Issue - meetings

Morecambe Winter Gardens NWDA Funding (feasibility studies)

Meeting: 03/06/2008 - Cabinet (Item 9)

Report of the Corporate Director (Regeneration).

Minutes:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Evelyn Archer)

(Councillor Evelyn Archer had declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following item due to being a member of the Friends of the Winter Gardens and left the meeting).

The Corporate Director (Regeneration) submitted a report that requested Cabinet to note progress on the Winter Gardens project development and the invitation made by the NWDA to the Winter Gardens Preservation Trust to apply for a £300,000 grant, and, on approval of the grant application, for Cabinet to agree to contract with the Trust as Accountable Body for NWDA funds and update the Capital Programme.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment were set out in the report as follows:

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Risk and Mitigation

Option 1

Accept the recommendation of Programme Management Group for the Winter Gardens project to be included in the Capital Programme and for the Council, as the Accountable Body for NWDA funds, to contract with the Trust

· Assists the Trust in delivering an important element/phase of their scheme.

· Allows for progress on a key element of the Vision and council priority.

· Contributes towards achievement of Vision spend targets

· Council is accustomed to dealing and contracting with third parties to deliver spend and project objectives.

This is the preferred option.

· Accountable body status confers risk and responsibility on the Council.

· Ability of the Trust to deliver on contractual commitments.

· Potential frustration by the Trust as the delivery organisation in the necessary protocols and procedure for prudent delivery of spend.

· As part of the package of work to be undertaken with the £300,000 the Trust is intending to employ direct project management resources and further investment in its own capacity to deliver this complex scheme.

· Council officer time has been given in support of the application process to date and the Council will continue to assist the Trust in recruiting the support necessary to manage this phase of the development work.

· The detailed Vision application, monitoring and evaluation process should also assist the Trust in delivering their contractual commitments.

Option 2

Cabinet does not accept the recommendation of Programme Management Group.

· No advantages identified given previous Cabinet commitments to supporting Vision and Winter Gardens project.

· Failure to deliver against a critical funding opportunity offered at a high officer level by NWDA.

· Potential loss of confidence in Council by key partners

· Non-delivery of spend and benefits would undermine confidence in the Vision and the Council’s ability to access funds. Mitigation would have to be referred back to key funding agencies and delivery protocols reviewed.

The Officer preferred option was option 1 as it provides the Trust with the ability to deliver the next phase of its activity and currently provides the only mechanism by which the Council can make funding available through the Vision to the project under appropriate scrutiny, monitoring and control mechanisms.

It was moved by Councillor Shirley Burns and seconded by Councillor David Kerr: -

“That the recommendations, as set out in ... view the full minutes text for item 9