Interactive webcast player

Place Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday, 1st September 2026 at 7:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  2. Cllr Joseph Parsons
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Joseph Parsons
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr James Small
  2. Laura Kirman
  3. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  4. Cllr Mary Dadd
  5. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  6. Cllr Stephen Murray
  7. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  8. Cllr Janet Whitehouse
  9. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  10. Cllr Janet Whitehouse
  11. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  12. Cllr Mary Dadd
  13. Cllr Joseph Parsons
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Ken Williamson
  2. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  3. Cllr Mary Dadd
  4. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  5. Cllr Ken Williamson
  6. Cllr Mary Dadd
  7. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  8. Cllr Janet Whitehouse
  9. Cllr Ken Williamson
  10. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  11. Cllr Stephen Murray
  12. Cllr Ken Williamson
  13. Cllr Stephen Murray
  14. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  15. Cllr Ken Williamson
  16. Cllr Joseph Parsons
Share this agenda point
  1. Fabrizio Ferrari
  2. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  3. Cllr Mary Dadd
  4. Fabrizio Ferrari
  5. Cllr Mary Dadd
  6. Fabrizio Ferrari
  7. Nicola Sayers
  8. Cllr Mary Dadd
  9. Fabrizio Ferrari
  10. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  11. Jennifer Gould
  12. Cllr Mary Dadd
  13. Jennifer Gould
  14. Cllr Mary Dadd
  15. Laura Kirman
  16. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  17. Fabrizio Ferrari
  18. Cllr Mary Dadd
  19. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  20. Cllr Stephen Murray
  21. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  22. Fabrizio Ferrari
  23. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  24. Cllr Holly Whitbread
  25. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  26. Cllr Rose Brookes
  27. Fabrizio Ferrari
  28. Jennifer Gould
  29. Cllr Rose Brookes
  30. Jennifer Gould
  31. Cllr Joseph Parsons
  32. Cllr Mary Dadd
  33. Laura Kirman
  34. Cllr Joseph Parsons
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:00:00
I'll just read the following announcement.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:00:05
I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live to the

1 WEBCASTING INTRODUCTION

internet and will be capable of repeated viewing.
Therefore, by entering the council chamber and using the seating area, you are consenting
to be in films and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting
and or training purposes.
Good evening members.
Welcome to tonight's meeting of place scrutiny committee on the 1st of September.
I'm Councillor Joseph Parsons, the chairman, and I'll just go through the panel.
So to my right, we've got my vice chairman, Councillor Morris, and to my immediate left,
we've got Nicholas Sayers, the deputy chief monitoring officer, or not chief, but deputy
monitoring officer.
And then we've got Matt Winslow, the service director for planning.
And then to his left, we've got Fabrizio Ferrari, the service director for communities.
And then to my vice chairs right we've got Laura Kerman from Democratic Services and
Steve Mitchell webcasting the meeting.
So on to item number two, have we got any apologies for absence?

2 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Laura Kirman - 0:01:09
Yes Chairman, we've got apologies from Councillor Bassett, Councillor Bromwich and Councillor
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:01:14
Heather and Councillor Churchill for substituting for Councillor Bassett tonight.
Thank you.
Item number four, have any members got any declarations of interest?

3 SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

4 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

5 NOTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

No, perfect. Okay, so item five, we've got notes of our previous meeting, pages three
to seven. Are members happy to agree those? Thank you. So item six, we've got the work
programme. Oh, Councillor Small.

