Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday, 9th June, 2026 7.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber - District Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth, SG6 3JF. View directions

Contact: Email: ScrutinyOfficer@north-herts.gov.uk 01462 474655

Media

Items
No.	Item
1.	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Members are required to notify any substitutions by midday on the day of the meeting. Late substitutions will not be accepted and Members attending as a substitute without having given the due notice will not be able to take part in the meeting. Decision: There were no apologies for absence received. Minutes: Audio recording – 01 minutes 56 seconds There were no apologies for absence received.
2.	MINUTES - 24 MARCH 2026 PDF 310 KB To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 24 March 2026. Decision: *RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 24 March 2026 were approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chair. Minutes: Audio recording – 02 minutes 07 seconds Councillor Jon Clayden, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Ralph Muncer seconded and, following a vote, it was: RESOLVED:*That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 24 March 2026 were approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chair.
3.	NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency. The Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered. Decision: There was no other business notified. Minutes: Audio recording – 03 minutes 46 seconds There was no other business notified.
4.	CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chair of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item. Members declaring a Declarable Interest, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote. Decision: (1) The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded. (2) The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question. (3) The Chair advised that for the purposes of clarification clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution does not apply to this meeting. (4) The Chair reminded Members of the adopted North Herts Scrutiny Charter and the need to ensure that the meeting was conducted with independence, initiative and integrity. The full Charter was available to Members via the Scrutiny Intranet pages. Minutes: Audio recording – 03 minutes 51 seconds (1) The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded. (2) The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question. (3) The Chair advised that for the purposes of clarification clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution does not apply to this meeting. (4) The Chair reminded Members of the adopted North Herts Scrutiny Charter and the need to ensure that the meeting was conducted with independence, initiative and integrity. The full Charter was available to Members via the Scrutiny Intranet pages.
5.	PUBLIC PARTICIPATION To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public. Decision: There was no public participation. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 01 seconds There was no public participation at this meeting.
6.	URGENT AND GENERAL EXCEPTION ITEMS The Chair to report on any urgent or general exception items which required their agreement. At the time of printing the agenda, the Chair had not agreed any urgent or general exception items. Decision: The Chair noted one urgent item in relation to the Churchgate Regeneration Project – Update & Next Steps. The Chair provided details for its urgency and advised that the full Urgency Notice for this item had been published on the Council website. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 06 seconds The Chair noted one urgent item in relation to the Churchgate Regeneration Project – Update & Next Steps. The Chair provided details for its urgency and advised that the full Urgency Notices for both items had been published on the Council website.
7.	CALLED-IN ITEMS To consider any matters referred to the Committee for a decision in relation to a call-in of decision. At the time of printing the agenda, no items of business had been called-in. Decision: There were no called-in items. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 48 seconds There had been no called-in items.
8.	MEMBERS' QUESTIONS To receive and respond to any questions from Members either set out in the agenda or tabled at the meeting. Decision: No questions had been submitted by Members. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 53 seconds No questions had been submitted by Members.
