Decisions

Decisions published

21/10/2025 - Statement of Gambling Policy 2025-2028 ref: 1589    Recommmend Forward to Council

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 21/10/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 28/10/2025

Effective from: 21/10/2025

Decision:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Maddocks)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Governance for Cabinet members to consider the revised Statement of Gambling Policy for 2025-2028 and refer to Full Council for adoption.

 

Section 349 of the Gambling Act 2005 (“the Act”) provides that each Licensing Authority shall, before each successive period of three years, prepare a statement of the principles that they propose to apply in exercising their functions under the Act during that period, and publish that statement. The Licensing Committee approved the draft policy, in line with the Councils constitution and it was now necessary for Cabinet to make recommendations to Full Council for approval.

 

It was agreed that the report to Council would highlight the changes to the Gambling Policy which would be useful for members.  Following concern regarding safeguarding of children it was suggested that consideration should be given to raising public awareness of the rules in terms of children.  It was also noted that the report to full Council would include a revised preface.

 

Councillor Maddocks proposed, seconded by Councillor Bannon:-

 

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved with Cabinet’s comments reflected in the report to Full Council.”

 

Councillors then voted:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

That Cabinet endorse the revised Statement of Gambling Policy 2025-2028 and refer the policy to full Council for adoption with the referral report reflecting Cabinet’s comments.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Officer Governance

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The Statement of Licensing Policy forms part of the Council’s Policy Framework.

 

It is important to follow the correct process in implementing the updated policy, with Licensing Committee making recommendations to the Councils Cabinet prior to adoption by Full Council. The absence of a valid policy leaves the Council susceptible to legal challenge.


21/10/2025 - Skerton School Procurement ref: 1590    Recommendations Approved

enabling options for procurement and delivery

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 21/10/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 28/10/2025

Effective from: 05/11/2025

Decision:

Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Caroline Jackson)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Housing & Property that sought Cabinet approval for a twin-track procurement strategy and progress Preliminary Market Engagement to test partnership opportunities for the redevelopment of the Skerton School site and Mainway regeneration.

 

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

 

 

Option1: Partnership

Option 2: Works contract

Option 3: Blended partnership/ contract options/ multiple partners

Option 4: Do nothing

Advantages

- PME to explore market interest and models for a viable route to delivery within a partnership model.

 

- Test market interest in models compatible with project outcomes.

 

- Transfer of major risks (funding, sales, development).

 

 - Injection of development expertise and capacity.

 

- Reduced control over design detail and lettings policy.

 

- Greater cost certainty for the Council within delivery model

- Compliant process via procurement frameworks

 

- Mitigates volatility of construction costs

 

- Strong Council control over design, sustainability standards, and tenure

 

- Potentially lower construction costs

- Partial

transfer of construction risk to contractor.

- Flexibility to combine different partnership and or contract models that are deemed best suited

 

- Potential to attract a consortium of partners bringing complementary skills (funding, development, construction, management).

 

 - Spreads risk by not relying on a single delivery partner.

None

Disadvantages

- Potentially higher long-term costs

 

- Reduced control over design and delivery

 

- Potentially reduced control as a council owed asset

 

- Portability of grant provision into Partnership model.

- Increased pre-development cost and management costs

 

- Significant management resource

 

- Current unavailability of funding prior to CHSR

 

- High financial burden on HRA

 

- Affordability risk

 

– mitigation via Homes England grant and potential new Government borrowing programmes.

- Risk of misaligned objectives between partners.

 

- Longer negotiation period may slow mobilisation.

 

- Added complexity in procurement, legal structures and governance.

 

- Higher resource needed to manage multiple relationships.

 

- Risk of misaligned objectives between partners.

 

- Longer negotiation period may slow mobilisation.

 

- Added complexity in procurement, legal structures and governance.

 

- Higher resource needed to manage multiple relationships.