6 WORK PROGRAMME

Cllr James Small - 0:01:41
Thank you, James. Just a small observation. My question I asked in the last place scrutiny
is missing from the minutes. Is that usual?
Laura Kirman - 0:01:49
The minutes of the meetings aren't verbatim.
They're a synopsis and a summary of the meeting.
From memory, I can't remember what you asked, but it was specifically picked up.
If you need it to be specifically picked up, you ask.
Otherwise, it tends to be covered in the discursive summary.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:02:16
Okay. Thank you. Okay. So item number six is the work programme. So on page seven of
the agenda, just a couple of points on the work programme. So we've got Thames Water
coming to place committee on the 3rd of November, which is our next scheduled meeting. And due
to that, so we can effectively scrutinise everything, TFL coming to the committee will
be pushed back until a later date which hasn't been confirmed yet, just so we've got time
to go through both individually. I'd like everyone to submit questions in advance if
possible so we can do a coordinated approach and send questions so hopefully we can get
responses in advance, like we did with TFL last year when they came. Are members happy
with that approach? Perfect, thank you. And I'll just note that that will go in the bulletin
in for, oh, Councillor Dadd.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:03:14
I'm wondering whether you could amend the work programme
because we did agree last time that section 62A,
designate, designation would be updated
to this committee regularly.
And I can see it's only on the 1st of September
and I can't see it thereafter.
I think it's really important that it comes back.
So I think at the moment it will be updated
and added as long as it needs to be every meeting. At every meeting so that will be
added to the work programme will it? It will be yes. Thank you. So we've got
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:03:46
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:03:52
Councillor Murray online. Thank you chairman this was one of the items I decided I
wanted to join the meeting for. When I initially heard like other members that
Thames Water wasn't coming to overview and scrutiny, but was coming to place on the 3rd of November,
I wasn't particularly impressed. But having given it a little bit of thought and looking at the
reasons they gave, then I think that was probably a reasonable decision because what has happened
has happened and therefore we need to learn the right answers and if Thames Water feels that they
are in a better position to at least try and explain for what they did or more importantly
what they didn't do during the episode. Coming to the 3rd of November meeting is probably the
best thing and U VOC actually dealt with the points I was going to make. We couldn't have
had TfL on the same night. We have had them recently. It's right that Thames Water takes
priority in your scrutiny and scrutiny from other Councillors. And the manner in which
you did the last TfL is obviously the manner in which you're going to conduct the James
Walk to scrutiny. So all power to your elbow, Councillor Parsons. Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Murray. Yeah, that's good news. And I do encourage every member
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:05:24
possible to get involved and send in their questions. Sorry, did I miss you, Councillor
the house. Thank you, Chairman. Is now the time to suggest new items? I know you're
Cllr Janet Whitehouse - 0:05:35
coming to that later or moving on. Yeah, by all means, if we're still on the work programme.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:05:40
Right. I don't know if it still exists, but there used to be an office as a green working
Cllr Janet Whitehouse - 0:05:44
party and they used to report regularly to scrutiny. We haven't heard from them for a
long time, so my first request would be that we hear from them as to what they've been
doing over recent years, I think it would be,
to make the council offices and other things more green.
So related to that, possibly separate,
we've had a very hot summer, and there's
been a lot in the press about the fact
that this is going to happen more often in the future.
And I would like to hear from officers how the council is
going to respond to that.
I mean, for example, planning applications
could insist that the specification of houses and flats
are such that they make it cooler than the existing houses are. More could be done to
educate drivers about turning off their engines and not udling them and all the CO2 stuff. I'm sure
there's a lot of things that could be done and I just wonder if that is something that comes
with scrutiny or whether it needs to be raised somewhere else.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:06:49
Thank you, Councillor Whitehouse. Yes, so we have joint chairmen's meetings where I
can bring up your points to discuss with the chairmen of all three committees. And if it's
something that does get pursued, I think we can take it to vote at the full overview and
scrutiny committee of whether it gets included in our work programme. Thank you. Councillor
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:07:15
again. Is it just that we're wanting to know answers to what's happened because
I was hoping that we might be able to have questions and ask them about things
about what improvements they need to accompany new developments. Yeah I'm more
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:07:31
than happy for those questions to be asked. Okay. Yeah I think we can
scrutinise all aspects of Thames Water while they're here. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay so have any members got any other comments on the work programme? Perfect.

