

Councillor Watson stated that whilst she understood the rationale for charging for this service this had been discussed and dismissed previously by Planning Committee.  She questioned whether Bolsover District Council was in favour of growth and felt there was no major benefit other than covering some officer’s time and would not be supporting the proposal.

Councillor Munro moved and Councillor Ritchie seconded

          RESOLVED that approval be given for the introduction of a pre-application (planning) advice charging schedule / service, commencing on 1^st October 2025.

Councillor Hiney-Saunders left the meeting at this point and having previously declared their interest in the following item of business, Councillors Fritchley and Wilson also left the meeting.

Prior to the commencement of this item Councillor Munro asked that his appreciation and thanks be recorded for the visit arranged by officers from Bolsover District Council and Shirebrook Town Council.  Councillor Munro hoped that there would be more opportunities for Members who had been unable to attend from both authorities to visit the site in the future.

Consideration was given to a report presented by Councillor Munro, Portfolio Holder for Growth and the Head of Business Growth, Dragonfly Management (Bolsover) Limited (DML), relating to the Roseland Park and Crematorium proposals which sought approval for borrowing additional funds to fund the continuation of the scheme through to practical completion and an advance amount for working capital required to cover the operational costs prior to and during, initial operation.  Councillor Munro drew members attention to paragraph 2.6 and the breakdown of the additional expenditure likely to be incurred.

The Head of Business Growth, Dragonfly Management (Bolsover) Limited presented the report and summarised the key points as follows:

·       The initial investment for the development of the crematorium at Shirebrook was £9.2m funded through borrowing as approved by Council in August 2022 also delegated authority for a contingency of 5% (£460,000).

·       CDS were appointed in the early phases of the project to continue post planning permission to produce the detailed Stage 4 and 5 architectural drawings.  A RIBA Professional Services Contract was signed on 7^th March 2023 between the Council (the “Client”) and CDS.  Dragonfly Development Limited (DDL) was appointed as (the “Contractor”) under an ‘open book agreement’ and started on site on 18^th September 2023.

·       An instruction was passed by the Client to the Contractor to stop work on site in April 2024.  This was due to several significant issues which were identified and had the potential to compromise the build quality of the contractor’s delivery teams.

·       The architect’s RIBA Stage 5 pack and their performance on the project fell below the standard expected by the Council and it was decided to terminate the contract.  The contract was a RIBA Professional Services Contract 2020 for Architectural Services.  This meant that the works onsite slowed significantly with some groundworks and planting continuing but at a much slower pace.

·       Benchmark Architects and Whiteley Eaves have been appointed the contract.  After which works on site remobilised following a lengthy delay in late 2024 following the revised drawing packs being issued by  Benchmark to the Contractor.

·       Section 2 of the report detailed the different parts of the build project with the build contract just being one of those elements.  The contract with DDL was ‘open book’ which ensured the Contractor undertook a “Plan and Specification, Non-Remeasurable” procurement exercise.  However, due to the errors and omissions from the outgoing architect’s RIBA drawing pack, some construction information was not detailed and some completely omitted.  The new architects had to undertake a comprehensive review of the RIBA Stage 5 drawing pack to align works already completed on site and to produce new co-ordinated  construction drawings for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item CL39-25/26

Council considered a presentation made by the Chief Executive which provided an update relating to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) proposals and public consultation.  In summary, the information provided by the Chief Executive included:

·       the key features of the various proposals, impact of population profiles and size with potential imbalances and potential issues for the two options as well as the growth for Derby City Council.

·       a public consultation had begun and included the proposals for a Northern and separate Southern Derbyshire County Unitary as well as the various options for Amber Valley Borough Council.

·       Option ‘C’ was new with Amber Valley potentially being split along parish boundaries rather than moved as a whole into either the Southern or Northern Derbyshire Unitary but there were potential constraints with this option.

·       the Chief Executive, Leader of the Council, and Deputy Leader, Councillor Ritchie and the Interim Director of Planning, Devolution & Corporate Policy had attended a number of public consultation sessions at Shirebrook Town Hall, Clowne, South Normanton and Bolsover Contact Centres to encourage the public to engage with the process and encourage them to take part.  The consultation was available online and was due to close on 10^th August 2025.

·       Derbyshire County Council had amended their position in  relation to their original submission for a single Derbyshire County Unitary with Derby City Council remaining unchanged in the middle previously described as a donut.  At their meeting in July 2025, Derbyshire County Council amended their position to include Options A and B (as submitted by the Derbyshire Borough and District Councils) as well as a separate Option C with the split for Amber Valley Borough Council and a slice through the southern end of Derbyshire Dales.

·       A series of workstreams had commenced as Phase 2 focused on the reorganisation proposal which included county-wide officer and councillor working groups to review topics such as Day 1 Readiness, Data and Insights, Transformation and Service Design, Finance, legal/governance and communication and engagement.

·       Phase 3 would focus on the transition and preparation for Vesting Day of the new Council (once approved).

·       Latest advice notes from Government Minister McMahon included:

o   Reiteration that the 500k population was a guideline and not a hard target.

o   Emphasis that the Minister was prepared to intervene where Councils were not working together or sharing data.

o   Confirmed timeline of 1^st April 2028 (Vesting Day).

o   Government intention to issue directions to give shadow unitary authorities significant control over the final year of district and county councils making new financial commitments before Vesting Day.

·       The process and timeline for BDC was confirmed as:

o   November 2025 submission of the final proposal.

o   New Year 2026 the statutory consultation would be launched.

o   July 2026 the Ministerial decision on which proposal to implement would be made.

o   Early autumn 2026 the Structural Order would be laid.

o   Late Autumn 2026 or early 2027 the Structural Change Order would be passed.

o   6^th May 2027 elections for the new shadow unitary  ...  view the full minutes text for item CL40-25/26

The Chair formally closed the meeting.