 

 

- Failure to progress key procurement strategy

Risks and mitigation

- No appetite for engagement

 

- Proposals not compatible viability/tenure/control

- Exploration of suitable frameworks to increase cost certainty may reduce management burden. However, a tender at this stage may risk predetermination challenge.

- Risk of fragmented delivery

 

– mitigated through clear governance and robust partnership agreement.

- Could confuse the market – PME will test interest.

 

- Potential overlap or conflict between models, winning both sites may be vital to Partners business model

- Stagnation of the project objectives.

 

- Pursue twin track approach.

 

The officer preferred recommendation is to proceed with Option 3, with engagement on the broadest possible terms, providing a clear scope and definition of each site, and our priority to advance Skerton first in alignment with Homes England programmes.

 

The blended option will help shape the most viable partnering options for the Skerton development and the Mainway regeneration and ensure that both schemes are advanced in a coordinated and comprehensive context. In doing so, it will increase the attractiveness of the proposition to potential partners, signal opportunities for longer-term relationships, and demonstrate the Council’s intent to bring forward Skerton as part of a wider regeneration of Mainway.

 

Cost plan assumptions may be compliantly reviewed through structured consultation supported by framework benchmarking and independent advice and provide a consistent baseline for comparison alongside partnership.

 

This is an efficient approach, which can be managed within the existing project resource and will generate a comprehensive range of responses and options to develop a preferred delivery model and navigates any perception of predetermination prior to a final decision by members.

 

Members noted that no single procurement route is fully developed at this stage. They therefore directed officers to pursue a twin-track approach, keeping both partnering and contract options open for Skerton. Members subsequently further agreed that engagement should be extended to include Mainway and signal the Council’s intention to work with the market to bring this forward wider regeneration.

 

Councillor Caroline Jackson proposed, seconded by Councillor Hamilton-Cox:

 

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved with recommendation (1) revised with the deletion of ‘estimate’ and insertion of ‘accurate account’.

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

(1)             That Cabinet authorises officers to obtain an accurate account of the full costings in respect of a Council led Design & Build contract for the construction of housing on the Skerton School site such costings to be obtained via a suitable framework.

 

(2)             That approval be given to the commencement of Preliminary Market Engagement (PME) activity in respect of the construction of housing on the Skerton School site.

 

(3)             That approval be given to the commencement of PME activity in respect of the development of Mainway both as a procurement in its own right or alternatively as a procurement connected to the Skerton School development.

 

(4)             That officers be authorised to take all necessary steps to commence PME in respect of recommendation 2 and/or 3 in accordance with all requirements under the Procurement Act 2023.

 

(5)             That Cabinet notes that a further report will be brought back to Cabinet with a recommended preferred route once PME and cost benchmark analysis has been completed in respect of Skerton School and/ or Mainway.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Officer Housing & Property

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision is consistent with Council Priorities:

A Sustainable District –Climate Emergency: Properties brought forward will be developed to a high standard, therefore benefitting residents with quality and warm homes.

 

An Inclusive and Prosperous Local Economy – opportunities for local contractors to be employed as part of development opportunities.

 

Housing Strategy – will link directly to the Homes Strategy for Lancaster District 2020-2025 by seeking to increase provision of affordable housing.

 

 

The proposals ensure that Skerton is advanced as the first enabling phase, aligned with Homes England programmes, while also increasing the attractiveness of the overall proposition to potential partners. By signalling the long-term opportunity at Mainway, the Council can build interest, explore longer-term relationships, and position both schemes within a coordinated regeneration strategy.

 

The estimated value of the works is above the qualifying financial threshold, and the Council is required to follow the full statutory procurement procedure. The twin track proposal following a recommendation for a compliant PME brings forward partnering options and greater certainty for construction costs in a step-by-step approach and is supported by procurement advice.

 

It makes the best use of resource and enables the project programme deadlines to be achieved, avoids any perception of predetermination and positions the Council to move positively into the most appropriate formal tender once robust market evidence is available and there is clarity on CHSR funding and the Autumn statement.