7 Planning Section S62A Update

Thank you. So we'll move on to item number seven, which is the planning sections 62A
update. Is it Councillor Williamson or Matt Winslow to present?
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:07:58
Thank you, Chair. Yeah, we said we would come back regularly. That might not actually be
the case, but because we are looking to submit the action plan as soon as we possibly can.
We've had one quarter of under 10 percent.
We are hoping the next one will be under 10 percent.
And at our meeting with the Ministry, they said after two quarters of under 10 percent,
they would possibly consider our application to de -designate.
But reporting on the Policy Advisory Group, that met on the 19th of August.
I'm grateful to all those members that attended it.
It was on Teams.
We agreed the terms of reference.
We agreed a way forward.
I'm hoping this is one of the shortest designations
on record and we can get designated as soon as possible.
Hence, we will probably be submitting the action plan
before the next place scrutiny meeting.
But there will be cabinet or council opportunities
to put it before.
But I've said in full council, I think in other meetings as well, that we are happy
as an advisory group to take on any members' comments, any things they think would push
this forward.
And as soon as the draught action plan has been through the policy advisory group, we're going
to suggest that it is circulated to all members.
So there will be scrutiny, but it might be
in a different way than we proposed
because we hope to get it in as early as we possibly can.
I think that pretty much goes through the points we raised.
But I say, I'm happy to take comments back to the group
from any member of this council,
not just the members of the advisory group.
I think that probably sums up where we currently are.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:10:02
Thank you. That's good news. Hoping that we get out as soon as possible.
Councillor Dadd. Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:10:07
I was only able to go to your advisory group for part of the time, unfortunately, and was
very pleased to see the recommendations, but there are a couple of things that I would
like this committee to consider that we raise. And firstly, on the bullet points, I'm looking
here at the report from the virtual meeting on the 19th,
where it says members of the group supported the inclusion
of the following into an action plan.
And one of the points was adding appeal learning to the action
plan, including clearer reporting or appeal outcomes,
reasons for losses, and lessons learned.
And I think that that could be enlarged a little bit,
because we need to ensure that we have defensible cases submitted to the appeal.
I would like to actually, I'm sure that they will be looking at the actual appeal cases
and what we present and whether we can actually make those more robust.
And then the other information I think would be useful is that we do need to look at some
of the PAS recommendations that were in the original one,
but also in the planning committee best practise
self -assessment toolkit, which is providing additional regular
information to committee members on our performance as
information as opposed to questions and answers.
And another point which I think will make a difference as well
is that we have heard in the past, for example,
down in Loughton and Lutton Close,
where it went straight to appeal because of slow non -determination.
And I think that one of the factors that has been raised in the report
from Matt Winslow and Graham Courtney
was speeding up the S106 agreements.
And I think we need to look at that in a bit more detail.
So starting earlier in the process and looking at where the log jams are, in a similar way
speeding up initial process and looking again where there are log jams and what we can do
to alleviate that.
I've only got a couple more points.
The other thing I think is some of the things from the PADS toolkit
was members being involved at the pre -app stage.
I think this is quite important and that is getting better relationship between planners
and planning members, committee members, in a structured way, in a transparent way, but
I think that that would actually aid the process and aid our decision making.
I've also got some questions about site visits, but I think it would be very useful if the
committee does look at the PAS planning committee best practise self -assessment toolkit because
the questions and answers that go through there could be quite useful for our case.
Thank you.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:13:46
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:13:49
All of those things are under review by the Policy Advisory Group.
So I'm reporting on the last meeting here, which started the process.
That there will be further meetings, the Policy Advisory Group, when the draught action plan
is more collected.
But I don't think, as I mentioned before, there will be time to come back to play scrutiny.
We will be submitting hopefully before at the earliest opportunity.
But all of those things will be going through with the Policy Advisory Group.
And there are some things that are maybe not going to be in the action group, the things
that we want to take forward anyway.
And there are changes coming from government.
There's all sorts of things in the pipeline.
And I'm trying to distil it all down to get this de -designation done at the earliest possible
date.
So some of those things may well follow on.
Some may be in there.
But time wise, I think we have to take the earliest opportunity to submit.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:14:58
Thank you. I just wanted to flag some of those things up because they weren't in the report. Thank you.
Thank you. Councillor Whitehouse.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:15:03
Thank you. Councillor Darrid just mentioned about appeals and lessons learned and feeding back the committee.
Cllr Janet Whitehouse - 0:15:10
I would just ask that that is fed back to all of us. Many of us have been on planning committees.
We can't now because of restriction in numbers.
We still have an interest in planning issues.
And residents come to us for advice.
We come and speak on behalf of residents.
So they're involved in planning decisions in that way.
It would be really helpful if we could also
have the learning that's being got from appeals and so forth.
It could be in the bulletin.
It could be training sessions.
But so much of it seems to be going just the few members
who are on planning committees now, and the rest of us
just don't hear anything about the developments.
So my request is that all this learning is more widely spread.
Thank you.
Councillor Williamson.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Councillor Whitehouse.
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:15:52
I totally agree.
The appeals are mentioned in the bulletin every week, those that have been lodged and
those that have been decided.
So the actual detail is there.
The lessons learned was one of the PAS recommendations, but the difficulty we had was it couldn't
be any other business or an item added on to the planning committees because we have
the two committees and different people sitting on different committees.
So it was decided it would be discussed at chairs and vice chairs meeting.
But I totally agree.
I think any lessons that can be learned should be open to all members and we'll try and make
sure that happens.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:16:39
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:16:48
because the
lifted as soon as possible. We all do. But that is, we also only don't submit when we
feel that we've got the best set of evidence, the best set of arguments and the best set
of challenges to actually get it lifted. So that would be a precise question. I then just
want to make one comment, Chairman.
Sorry I left it on. Yeah, absolutely. We need to put our best arguments forward.
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:17:34
I presume we get more than one chance to do this,
but let's do it at the first chance and get it right.
Absolutely agree.
Okay, thank you.
And then my comment, and I will carry on making this comment
because I need to, because my inbox is still,
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:17:54
I won't say inundated,
because Thames Water was the inundating issue.
My mother sang almost bloody by it.
But I'm regularly getting daily emails about how EFDC handled the AI data centre application
in Langston Road.
Daily emails about it.
So I will just make this comment again.
I fully accept what the portfolio holder said the last time I raised it.
I forget which meeting it was.
It may have been cabinet.
It may have been ONS.
It may even been a place that it played no part in the process of getting it to the
section 62A designation played no part in his decision to allow it to be decided by
officer delegation. But I still say that it played some part because I've got the officer
email that was sent to me, Councillor Neckie, Councillor Rackham, explaining why it was taken
under officer delegation and part of that email clearly said that the consideration was section
So I'm really expressing my continued unhappiness and the unhappiness of a considerable number
of residents across Loughton, I would say even across the district, but certainly across
Loughton.
I'm not necessarily expecting a response.
I'm just airing a very strong feeling.
Thank you.
Councillor Williamson.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Councillor Murray.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:19:27
I'm more than happy to respond.
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:19:29
I think I've actually mentioned the phrase you mentioned in all three of those meetings
at some point.
I was absolutely crystal clear in my email to the planning officers, 62A was not mentioned
in my email at all.
Mr Courtney added it in, it was not even in my consideration or in my email.
But I'd like to make it clear, it's been in the, I think we call it local media, I'm sure,
that I actually made the decision on, the planning decision on this, and I want to make
it perfectly clear, I made the decision that it was the officers that made the decision,
and in my decision to make the officers make the decision, I neither was for nor against
this particular application.
but it was reported in the local media that I had actually made the decision, which was
totally untrue. I wouldn't want that power anyway. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Murray.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:20:36
Thank you. So if there's no further comments from anybody else, I think we can note this
report. So we'll move on to item number eight, which is the community assets management policy.

