Agenda, decisions and draft minutes
PDF 535 KBVenue: the Council Chamber - Council Offices, Trinity Road, Cirencester, GL7 1PX. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies To receive any apologies for absence. The quorum for Cabinet is 3 members.
Additional documents: Minutes: There were no apologies for absence. |
|||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interest from Members. |
|||||||||
|
To approve the minutes of the previous meeting of Cabinet held on 8 January 2026. Additional documents: Decision: The purpose of this item was to consider the minutes of Cabinet held on 8 January 2026:
The recommendation to approve the minutes was proposed by Councillor Mike Evemy and seconded by Councillor Juliet Layton.
RESOLVED that, subject to the amendment on fees and charges item 186, the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 8 January 2026 be approved as a correct record.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions.
Minutes: The purpose of this item was to consider the minutes of Cabinet held on 8 January 2026: Councillor Evemy requested that the word ’potential’ be removed on page 19 minute 186.
The recommendation to approve the amended minutes was proposed by Councillor Mike Evemy and seconded by Councillor Juliet Layton.
RESOLVED that, subject to the amendment on fees and charges item 186, the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 8 January 2026 be approved as a correct record.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions.
|
|||||||||
|
Leader's Announcements To receive any announcements from the Leader of the Council. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader expressed sincere thanks to Nigel Robbins, who had stepped down from the Council after nearly 13 years of dedicated service as both a County and District Councillor for the Cirencester Beeches ward. The Leader acknowledged Mr Robbins’ significant contribution during his tenure, including serving as Leader of the Council for two years and as Leader of the Audit and Governance Committee for nearly four years. He had been an active and committed member throughout his service. On behalf of the Council, the Leader formally expressed gratitude for his work and wished him well in his retirement.
The Leader informed Members that the Government’s consultation on local government reorganisation in Gloucestershire had commenced that day and would run for seven weeks. Members were reminded that three options had been submitted for consideration. Cotswold District Council had voted unanimously in favour of a single unitary option, which was also supported by Gloucestershire County Council, Tewkesbury Borough Council and Stroud District Council. The two alternative proposals under consultation were the East–West split proposed by Cheltenham Borough Council and the Greater Gloucester model proposed by Gloucester City Council. The Leader advised that the Council’s Communications Team would encourage residents and stakeholders to participate in the consultation and submit their views to Government. It was noted that the Government was expected to make a decision before the summer recess, with an anticipated announcement in July, setting out how local government in Gloucestershire would be structured from 1 April 2028.
The Leader reported that a letter had been sent to Government earlier in the week regarding the Council’s housing target. The letter requested a meeting with Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister for Housing, to discuss the matter further. The request drew on feedback from the recent budget consultation, which received nearly 2,000 responses. An update would be provided in due course.
The Leader was pleased to report positive media coverage regarding successful enforcement action taken by the Council in relation to littering. Officers had worked diligently on the case, supported by Councillor Slater, who had identified offending items that enabled the perpetrator to be traced and prosecuted. The Leader welcomed recent positive media coverage following a successful litter prosecution. Thanks were extended to Councillor Slater, the Enviro-Crime Programmes Officer and the Counter Fraud team for their work. The Leader reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to maintaining a clean district and confirmed that enforcement action would continue where sufficient evidence was available. |
|||||||||
|
Public Questions To deal with questions from the public within the open forum question and answer session of fifteen minutes in total. Questions from each member of the public should be no longer than one minute each and relate to issues under the Cabinet’s remit. At any one meeting no person may submit more than two questions and no more than two such questions may be asked on behalf of one organisation.
The Leader will ask whether any members of the public present at the meeting wish to ask a question and will decide on the order of questioners.
The response may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner. Additional documents: Minutes: There was one public question from Mr Gorin, who stated that he and his wife had owned a small second home in Cirencester since January 2013 and that he had researched the Council’s policy to raise money for “affordable housing”.
The question related to the current 100% Council Tax Premium on second homes, as provided for in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 and approved by Cotswold District Council in March 2024 and at its Revenue Meeting in February 2025.