Wards affected: Skerton Ward;

Lead officer: Andrew Whittaker


21/10/2025 - Industrial Style Roof Repairs ref: 1591    Recommendations Approved

Seeking authorisation to proceed to tender for the refurbishment of 3 large scale industrial style roofs.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 21/10/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 28/10/2025

Effective from: 05/11/2025

Decision:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Housing & Property that sought approval to undertake roof refurbishment works to key council buildings.  The report was exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 3, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the exempt report.

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

The resolution is set out in a minute exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Officer Housing & Property

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision is consistent with the Council’s priorities.  Exactly how the decision fits with Council priorities is set out in the exempt minute.

 

 

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Charity Slater Lees


21/10/2025 - Review of Council Housing Tenancy Agreement ref: 1588    Recommendations Approved

Seeking Cabinet approval to go out to consultation to review Council Housing Tenancy Agreement

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 21/10/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 28/10/2025

Effective from: 05/11/2025

Decision:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Caroline Jackson)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Housing & Property that sought approval from Cabinet to consult with tenants on proposed changes to the council housing Tenancy Agreement relating to secure and introductory tenants.

 

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

 

 

Option 1: Do nothing – continue with the existing tenancy agreement

Option 2: Cabinet approves the proposal to revise the tenancy agreement

Advantages

Simplicity of continuation. Cost savings (minimal e.g. postage costs)

The tenancy agreement is updated to ensure that it meets current standards and requirements, and is fit for purpose.

 

The tenancy agreement remains an effective management tool.

 

The Tenancy Agreement provides tenants with sufficient information to understand their rights and obligations in relation to their home.

Disadvantages

The existing tenancy agreement does not reflect current standards and requirements. This may mean that the Council does not meet the required consumer standards.

Costs of implementation will be incurred with postage – writing to tenants twice.

Risks

The tenancy agreement will not be wholly fit for purpose as an effective management tool.

 

The Regulator of Social Housing deems the Tenancy Agreement to be outdated and not fit for purpose, this could be a breach of the consumer standards.

None known.

 

The Officer preferred option is Option 2 for the reasons set out above.

 

Councillor Caroline Jackson proposed, seconded by Councillor Bannon:-

 

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

 

Councillors then voted:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

(1)        That the Community Housing Manager be authorised to consult with tenants regarding the proposed changes to the Tenancy Agreement and to serve the necessary preliminary notice of variation.

 

(2)        That a further report be brought to Members following the completion of the consultation process seeking final approval.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Officer Housing & Property

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The need has been identified for the Council to review its tenancy agreement to ensure that the agreement remains fit for purpose and can be used as an effective management tool. The agreement has also been updated to ensure that it meets tenant expectations in terms of clarity and understanding.

 

The decision is consistent with the Council Plan:  – the proposal supports the Council’s objectives: to be a Co-operative, Kind and Responsible Council and links to the Councils ambitions of Openness and the Councils Standards – Transparency, Influence and Accountability.

 

The review is being undertaken in line with the Service Improvement Plan – 4.8 Council Housing tenancy agreement and license agreement updated to reflect current practices and in line with best practice and has been given a deadline date of completion of year 2.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Catherine Cunliffe


21/10/2025 - Letting of Community Asset (Ryelands House) ref: 1592    Recommendations Approved

Discuss Future Options for Ryelands House

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 21/10/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 28/10/2025

Effective from: 05/11/2025

Decision:

Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Housing & Property that sought approval to accept a proposal to enter a lease arrangement with North Lancashire Community Land Trust.

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the exempt report.

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

The resolution is set out in a minute exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Officer Housing & Property

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision is consistent with the Council’s priorities.  Exactly how the decision fits with Council priorities is set out in the exempt minute.

 

 

 

 

Wards affected: Skerton Ward;

Lead officer: Stephen Morris