9.	INFORMATION NOTE: FULL YEAR PERFORMANCE UPDATE ON 3C'S 25/26 PDF 134 KB INFORMATION NOTE OF THE CUSTOMER & DIGITAL SERVICES MANAGER This information note is to provide an update on the full year (25/26) performance regarding the Comments, Compliments and Complaints (3C’s) for the Council and the contractors that provide services on the Council’s behalf. This briefing note accompanies the 3C’s dashboard at Appendix A, and the breakdown of 3C’s by service and type at Appendix B. Additional documents: Appendix A 3C's 25/26 , item 9. PDF 176 KB Appendix B 3C's 25/26 , item 9. PDF 230 KB Decision: Councillor Sean Nolan, as Executive Member for Customers, presented the Information Note entitled ‘Full Year Update on Comments, Compliments and Complaints (3C’s) 25/26’, following which Members asked questions. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 58 seconds Councillor Sean Nolan, as Executive Member for Customers, presented the Information Note entitled ‘Full Year Update on Comments, Compliments and Complaints (3C’s) 25/26’ and advised that: · Overall comments had decreased compared to the previous year. · Complaints received by the Council and their contractors and details of this were shown at paragraphs 3.5 – 3.7 in the information note. · The percentage of interactions resulting in a complaint was below 1%. · 82% of stage 2 complaints had been resolved within 10 days, which met the 80% target. · Only 15 stage 2 complaints had been deemed as justified, and they had been related to waste. · Leisure Centre comments, compliments and complaints had dropped 50% compared to the previous year, and had returned to a consistent level since the contract change. · The Local Government Ombudsman had received 6 complaints over the year as detailed at paragraph 3.12, but none of these had been upheld. · The Council and their contractors had received 202 compliments as seen in Appendix B to the report. The following Members asked questions: · Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason · Councillor Claire Winchester · Councillor Ralph Muncer · Councillor Elizabeth Dennis · Councillor Paul Ward · Councillor Martin Prescott · Councillor Sadie Billing In response to questions, the Customer and Digital Services Manager advised that: · Justified complaints had been higher on the year due to the waste contract change, and staffing issues in the Waste Team around that time. · Problems experienced with key staff leaving the Waste Team had been resolved. · The leisure contractor followed timescales used by the Council for complaints, and they provided their complaint data to the Council at the end of each period. · Auditing on complaint data from the leisure contractor was not currently done, but this could be raised with the Leisure Team to see if it could be implemented. · Baseline complaint data had been provided by the previous waste contractor before the customer service element of the contract had been transferred to the Council. · Contacts were monitored both day-to-day and monthly so peaks and troughs could be identified. · Since the garden waste resubscription period and the waste contract change, complaints had dropped to a stable level. · Complaints and service requests were distinguished appropriately and captured well by Customer Service Centre (CSC) staff, but data would be provided on this if it was available. · A drop in complaints received by the waste contractor since the contract change had occurred as complaints now came directly to the Council, unlike the last contract. · Most complaints were still dealt with by the leisure centre operators as seen in Appendix B to the report. · Figures related to waste indicated that they were at a normal level currently. · AI had been deployed on CSC telephone lines to answer basic enquiries, but officers were available to handle more complex enquiries and complaints. · There were no plans to replace CSC officers with AI as it was a supporting tool. · Appendix B to the report detailed the number of compliments, but they would be happy to ... view the full minutes text for item 9.
10.	EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC To consider passing the following resolution: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). Decision: *RESOLVED:* That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). Minutes: Audio recording – 25 minutes 06 minutes Councillor Jon Clayden proposed and Councillor Claire Winchester seconded and, following a vote, it was: *RESOLVED:* That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended).
11.	CHURCHGATE REGENERATION PROJECT UPDATE & NEXT STEPS - PART 2 View the reasons why item 11. is restricted View the background to item 11. View the decision for item 11. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – ENTERPRISE To provide an update on the project progress so far, and report on suggested next steps and milestones in preparation for the Cabinet decision in June and Full Council decision in July. Decision: Details of the decision taken on this item are restricted due to the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of Section 200A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended). Minutes: N.B. This item was considered in restriction session and therefore no recording was available. Details of minutes taken on this item are restricted due to the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of Section 200A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).
