Issue - meetings

To consider the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision – Major Projects).

RESOLVED that the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision - Major Projects) be approved and adopted

Councillor Pavitt left the meeting at 8.13pm.

Councillor Armstrong introduced the report on the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision – Major Projects). He said Uttlesford had been starved of funding for sports facilities during the past decade  and the Policy would set out how this process would work.

Councillor Oliver, Chair of the Governance, Audit and Performance Committee, said that whilst the Committee had endorsed the Policy for adoption, it had done so subject to a number of specific concerns. He said a number of amendments should be made to improve the Policy; firstly, to remove the requirement that sport grants be fully spent within the same year as they were allocated; secondly, the Policy also stipulated that an organisation could not receive a sports grant if it had received any other grant from the Council, clarity was required as to whether this included grants from the Member Ward Initiative Fund. Thirdly, clarification was required as to whether there were any time restrictions in terms of an organisation applying for grants year on year. He said the Committee had expressed disquiet that this year’s grant appeared to have already been decided as per item 13 on the agenda. He also asked that if policies were brought to the GAP Committee in future, that the relevant Cabinet Member attend the meeting to present the policy.

Councillor Hargreaves thanked Councillor Oliver for his comments. He responded to the point regarding spending the grant within the same year it had been allocated. He said it was common practice to have such conditions within a grants policy but it would be sensible to look at this to make it less “draconian”. In regard to the comment that this year’s grant had already been allocated, he said there had been a longstanding agreement, made in principle by the previous Administration, and much work had been put in by the organisers; without the Council’s support, the project would not have the necessary funding to continue.

Councillor Armstrong said he had been talking to other clubs and organisations across the district, and the process was being opened up to all localities.

Councillor Hargreaves said there was a prohibition regarding granting the same organisation two separate grants.

Councillor Day said it would be conducive to have a universal grants policy that applied to all grant processes across the Council.

Councillor Hargreaves agreed and said the entire process would be looked at.

The Chief Executive advised Cabinet that the final wording be delegated to the Director – Public Services and Councillor Armstrong, in order to pick up the amendments suggested by the GAP Committee. She added that Members were completely unfettered in terms of determining the next item.

Councillor Armstrong proposed; Councillor Day duly seconded. The proposal was carried unanimously.

             RESOLVED that:

i. the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision - Major Projects) be approved and adopted in principle;

ii. the Director of Public Services, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Sports, Leisure, Education and the Arts, be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12

To consider the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision – Major Projects).

The Assistant Director – Housing, Health and Communities gave a summary of the report, which detailed the Grant Allocation Policy (Sports Provision – Major Projects) for approval and adoption.

Councillor Barker said that she would have expected the responsible Cabinet Member to have presented the item.

Various Members commented on the proposed Grant Allocation Policy that was due to be submitted to Cabinet on 9 February 2021. The main points were as follows:

·         The Committee believed the requirement for grants to be “fully spent within the year for which they are allocated” was unrealistic, given the likely size of some of these projects. If the intention was that recipients will be allowed to roll forward their grant into the following year, this did need to be explicitly stated in the policy.

·         The Policy stipulated that a recipient cannot have received a grant from the Council for the same project. Did this include grants given by Councillors under the Ward Member Initiative Grant scheme?

·         Could the same organisation apply in subsequent years or would there be restrictions on this – for example only every other year or once every three years? If there was to be a restriction on how frequently a club could apply, this needed to be stated in the policy.

·         Could a line be added to the policy stating that all grants are awarded by the Council “in good faith” to cover the Council for any unseen eventuality?

Some members of the committee expressed disquiet that they were being asked to recommend approval of the policy when it was clear that it had already been decided who was to receive the first grant. The point was made that the Council would be launching a grant scheme and could potentially have between 15 and 20 clubs making applications for it when it has already been decided who was to receive it. Members were concerned at the apparent lack of transparency.

The Director - Finance and Corporate Services said that the matter had been brought to the Committee for governance reasons in that any comments made would be forwarded onto Cabinet. He said that this was an opportunity for extra controls to be added in and said that a paper would be taken to Cabinet that presented views expressed by the Committee. He said that no decision was being taken relating to allocating and spending grant monies but that the decision from the Committee was in respect of procedures and policies.

The Assistant Director - Housing Health and Communities said that smaller grants would fall under different criteria. She said that the document could be considered to be a living document that could be periodically reviewed. She also confirmed that the policy in respect of terms and conditions would have input from legal officers.

The Chair said that he would take a paper forward to Cabinet that outlined the views of the Committee.

Councillor Barker said that she would be abstaining from voting on the recommendation on the basis that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7