Mr Gorin asked whether Councillors were aware that, in its first year (2025/26), 1,856 properties had been identified, potentially raising £3.66 million. However, he stated that the Council did not have a way of determining the true number of second homes and that, in any event, once Class 1 exemptions were applied, the number subject to the premium had reduced to approximately 816 properties, some 1,040 fewer than the budget prediction. He further stated that the income had fallen well below the predicted £246,000, explaining that this lower figure arose because the Council’s precept represented only 7% of the total Council Tax collected, and that this percentage was also applied to the premium. As a result, he suggested that fewer people were paying less revenue, estimating the amount retained by the Council to be approximately £120,000, which he argued would not fund an affordable home.
Mr Gorin asked that, when debating the second home premium for 2026/27, the Council review its decision in line with the powers contained in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 to “vary or revoke a determination”. He requested that the Council seek to identify accurately the total number of second homes, review the distribution of funds between preceptors, noting that the majority of the premium was allocated to Gloucestershire County Council rather than to the District Council, and ensure that any funds raised were directed towards affordable housing before voting to re-impose what he described as an unfair and punitive tax.
He further stated that the inequity of the current methodology was illustrated by the Council’s decision not to apply the premium to second homes in the Cotswold Water Park, on the basis that they were not suitable or available for permanent occupation and would not bring additional accommodation into the market. He argued that it was anomalous that, where the purpose of the premium was to raise funds for affordable housing, certain second homes were not required to contribute.
In response, the Leader advised that, as former Portfolio Holder for Finance, he was familiar with the matter and would respond in the first instance.
It was noted that, at the time the legislation was introduced, representations had been made to Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Member of Parliament for North Cotswolds, regarding the absence of any requirement for owners to self-identify second homes. However, this provision had not been included in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023.
The Leader stated that, while the Council sought to identify second homes wherever possible, estimating the number ... view the full minutes text for item 196. |
|||||||||
|
Member Questions No Member Questions have been submitted prior to the publication of the agenda.
A Member of the Council may ask the Leader or a Cabinet Member a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the Cotswold District. A maximum period of fifteen minutes shall be allowed at any such meeting for Member questions.
A Member may only ask a question if: a) the question has been delivered in writing or by electronic mail to the Chief Executive no later than 5.00 p.m. on the working day before the day of the meeting; or b) the question relates to an urgent matter, they have the consent of the Leader to whom the question is to be put and the content of the question is given to the Chief Executive by 9.30 a.m. on the day of the meeting.
An answer may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no member questions. |
|||||||||
|
Schedule of Decisions taken by the Leader of the Council and/or Individual Cabinet Members No delegated decisions had been taken by the Leader and/or Individual Cabinet Members since the publication of the agenda for Cabinet on 8 January 2026. Any decision made after the publication of this agenda will be reported at the next meeting of Cabinet. Additional documents: Minutes: No delegated decisions had been taken by the Leader and/or Individual Cabinet Members since the publication of the agenda for Cabinet on 8 January 2026. |
|||||||||
|
Issue(s) Arising from Overview and Scrutiny and/or Audit and Governance To receive any recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and to consider any matters raised by the Audit and Governance Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: Cabinet noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had met earlier in the week and had pre-scrutinised the item on Retail and Hospitality Sectors in the Cotswold District. As a result of this scrutiny five recommendations were made. The recommendations and the Cabinet’s response are set out in a supplementary paper .
Councillor Wilkinson, portfolio holder for Economy and Council Transformation stated that the proposal was the result of significant work undertaken in response to a rapidly changing environment for high street businesses. He observed that businesses across the country, including within the Cotswold District, were facing increasing pressures from rising costs, including business rates, increases in the National Minimum Wage and National Insurance contributions. Concern that the current approach to business rates was arbitrary and disproportionate was expressed, and support for writing to local Members of Parliament to seek reform was confirmed.
The importance of vibrant high streets, particularly in rural areas with limited access to services, was emphasised, along with a caution that the loss of shops could undermine community sustainability. It was noted that many smaller settlements relied on a small number of local businesses.
Continued engagement with businesses and measures to support investment in high streets, while resisting the conversion of retail premises to residential use, were highlighted as important due to the cumulative impact on parking, footfall, and long-term viability.
Cabinet support was confirmed for four of the five proposed elements and a willingness to write to Government to highlight the local impact of national policy decisions was indicated.
|
|||||||||
|
Asbestos Management Plan Purpose: To submit Cotswold District Council’s Asbestos Management Plan to Cabinet for approval.