12.	CHURCHGATE REGENERATION PROJECT UPDATE & NEXT STEPS - PART 1 PDF 151 KB View the background to item 12. View the decision for item 12. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – ENTERPRISE To provide an update on the project progress so far, and report on suggested next steps and milestones in preparation for the Cabinet decision in June and Full Council decision in July. Additional documents: Churchgate Regeneration Project & Next Steps Part 1 - Updated , item 12. PDF 158 KB Decision: *RESOLVED:* That the recommendation to Full Council and Cabinet was noted, and that the Overview & Scrutiny Committee also noted the provided update/next steps of the project. *RECOMMENDED TO CABINET:* That Cabinet recommends that Council approves the allocation of additional funds, referencing the Part 2 report. *REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:* To ensure that the Overview & Scrutiny Committee are content with the decisions being put forward to Cabinet on 16 June 2026 and to Full Council on 16 July 2026. This report provides an overview of the recent work completed and details how the project team and Project Board propose to move forward – providing the Committee with an opportunity to ask any further details. Minutes: Audio recording – 01 hours 03 minutes 38 seconds Councillor Val Bryant, as Leader of the Council, presented the report entitled ‘Churchgate Regeneration Project Update & Next Steps – Part 1 and advised that: · Since the consideration of the project at a Full Council meeting in July 2025, they had worked to test the most critical issues of the site such as parking, public realm, the future of the market, governance and long-term sustainability of the town centre. · The Council was in a stronger position than it was 12 months ago as there was a strong technical and financial evidence base, and a clearer understanding of the site constraints, viability and delivery challenges, market appetite and delivery expectations. · Soft market engagement recently undertaken had confirmed strong confidence in Hitchin as an attractive town centre regeneration opportunity with long-term potential. · It was a finely balanced scheme, which required detailed feasibility work and delivery planning, and a proportionate approach to risk before any delivery route was chosen. · The Council was seeking to appoint specialists with regeneration expertise to work alongside the project team and take it from ambition and planning to delivery and implementation. · A phased approach would ensure that investment, funding and risk remained proportionate to uncertainty at each stage of the project and reflect the scale and complexity of the opportunity and feedback received from the soft market engagement. · This would ensure that the project would progress in a measured way by maintaining strategic oversight and decision-making control and reduce uncertainty before any long-term partnership was entered into. · The recommendations would support the ambition to deliver a viable, high-quality regeneration scheme to support the sustainability and vitality of Hitchin town centre. The Chair advised that an updated version of this report had been published as a supplementary document. The following Members asked questions: · Councillor Claire Winchester · Councillor Ralph Muncer · Councillor David Chalmers · Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason · Councillor Elizabeth Dennis In response to questions, the Churchgate Project Manager advised that: · Viability testing would not decrease the quality or delivery of the project or affordable housing as the regeneration aimed to produce a high-quality mixed-use development that celebrated the market, public realm and heritage of the area. · The additional funds would allow testing of design quality, viability, and deliverability together rather than separately, while allowing the Council to have strategic oversight over quality control. In response to questions, the Chief Executive advised that: · The Secretary of State would place restrictions on the financial decision-making ability of the Council once a shadow authority was created, which would mean signoff from the shadow authority being required for financial decisions over a certain threshold and the potential need for multiple signoffs on this project. · If they focused on delivering a viable scheme that made sense to the Council, it should also make sense to a shadow authority. · However, they could not speak on behalf of a shadow authority that did not yet exist and whose purpose would be to oversee the preparation of the unitary authorities. ... view the full minutes text for item 12.
13.	LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANISATION FUNDING PDF 164 KB View the background to item 13. View the decision for item 13. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – RESOURCES To seek agreement on how the LGR funding will be allocated, including decision making processes. Decision: RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: (1) That Cabinet approve that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to county-wide costs. Any contribution will be based on a fair share from each Council and can be approved by the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Executive Member for Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation and Executive Member for Resources. (2) That Cabinet approve that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to additional staffing costs, noting that £450k has already been allocated. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Executive Member for Resources, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and political Group Leaders, except where the Constitution already requires different approval processes. (3) That Cabinet approve that up to £200k of the available funding can be spent on additional training costs. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources. (4) That any spend is subject to a cap of £1 million in 2026/27 and £2 million overall. *REASON FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:* This is intended to provide a practical framework for agreeing LGR costs. It aims to allow timely reactions in what will need to be a fast-moving project. Minutes: Audio recording – 01 hours 46 minutes 22 seconds Councillor Ian Albert, as Executive Member for Resources, presented the report entitled ‘Funding for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR)’ and advised that: · This report was seeking agreement on how the LGR reserve for the next two financial years would be allocated, and the decision making and reporting mechanisms for this. · Spending on LGR could be put into three categories, which were county-wide costs, additional staffing costs arising from LGR related work and staff training costs. · £1 million would be allocated to county-wide costs, with any contribution to this being a fair share contributed by each council, and this would be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with executive members. · Up to £200K would be spent on staff training costs, which would be hugely important in the context of LGR. · The recent delegated decision allocated £450K of the LGR funding to four full-time, two-year, fixed-term posts in HR and IT to address workload pressures. · However, recruitment was ongoing for these posts, and they would not necessarily need to spend the full allocation. · Delegated decisions were likely to be published for spending on staff backfill and county-wide costs, but may not be needed for the learning and development allocations as these transactions would be low value and allocated in tranches, but they would be monitored in the quarterly budget reports. · Proposals for spending would go the Leadership Team for review and prioritisation in the context of the available budget. · Significant officer time spent on LGR related work would continue. · Centralised spending would be easier to compartmentalize through workstream leads and project plans. · Funding for the LGR Reserve was fixed and they might need to reevaluate the allocation as part of the budget setting next year, but currently it was robust. · Points raised about managing funds effectively on large projects such as LGR would be taken onboard. · There would be continued opportunities for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Finance, Audit and Risk Committee to review spending on LGR. The following Members asked questions: · Councillor Claire Winchester · Councillor Paul Ward · Councillor Ralph Muncer · Councillor Jon Clayden · Councillor Sadie Billing In response to questions, the Director – Resources advised that: · The £200K for additional staff training costs had been set after conversations with the Learning and Development Manager, and most costs had been absorbed within existing budgets so far, meaning it was a realistic figure. · More spending on new positions would not take place soon as the immediate workload pressures had been addressed. · Future recruitment would occur as LGR related work grew more intense. · If additional staff were needed, there would be a need to make timely decisions, and the benefit of wider consultation on spending would have to be considered. · Risk from potential redundancy costs following LGR due to appointing additional staff was a factor, but the risk of not appointing additional staff was even greater. · It was speculated that additional staff might be needed beyond LGR. · The county-wide costs went towards a central ... view the full minutes text for item 13.
14.	ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 2025/26 PDF 116 KB View the background to item 14. View the decision for item 14. REPORT OF THE CHAIR OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 2025/26 To consider the annual report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the 2025/2026 Civic Year. Additional documents: Appendix A Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025-2026 , item 14. PDF 343 KB Decision: *RESOLVED:* That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered and provided comments on the draft Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26, attached as Appendix 1, prior to consideration by Full Council. *RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:* That the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26, as attached at Appendix 1, be noted. *REASON FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:* To enable the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider and comment on the report of the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the work of the Committee in the 2025/26 Civic Year prior to consideration by Full Council. Minutes: Audio recording – 02 hours 18 minutes 47 seconds Councillor Claire Winchster, as the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26, presented the report entitled ‘Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26’ and advised that: · The Committee had examined 30 items and made 26 recommendations to Cabinet. · It was recognised that the Committee had worked to improve and refine decisions rather than rehash them. · They were grateful for the diligent work of Members, including the additional commitment given by Members of the S106 Task and Finish Group. · Time had been taken to reflect on the work they had been undertaken to ensure an appreciation for cooperative and transparent working that had focused on building mutually respectful relationships with Members, officers and portfolio holders. · There would be a lot for the Committee to consider with the coming of unitary authorities, and luck was wished to the new Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. · Members and officers were thanked for the support they had given over the last year and for the opportunity given. Councillor Jon Clayden proposed the recommendations in the report, and this was seconded by Councillor Ralph Muncer. Councillor Ralph Muncer put on record his thanks to Councillor Winchester for her time as the Chair of the Committee and for the support she had provided to the S106 Task and Finish Group. He additionally thanked Members, officers and Executive Members for their support over the past year. Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason put on record his thanks Councillor Winchester and highlighted the effectiveness of cross-party scrutiny within the S106 Task and Finish Group. The Chair put on record his thanks to Councillor Winchester for her work as the Chair of the Committee last year and for the collaborative relationship they had built. He also put on record his thanks to the Scrutiny Officer and Councillor Ralph Muncer as the Chair of the S106 Task and Finish Group. Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was: *RESOLVED:* That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered and provided comments on the draft Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26, attached as Appendix 1, prior to consideration by Full Council. *RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:* That the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26, as attached at Appendix 1, be noted. *REASON FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:* To enable the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider and comment on the report of the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the work of the Committee in the 2025/26 Civic Year prior to consideration by Full Council.