8 Community Assets Management Policy

I'll pass over to Fabrizio to present that.
Thank you, Chair.
Evening, councillors.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:20:51
So everyone should have had the policy and the report, accompanying report.
So the policies ultimately sets out a consistent approach and a transparent approach for the
process and management of our community assets.
The policy sets out what we define as a community asset and what we define as a VCSO or a community
organisation and how an application for from one of these organisations may be
submitted if they want to take a long lease on a cut or of an asset or a
transfer of an asset. So for this evening what I'd like the committee to do is to
review the policy and comment on any on on the policy and on the proposed the
proposed process for managing managing the policy and give feedback. Thank you
So over to members, Councillor Dadd.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:21:42
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:21:46
I have had some communication with yourself
and with Fabrizio only today and I do apologise for that.
Yes, I think, you know, in principle,
I think this is a good idea,
but my thoughts are that it needs a little bit more work
before it goes for approval from a number of aspects.
I'm not clear, and perhaps Fabrizio Ferrari can actually
answer some of these, does this include anything to do with HRA?
So yes, depending on, again, going back to the HRA policy
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:22:32
and looking at, obviously, the assets.
So it needs to reflect back to the HRA policy.
So there might be assets within HRA that could fall under this process.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:22:44
And can I also ask that I thought that HRA assets and
monetary situations were ring -fenced?
So I would not know that.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:22:56
I'd have to refer to my colleague, Nick, in terms of that.
But they are obviously subject to Section 123, if I'm correct.
So yes they are ring -fenced is the answer to your question and Fabrizio is quite right.
Nicola Sayers - 0:23:14
Any land asset that's held by the council is subject to our section 123 duty, Local
Government Act 1972 which means we are unable to dispose of land or assets at an undervalue.
So I think what you're referring to is where the funds go but that would depend on in which
fund the land sits.
Does that help?
Yes, that does, thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:23:37
Yes, I understand that you can dispose of land and property
at less than market value.
My query then is that how many properties and land
does EFDC own, and what is their size and valuation?
And of these, which would not be acceptable for a CAT?
And some examples.
That's my first question, but I know that we have a lot of commercial properties as
well, and land, and my main concern is it's all very well to say, well, the criteria,
but the criteria, and perhaps I ought to have gone through this first, the criteria is not
particularly tight.
And I can see that there's a lot of work going into this on the legal aspects.
I'm looking at more from assets, basically.
So if I just go on and then perhaps Fabrizio can come back afterwards.
But of this total, I suspect a lot of them are already leased out under various terms
with full repairing lease.
I know that certainly the David Lloyd also had
a percentage of their profits or their take
as well as the rent as well.
And that would be more than a 10 year lease.
It would have been quite a lot longer.
But also, I think that the scrutiny should be able to look
and see a list of a schedule of assets.
I know that there certainly used to be a commercial register of assets, and to see what those
are, what implications there could be, what the profit and loss is for these before we
actually start doing a policy that may have people thinking, oh yes, we'll go for that
and we've got nowhere to go on that.
But the other thing is, how many requests has EFDC had annually for CAT since that's
come into place and what are the examples?
So those are some of my questions, but I do want to come back on some of the comments,
some of the content of this.
So I don't know if you want to answer those questions first.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:26:13
I'm happy for you to come back on the content and I'll take questions on the end.
Right.
Can I just go to Jen Gould online first?
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:26:19
I'm just going to Jen Gould online.
Jennifer Gould - 0:26:27
I wanted to come back to you on a few points, I think.
Thank you, Chair.
Sorry.
Thank you, Chair.
Yeah, Councillor Dab.
I think what is important to note about the community asset transfer policy is that it's
not designed to dispose of commercial assets.
This is really about pockets of assets
that are valuable to the community.
So to give you some examples of that,
we have got examples of relatively small buildings
that have no use other than for, for example,
Girlguiding, Scouting activity and are run by those sort of community groups that it
may be worth looking at transferring that asset to because it doesn't hold
necessarily a value other than that community value. We've got pockets of
land attached for example to cemeteries that serve no other purpose but could
potentially provide an extension to existing church land for example. So the
policy is about those smaller bits of assets which hold a significant
community value to that local community but not necessarily commercial. So your
point about commercial assets wouldn't fall into this policy in any event.
Does that clarify the situation?
That's very helpful, thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:28:12
And I fully appreciate that that is a sensible approach.
What my concern is, is whether this policy is tight enough, to be honest.