Recommendation: That Cabinet resolves to 1. Approve the Cotswold District Council Asbestos Management Policy. Additional documents:
Decision: The purpose of the report was to submit an Asbestos Policy to Cabinet for approval, ensuring compliance with statutory duties and clarity regarding the Council’s responsibilities as both an employer and a property owner.
Councillor Mike Evemy, Leader of the Council, introduced the report and highlighted that need to replace existing asbestos guidance with a comprehensive policy that clearly defined the Council’s responsibilities for managing asbestos and asbestos-containing materials. This was intended to support delivery of the Health and Safety Work Plan and to ensure continued compliance with statutory duties, under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and associated legislation.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Mike Evemy and seconded by Councillor Andrea Pellegram.
RESOLVED that Cabinet: Approved Cotswold District Councils Asbestos Management Policy.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions.
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to submit an Asbestos Policy to Cabinet for approval, ensuring compliance with statutory duties and clarity regarding the Council’s responsibilities as both an employer and a property owner.
Councillor Mike Evemy, Leader of the Council, introduced the report and highlighted that need to replace existing asbestos guidance with a comprehensive policy that clearly defined the Council’s responsibilities for managing asbestos and asbestos-containing materials. This was intended to support delivery of the Health and Safety Work Plan and to ensure continued compliance with statutory duties, under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and associated legislation.
The Leader invited any questions or comments.
Councillors asked how staff responsible for asbestos management would gain practical experience if no asbestos was identified in the Council’s buildings, and whether responsibility for social housing could be delegated to Bromford Housing.
Officers responded that the policy would be communicated across the Council and its partners via the Communications Team. Relevant staff had been identified for training through the IHasco programme, and recent in-depth sessions had been delivered by an asbestos expert. The Environmental Crimes Programmes Officer, had also been included due to potential exposure when managing fly-tipped materials.
Councillors welcomed the inclusion of operational staff in the training, noting the risks associated with asbestos and the importance of specialist handling. Councillor Pellegram expressed full support for the policy, emphasising the need for safe management and compliance as property owners and employers.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Mike Evemy and seconded by Councillor Andrea Pellegram.
The proposal was put to the vote and agreed by Cabinet.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions.
|
|||||||||
|
Contract for Waste, Street Cleansing and Grounds Maintenance Services Purpose: To seek Cabinet’s approval to proceed with negotiating and to enter into a Common Service Agreement with Ubico Limited for the delivery of waste collection, street cleansing, and grounds maintenance services. The proposed agreement would replace the current contract, which ends on 31 March 2027.
Recommendations: That Cabinet resolves to: 1. Enter into a Common Service Agreement with UBICO as described in the report; and 2. Delegate authority to the Director of Communities and Place in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Regulatory Services to agree the final terms of the agreement with Ubico. Additional documents: Decision: The purpose of the report was to seek Cabinet approval to proceed with negotiations and to enter into a Common Service Agreement with Ubico Limited for the delivery of waste collection, street cleansing, and grounds maintenance services, with the new agreement proposed to replace the current contract which was due to expire on 31 March 2027.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram, Cabinet Member for Environment & Regulatory Services, introduced the report which described Cotswold District Council’s current Service Contract with Ubico Limited for waste collection, street cleansing, and grounds maintenance which was due to expire on 31 March 2027. Ubico had proposed replacing individual contracts with a Common Service Agreement across its shareholder authorities, providing a single contractual framework while allowing for local service specifications.
Given the scale of Local Government Reorganisation and the need to maintain service continuity, the Common Service Agreement (CSA) was described as a proportionate and flexible approach, with the CSA providing a shared contractual framework across shareholder authorities while allowing locally tailored service specifications.
It was noted that the approach supported service continuity, allowed for future flexibility in light of Local Government Reorganisation, and enabled novation to a new Unitary Authority if required. Alternative delivery models were noted but, given the timing and scale of Local Government Reorganisation, continuation of the current delivery model was considered the most proportionate approach at this stage.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Andrea Pellegram and seconded by Councillor Mike Evemy.