15.	OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME 2026/27 PDF 126 KB View the background to item 15. View the decision for item 15. REPORT OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER This report highlights items scheduled in the work programme of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the 2026-27 Civic Year. It also includes items that have not yet been assigned to a specific meeting of the Committee. Additional documents: Appendix 1 – Work Programme of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2026-2027 , item 15. PDF 22 KB Appendix 2 - FORWARD PLAN - 15 MAY 2026 , item 15. PDF 36 KB Appendix 3 – Overview and Scrutiny Decisions and Monitoring Log , item 15. PDF 61 KB Decision: RESOLVED: (1) That the Committee prioritised topics for inclusion in the Work Programme attached as Appendix 1 and, where appropriate, determined the high-level form and timing of scrutiny input. (2) That the Committee, having considered the most recent iteration of the Forward Plan, as attached at Appendix 2, suggested a list of items to be considered at its meetings in the coming civic year. (3) That the Committee, noted the Decisions and Monitoring log, as attached at Appendix 3. REASONS FOR DECISIONS: (1) To allow the Committee to set a work programme which provides focused Member oversight, encourages open debate and seeks to achieve service improvement through effective policy development and meaningful policy and service change. (2) The need to observe Constitutional requirements and monitor the Forward Plan for appropriate items to scrutinise remains a key aspect of work programming. Minutes: Audio recording – 02 hours 23 minutes 24 seconds The Scrutiny Officer presented the report entitled ‘Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme 2026/27’ and advised that: · Members had undertaken scrutiny training on 12 May, and following this, Members had helped to develop the Work Programme for 2026/27, which was attached at Appendix 1 to the report, and included items for the next Committee meeting in September. · Members were invited to raise items for the Work Programme through various means if they provided reasons for why it should be considered by the Committee as this would help with preparations and ensure that objectives could be met. · Updates could also be received outside of meetings through methods such as spotlight reviews and site visits. · Specific questions should be raised by Members ahead of Committee meetings to allow officers and Executive Members to coordinate a response ahead of time. · The Forward Plan for 15 May was attached at Appendix 2. · The Decisions and Monitoring Tracker was attached at Appendix 3, and detailed each recommendation made to Cabinet from the last Committee meeting. Councillor Ralph Muncer suggested that an update on the progress made by Cabinet on the S106 Task and Finish Report should take place at the Committee meeting on 10 November as that would give significant time for officers and Executive Members to give a response and factor in the next stage of the Local Plan Review. Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason suggested that they should look at the merger of Settle and Paradigm and how this would impact residents, with the potential to invite them to a future Committee meeting to improve their working relationship with the Council going forward. In response to a question raised by Councillor Claire Winchester, the Scrutiny Officer advised that: · They usually contacted Hertfordshire Constabulary in November each year regarding a topic that the Committee would like them to present for the Crime and Disorder Matters item in January. · The Leadership Team would be able to provide steer to the Committee on local issues that they might want Hertfordshire Constabulary to consider. Councillor Claire Winchester suggested that the Committee should pick just one topic for them to present at the Committee meeting in January. Councillor Nigel Mason highlighted that the presentation by Hertfordshire Constabulary should focus on impacts, not just data and insights. Councillor Ralph Muncer highlighted that they should focus the Crime and Disorder Matters on the impact that policing reorganisation would have on local community policing and its priorities. The Scrutiny Officer highlighted that Members should raise key requirements for the report on Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) Future Plans as soon as possible. Councillor Elizabeth Dennis advised that: · It would be hard for the Committee to make requests on the report until they knew the number of unitary authorities and which one the Council would be merged into. · However, she suggested that the Committee should look at the protections of nature, ecological assets and parks and playgrounds, and potential stewardship models for these. · The Committee should also ... view the full minutes text for item 15.