And perhaps I can go through a couple of things, if that's all right with you, Mr Chairman.
So, on page 13, the background, we're talking about 1 .2, community asset transfer, and we're
talking about long leasehold or freehold basis.
So, it's saying about public body transfers, ownership, or management.
So, what we're basically saying is here, we're transferring ownership, are we?
because effectively if we're having a long lease of 99 to 150 years,
that's effectively not much different to a freehold.
Do you want me to come back on that?
Is it easier for you to answer each time?
Yeah, I think so.
And if I may well want to jump in.
Jennifer Gould - 0:29:18
But I mean, I think one of the reasons...
So I think a policy like this is difficult to be very specific because,
you know, for example, the two sort of examples that I've just given you there,
there's lots of different nuances to these pockets of assets.
And I think if we were to be too descriptive, we'd probably tie ourselves up in knots
and be unable to do anything for the benefit of the community.
So there is, I think there's a pragmatism to the policy and that we need to be sort
of relatively nimble and flexible with it.
So while I appreciate it's not necessarily buttoned down and hugely specific, I think
I think that flexibility is needed to be built in because each will be different and each
will be considered on its merits.
So you know, we might be looking potentially at transfer of ownership, we might be looking
at a long lease we might be looking at a shorter one, it really will depend upon the asset,
the value to the community. And this is all about, you know, the principle of the policy
is to safeguard those assets that are valuable to the communities in which they sit, rather
than placing them potentially at risk for the future. So that's the intention. But I
Do you think, you know, we'll certainly go through
and hear your points and we might be able to tweak
some of the wording, but I would caution, I think,
against making it so specific that it doesn't give us
any room to really genuinely consider each piece
on its own merits.
No, I appreciate all that, thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:31:09
So if we go on to page 19, governance and decision making,
applications will be initially assessed by an officer panel
comprised of representatives from.
Now what would be useful here is what level.
Now I don't know, property services, grounds maintenance.
I can't see anybody there as far as a chartered surveyor.
I think that's really, really important in leases.
They understand leases.
They understand sometimes leases more than the legal side because legal people try to
look after their client, but sometimes they don't necessarily do so.
I know this from my husband who is not only FRICS but also arbitrator and independent
expert in commercial leases.
So that is my concern, is that perhaps we should have somebody well versed in commercial
leases to have a look at that.
It comes to point number 10, reviewer monitoring.
Now, once an asset has been assigned, a formal review will take place at intervals agreed
between the council and the leaseholder.
This may vary between two and five years, depending on the length of the agreement.
I am not a surveyor, but I understand that that would actually, in a long lease of 99
years, 150 years, that would not be sensible. It would be sort of kicked out really. And
in any case, who would be paying for that? So I think that you might want to think about
well what covenants and things should be put into a lease rather than what we're going
to review and monitoring it as it would be a normal commercial lease for 10 or 20 years.
Later on it says reviews are intended to be supportive and may identify opportunities
for assistance, variation or improvement. But why and who would be paying for that?
And then on page 20, the council will retain the right to step in and where necessary and
proportionate bring the lease to an end in accordance with the terms of the lease.
Possession of the affected asset will revert to the council.
Well of course there are costs involved in that, taking people to court, etcetera, etcetera.
So I think this needs to be looked at a bit more carefully as far as how you're going
to have a lease, but the other thing that links to it is the management process. So
on page 22, the applicant should be established for the community, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah. So they are all fine. We have appropriately constituted such as registered charity, community
interest company, town of parish council, et cetera.
We don't know how long those are going to be in existence.
We don't even know how long town and parish council is going to be in existence.
And I think that, you know, to say as today this is what we think the applicant must have
is fine.
but when the asset must fulfil the following criteria.
And that is very, very vague.
So somebody who is really hell -bent on getting a nice,
you said at a scout hub, but something else,
could say, well, I qualify and, you know,
it's freehold owned by the council.
You don't, how do you know it's not, by interest,
how do you know it's not required for future investment?
Because things change over 50 years.
Little scrappy bits of ground that we didn't use before are now really important and valuable.
Be legally and financially viable for transfer.
What does that mean?
Suitable for it to be declared a surplus to requirements.
I think there's a lot of things in here that need to be looked back at and tidied up to
be a bit tighter.
I understand that a lot of work has been gone into it, but I think that it needs to be looked
at from those perspectives and again the proposed use, enhance the social community and economic
value of the asset. Why economic value of an asset? There are some things in here I