RESOLVED that Cabinet agreed to : 1. enter into a Common Service Agreement with Ubico as described in this report, and 2. delegated authority to the Director of Communities and Place in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Regulatory Services to agree the final terms of the agreement with Ubico.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions Minutes: The purpose of the report was to seek Cabinet approval to proceed with negotiations and to enter into a Common Service Agreement with Ubico Limited for the delivery of waste collection, street cleansing, and grounds maintenance services, with the new agreement proposed to replace the current contract which was due to expire on 31 March 2027.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram, Cabinet Member for Environment & Regulatory Services, introduced the report which described Cotswold District Council’s current Service Contract with Ubico Limited for waste collection, street cleansing, and grounds maintenance which was due to expire on 31 March 2027. Ubico had proposed replacing individual contracts with a Common Service Agreement across its shareholder authorities, providing a single contractual framework while allowing for local service specifications.
Given the scale of Local Government Reorganisation and the need to maintain service continuity, the Common Service Agreement (CSA) was described as a proportionate and flexible approach, with the CSA providing a shared contractual framework across shareholder authorities while allowing locally tailored service specifications.
It was noted that the approach supported service continuity, allowed for future flexibility in light of Local Government Reorganisation, and enabled novation to a new Unitary Authority if required. Alternative delivery models were noted but, given the timing and scale of Local Government Reorganisation, continuation of the current delivery model was considered the most proportionate approach at this stage.
The Leader invited Councillors to speak. Councillor Tony Dale stated that the proposal made considerable sense, noting his experience of the challenges faced by Ubico in managing diverse council requirements for waste collection and recycling. He commended the Chief Executive of Ubico for effectively coordinating multiple contracts and supported the move to a common services agreement, emphasising that it should benefit both Ubico and the councils involved, including the forthcoming unitary authority, by creating a more efficient and streamlined service.
The Leader noted that the current contract would end before the council’s term and that renegotiating it now would be a distraction. He agreed that a common agreement would allow Ubico and the councils to plan future services across an expanded footprint, enabling greater flexibility and efficiency while providing a foundation for the new unitary authority to develop services consistently across Gloucestershire.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Andrea Pellegram and seconded by Councillor Mike Evemy.
The proposal was put to the vote and agreed by Cabinet.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions
|
|||||||||
|
Revenue Budget 2026-27, Capital Programme and Medium Term Financial Strategy Purpose: To present the Revenue Budget for 2026/27, Capital Programme and Medium-Term Financial Strategy for 2026/27 to 2029/30.
Recommendations: Cabinet is requested to consider and approve for recommendation to Council: 1. the Medium-Term Financial Strategy set out in Annex B 2. the Budget Pressures and Savings for inclusion in the budget, set out in Annex C 3. the Council Tax Requirement of £7,419,716 for this Council 4. the Council Tax level for Cotswold District Council purposes of £163.93 for a Band D property in 2026/27 (an increase of £5) 5. the Capital Programme, set out in Annex D 6. the Annual Capital Strategy 2026/27, as set out in Annex E 7. the Annual Treasury Management Strategy and Non-Treasury Management Investment Strategy 2026/27, as set out in Annex F 8. the Strategy for the Flexible use of Capital Receipts, as set out in Annex H 9. that £2m is set aside in a new earmarked reserve Council Priority: LGR Transition through the releasing of £2m of the balance currently held in the Financial Resilience Reserve. 10. the balances and reserves forecast for 2026/27 to 2029/30 as set out in Section 7 of the report.
Cabinet is further recommended to approve delegation to the Council’s Deputy Chief Executive, in consultation with the Chief Executive, Leader, and Cabinet Member for Finance 1. To agree changes to the General Fund Summary arising from the Final Local Government Finance Settlement and the Business Rates Retention Scheme estimates prior to submission to Council. Additional documents:
Decision: The purpose of the report was to present the Revenue Budget for 2026/27, Capital Programme and Medium-Term Financial Strategy for 2026/27 to 2029/30 to Cabinet for approval.
Councillor Patrick Coleman, Cabinet Member for Finance, introduced the report. It was noted that the Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy, had been prepared in the context of ongoing financial pressures and a significant medium-term budget gap. Members noted that, while funding reforms and a three-year provisional settlement provided increased certainty, savings and efficiencies would be required to maintain financial sustainability.
It was noted that there was no immediate risk of the Council requiring Exceptional Financial Support or issuing a section 114 notice. The 2026/27 budget was balanced through the use of reserves, with further gaps forecast in later years.