really don't understand and I think that we need to have it a lot tighter as far as the
criteria to be able to do so and what our assets are and to safeguard our assets. I'm
not against them being either very long lease or freehold to local communities.
For example, longer town council has a long lease on their council offices.
But I personally would like this to go back to have a bit more work on it before it is
approved by this group.
And I'm sorry I've spoken too long,
but Jen Gold might want to come back on a couple of things.
Just, I'm sure Nicola will come in.
Just to remind you this cabinet,
sorry, this meeting doesn't approve.
Laura Kirman - 0:36:56
It's recommended.
Thank you, Councillor Dadd.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:37:01
Can I go to Fabrizio first to come back
on some of your points?
So I'll try and take each of your points.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:37:07
So page 13, Councillor, you mentioned in terms of background
a long lease or freehold. So I suppose that will ultimately, again going back to Jen's
point, it's a case -by -case basis. So yes, it will ultimately, a long lease does become
a freehold. However, we will look at it on a case -by -case basis and look at where that
is appropriate. So for example, Jen gave an example of a piece of land next to potentially
a playground or something like that. We would have to look at that and see what are the
benefits of giving that up or giving that as a long lease. It might be a benefit to
the town and parish council, they can extend potentially a playground or a site of services
that they offer. So yes, to answer your question, yes, a long leasehold does ultimately become
a freehold. Page 19, you mentioned about governance and decision making. So that is on the initial
process. So the way we foresee this happening is we'd get an initial request for a piece
of land and we'd have to bring a group of officers together to look at identifying what
that land could, will be used for, if there's any future plans and so on before then bringing
in a surveyor and looking at value and other elements.
So ultimately what we want to do is have a two -stage process whereby someone sends an
expression of interest in, identifies the land, we need to then look at the land because
what has come out in many conversations with the organisations is we identify a piece of
land as one thing but they see it as another or another postal address, et cetera.
So we ultimately need a bit of information to be able to then do those eligibility cheques
on the land on the organisation itself.
You know, if an organisation applies in, says they want a commercial, sorry, an asset, a
community asset, and they have lots of reserves but they say they can't pay for it, then we
obviously have to take that into account as well.
So there's lots of different factors here.
And then at a later point you'd probably bring in a surveyor to look at the value and all
of the other elements of the land and the lease holding, and also obviously the legal
team we liaise with.
Review and monitoring.
So we have standard leases for that.
That's just an example.
Again, that can be changed in a policy if we feel that that's not appropriate.
it could be a longer review policy, but those reviews depend, needs to be proportionate
to also the asset that you're giving up and the asset that you might give a lease on.
For example, if you're working with a community organisation or a charity, they might not
have the capacity to bring in legal organisations, et cetera, so you need to make, I suppose
from a legally binding point of view, look at how you would work with them as well to
review the asset and review the management of the asset, et cetera.
Your point regarding be legally viable for transfer, so that's again going up, we need
to HRA, obviously looking at HRA, looking at all other policies, all other policies
we have as a council and make sure that it is legally viable to transfer, ensuring there's
no covenants on that land first.
So in some examples there might be covenants, allotments for example in other areas.
And then in terms of what would be the economic value of the asset, what that means is in
in terms of how, by giving that asset or transferring that
asset to an organisation, how would it benefit the asset
and the community?
How would it be bought into better economic standing?
So if it is, for example, a piece of scrub land that is
just sitting there and not being used,
it has no economic value.
However, if it's then transferred to a community
organisation, a parish council or a town council,
they're able to make it into a cemetery, for example,
another area that is a benefit to the community,
then it would obviously enhance the economic value of the asset.
I hope.
Yeah, go ahead.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:40:32
No, I agree with what you're saying, but what I'm basically saying is I really seriously think that it needs to have a charter surveyor look at it from a different perspective before you go into those details.
And I think also that the council needs to have, to actually have a look at the schedule of assets, what we have.
know what we're looking at.
I mean, you say that most of them would not be appropriate,
but let's have a look and see what we've got
and what difference it's going to make overall.
But that's obviously up to this committee.
Thank you.
Now, before, I know we've got Councillor Murray to come back,
but if there are specific comments
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:41:10
that you would like to pass on to cabinet
before it's approved, of course,
we're only passing on our approval.
We can by all means add your comments on
for cabinet to consider at the end of the item.
Any other members of the committee wanting to comment?
If not, I'll go to Councillor Murray.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:41:34
I've got one comment to make and then two questions.
If I understood the conversation correctly
and reading the report,
this is something that's happened in Louton
in my patch for quite some time.
I was a founding member of the parish council in 1996,
and we've got our share of the recreation ground,
which is by far the largest part on a long lease.
And I have to say it's been a very successful relationship.
And I think I can say without any challenge really
that we've cared for it far better
than the Echocross District Council,
I've known that piece of land since I was a child going way back to 1959 and the indifferent
Second Forest District Council showed it was quite markable and the care and consideration
here at Louth and Town Council within obvious financial constraints on the Long Lease has
really worked to the benefit of that space and the enjoyment of local people.
So I think this is a really good thing.
We've got a community hall in the middle of my ward
or it's actually more on the edge,
the Oakwood Hill Community Hall, which is an HRA asset,
but it's been on a long list of various organisations
for a long time.
And that seems to have worked to everyone's benefit.
And of course, that's in talk on,
I think all the playgrounds that were under the HRA
when we were set up.
So as a principle, I think it can work really, really well.
I do just have two questions
and I think I probably know the answer to the first one,
but I just want to make really clear.
We're not looking to approach organisations,
the initiation of the process would be
if anyone approached us.
So in other words, we're not looking to offload
community assets as part of say the LGR process,
because that did go through my mind
when I was reading the report.
So that would be the first question.
It's not a question of us approaching
community groups or parishes.
It would be a question of them approaching us.
And my second question on the very last page,
Is that an absolute assurance that the decision, the final decision making process would be
only when it's gone through communities and it will be a decision by cabinet.
It would never be a decision just made by a portfolio holder.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Councillor Murray.
I'll go to Fab for that.
Thank you, Councillor Murray.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:44:33
Yes, in answer to your first question, are we looking to approach organisations?
No, we're not.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:44:36
we are looking, this is voluntary, so it's for organisations to approach us with any
land or assets and so on that they would feel and also they must fit in within the criteria
of the VCSO. And yes, to answer your question, it would go through the proper process as
detailed in the process document, so it would go through a scrutiny process and then onto
cabinet for decisions on whether those assets obviously be transferred and that will include
obviously the length of lease and all of the other elements. Thank You
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:45:09
Councillor Whitbread. Thank You Chairman and thank you to Fabrizio I know a lot
Cllr Holly Whitbread - 0:45:14
of work has gone into this policy already and thank you to Councillor Dadd
as well for those detailed questions which are important because it is
important that we protect our assets and actually the reason we'd be looking at
this by case by case basis is so there was that level of legal protection
However, before this report gets to cabinet, we'll make sure we've looked through all of
the legal questions that you've asked and the detailed list of questions.
I'm happy to sit down with yourself and officers afterwards if that would provide some assurance.
What I would say about this policy, it's designed to be a positive community -based policy.
Actually, Councillor Murray rightly highlighted local government reform.
Actually, it's protection from any of those brilliant community resources we have across
the district, when we become a bigger unitary authority, we want to make sure some of those
smaller community assets survive and actually in many cases are improved and enhanced.
I know it's actually owned by Eppin Town Council, but it's the same principle.
The market garden in Eppin has been fantastically looked after by the community garden charity.
They do an amazing job and it's well used by the whole community.
So these are the kind of projects that we'll be looking at and looking for people to approach us about across and across the district
I would say in terms of the level of consultation. Certainly it needs to go through scrutiny as the cabinet member
I wouldn't want to be signing anything off individually and as well as going through the cabinet process
I would say it would be important to add a line as well that it goes through the ward members
to ensure we have full local consultation and if relevant the town and parish councils as
just to make sure it's working to everyone's benefit.
But I think there are a number of sites
which would come to mind in terms of looking at this
for the future.
I mean, Village Car Parks is actually a really good example.
Royden Parish Council have spoken to us previously
about the small parish car park.
And actually, in terms of local government reform,
we don't bring any income in,
and there's not any opportunity for income,
so it might be better if the parish council
look after it and make sure it's protected for local people and local businesses into
the future.
But I completely agree that every case needs to be looked at individually.
We don't want to make any unwise decisions in terms of assets.
Obviously we have a commercial asset register and we're very successful in terms of our
commercial assets.
And obviously we wouldn't be looking at giving anything away that would be bringing in income
to the council because that's so important to our financial picture overall.