The Council noted proposals to increase Council Tax by £5 for a Band D property, which had received public support through consultation. Members also noted the planned use and maintenance of reserves, the continued requirement to deliver savings and transformation, and the proposed capital programme, including investment in waste and recycling infrastructure, funded without additional borrowing.
The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Coleman and seconded by Councillor Tristan Wilkinson.
RESOLVED that Cabinet considered the budget report and approved for recommendation to Council: 1. the Medium-Term Financial Strategy set out in Annex B 2. the Budget Pressures and Savings for inclusion in the budget, set out in Annex C 3. the Council Tax Requirement of £7,419,716 for this Council 4. the Council Tax level for Cotswold District Council purposes of £163.93 for a Band D property in 2026/27 (an increase of £5) 5. the Capital Programme, set out in Annex D 6. the Annual Capital Strategy 2026/27, as set out in Annex E 7. the Annual Treasury Management Strategy and Non-Treasury Management Investment Strategy 2026/27, as set out in Annex F 8. the Strategy for the Flexible use of Capital Receipts, as set out in Annex H 9. that £2m is set aside in a new earmarked reserve Council Priority: LGR Transition through the releasing of £2m of the balance currently held in the Financial Resilience Reserve. 10. the balances and reserves forecast for 2026/27 to 2029/30 as set out in Section 7 of the report. Cabinet approved delegation to the Council’s Deputy Chief Executive, in consultation with the Chief Executive, Leader, and Cabinet Member for Finance 11. To agree changes to the General Fund Summary arising from the Final Local Government Finance Settlement and the Business Rates Retention Scheme estimates prior to submission to Council.
Voting record: 7 For, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions.
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to present the Revenue Budget for 2026/27, Capital Programme and Medium-Term Financial Strategy for 2026/27 to 2029/30 to Cabinet.
Councillor Patrick Coleman, Cabinet Member for Finance, introduced the report. It was noted that the Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy, had been prepared in the context of ongoing financial pressures and a significant medium-term budget gap. Members noted that, while funding reforms and a three-year provisional settlement provided increased certainty, savings and efficiencies would be required to maintain financial sustainability.
It was noted that there was no immediate risk of the Council requiring Exceptional Financial Support or issuing a section 114 notice. The 2026/27 budget was balanced through the use of reserves, with further gaps forecast in later years.
The Council proposed to increase Council Tax by £5 for a Band D property, which had received public support through consultation. Members also noted the planned use and maintenance of reserves, the continued requirement to deliver savings and transformation, and the proposed capital programme, including investment in waste and recycling infrastructure, funded without external borrowing.
The Leader noted the good level of response to the public budget consultation despite it being concurrent with pre-election period and overlapped with the local plan consultation, and thanked all those who had responded to the consultation, noting that approximately two-thirds of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the Council’s general approach, including the proposed 5% Council Tax increase, consistent with previous years. The responses to two specific questions were highlighted: 57% of respondents supported transforming services to be more cost-effective and customer-focused rather than maintaining the status quo, and 65% favoured prioritising delivery of capital projects within current capacity and finances rather than pursuing additional investment.
The Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer, provided a brief update on the financial position. He noted that, as of 28 January 2026, the forecast for business rates had increased by £178,000 due to retained renewable energy schemes, and the reconciliation of Publica contract sums for 2026/27 was improving the overall position. He cautioned that the final government finance settlement, due on 9 February 2026 , could pose a small risk of change, particularly regarding business rates pooling, but advised that any adjustments were unlikely to be implemented immediately and would more likely affect future years.
The Leader invited questions or observations from Members on the report. Councillors agreed that the Council’s financial position had been managed exceptionally well, highlighting the prudence in business rates forecasting, the three-year settlement which reduced immediate risk, and the absence of a “cliff edge” in the budget. They welcomed the substantial capital investment of almost £8.5 million in the waste vehicle fleet, noting that it secured a high-quality, environmentally friendly service for at least six to eight years without external borrowing. The contribution from extended producer responsibility funding of £1.721 million was also acknowledged as helping to offset service costs.
Councillors noted the positive impact of budget allocations on local residents, including continued funding for the home ... view the full minutes text for item 202.
|
|||||||||
|
Next Meeting Date To advise members of the next meeting of Cabinet. Additional documents: Minutes: The next meeting date of Cabinet was confirmed as 5 March 2026. |
Carried