but many of these assets are important to communities
and may be enhanced through this policy as well.
But thank you for the detailed questions,
and I look forward to presenting this report later on
and hopefully with approval of committee,
but we'll make sure that all those legal questions
are answered. Thank you.
Thank you. Councillor Brooks.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:48:10
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Rose Brookes - 0:48:14
My question refers to using it as an example,
Councillor Murray has mentioned the Oakwood Hill Community Centre,
which currently is leased by Restored Church and previously an old people's club.
It is a very valuable asset on the Oakwood and the state.
Now, if a community would like or someone in the community and organisation would
like to engage going forward but haven't got the financial means.
What sort of happens in that sort of situation?
And also, the ones that no one wants,
do they just transfer to the new West Essex authority, please?
Thank you, Councillor Brooks.
So I think if an organisation were interested in an asset
Fabrizio Ferrari - 0:49:11
and didn't have necessarily the financial backing.
We could support, obviously, as you know,
the communities team we work with,
I'm the director of, has a huge success
in applying for funding in other areas
and looking at support for funding.
So that's something we could potentially look at
and work with an organisation to look at
how they could apply for funding
for an asset to take on an asset.
We've done that with many other organisations
and we're willing to do that again.
So it's a case of trying to offer that whole 360 support
if we see the benefit of that organisation
taking on that asset. And in terms of the assets, well without knowing the whole process for local
government reorganisation, I couldn't comment on that but I assume they would transfer over as an
asset of the organisation that we become or the council that we become.
Thank you. I'll go to Jen Gould.
Jennifer Gould - 0:50:11
Yes, that's the assumption, he's right. Once EFDC no longer exists and is superseded by
the West Essex Unitary Authority or some description of that, whatever it's going to be called,
everything will get transferred across, so it won't be lost, it wouldn't be in the
Cllr Rose Brookes - 0:50:38
Thank you. And in a court like David Lloyd where we end the freehold, so we do get some
income from their lease, I'm not sure how long it is, what sort of happens in that sort
Jennifer Gould - 0:50:52
of situation? Is it similar? Yes, I mean, so, I mean, Ephraim Boroughs District Council
won't exist. So any contracts, leases, tenancies, etc, will get novated across or, you know,
I'm sure Nicola will pull me up on the terminology of that, I suspect that's not quite right,
but for all of those different types of eventualities. But yes, we'll all go to the new local authority,
we will continue to collect the income as we do now and that income will continue to go into the
general fund as it does at the moment. Just by the way, so once LGR also happens we will,
as you know, both Harlow and Uthausford are also stock holding local authorities and have an HRA,
so on the day one there will need to be one HRA one general fund so things will
come together in that way yeah thank you thank you if there are no further
comments from anybody else we need to well we've got to either recommend this
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:52:01
to cabinet for approval or we can add some some comments so councillor dad
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:52:11
would you like to add any comments yes please can I actually suggest that
But with discussion with Councillor Holly Whitbread, we've put through a couple of amendments
to make sure that it is safeguarding our assets.
I don't know what wording is the best to approach that.
Could suggest something like amendments to be agreed with the Cabinet holder prior to
the meeting?
Yes.
That be?
Laura Kirman - 0:52:42
Yeah, I'm happy with that.
Cllr Joseph Parsons - 0:52:46
So based on the amendments that we'll agree, are members happy to agree that to cabinet?
Thank you.
Perfect.
So the only other item is dates of future meetings, which will be the 3rd of November
2026.

9 DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS

Of course, we will have temp mortar.
Close to the time, I'll make sure reminders are sent for any questions.
But I will close the meeting now at 7 .53pm.
Cllr Rose Brookes
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill East and Whitebridge ward
Loughton Residents Association
View profile Cllr Rose Brookes
Cllr Mary Dadd
District councillor for Ongar ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Mary Dadd
Fabrizio Ferrari
Team Manager - Economic development & Health Improvement
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Fabrizio Ferrari
Jennifer Gould
Strategic Director - Chief Operating Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Jennifer Gould
Laura Kirman
Democratic Services Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Laura Kirman
Cllr Stephen Murray
District councillor for Loughton Roding ward
Independent
View profile Cllr Stephen Murray
Cllr Joseph Parsons
District councillor for Waltham Abbey West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Joseph Parsons
Nicola Sayers
Head of Legal
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Nicola Sayers
Cllr James Small
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill East and Whitebridge ward
Reform UK
View profile Cllr James Small
Cllr Holly Whitbread
District councillor for Epping West and Rural ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Holly Whitbread
Cllr Janet Whitehouse
District councillor for Epping East ward
Liberal Democrats
View profile Cllr Janet Whitehouse
Cllr Ken Williamson
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Ken Williamson