Agenda item

Report number LDS082 by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.    (Enclosure)

The Heads of Finance and Legal and Democratic Services gave a presentation to PDG members about the Community Right to Bid which provided a broad overview and summarised the broad principles.

Provisions gave local groups a right to nominate a building or other land for listing by the local authority as an asset of community value, which is designed as: “an actual or current use of the building or other land that is not ancillary use, furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community, and it is realistic to think that there can continue to be non-ancillary use of the building or other land which will further the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community”. Exemptions included residential properties including gardens, outbuildings and other associated land and residential caravan land.

When a listed asset was put forward for sale, local community groups would be given a fair chance to make a bid to buy it on the open market. Nothing further would happen unless the owner decided to dispose of the asset. Assets would remain listed for a 5-year period.

Parishes, community organisations and constituted neighbourhood forums could nominate assets to go on the list. On receipt of a nomination form the local authority would have 8-weeks to make a judgement about whether the asset met the definition as set out in the Act. If the asset was nominated then the local authority must place the asset on a list and notify all parties. The owner of the asset would have a right to appeal through an internal review process led by officers who did not take part in the decision to list the asset. If the local authority did not agree that the asset should be listed, it would be placed on a list of assets called ‘nominated but not listed’. These lists were required to be published publically.

If the owner decided to dispose of a listed asset, they would be required to notify the local authority of their intention. Following receipt of this notice, there would be a 6-week period to allow community interest groups to make a written request to be treated as a potential bidder. If no community groups were to come forward the owner could sell at the end of the 6-week period. If a request was forthcoming a 6-month moratorium would begin during which the owner could continue to market but could not exchange contracts (unless to a community group). After the moratorium period the owner would be free to sell to whomever they chose and at whatever price.

Councillors were asked to make recommendations in respect of a number of questions in report LDS082. The proposed form on which assets should be nominated was attached as appendix A to the report. Councillors were keen to ensure that applications were made by genuine local groups and to prevent spurious applications. They agreed that parish meetings and the Grantham Charter Trustees should be able to put forward applications. Within the legislation an unincorporated group required 21 people who were on the electoral register for the district. Councillors felt this number was too high and suggested that consideration should be given to a lower number, taking account of the informal nature of an unincorporated group and the number of residents in some of the smaller villages.

Conclusion:

1.    That the community groups as defined in legislation should be able to nominate assets, together with parish meetings and the Grantham Charter Trustees.

2.    Consideration should be given to decreasing the number of people required to constitute an unincorporated group from 21 people on the electoral register for the district.

Members of the PDG considered the process through which nomination applications should go. It had been proposed that forms should be considered by the Heads of Finance and Legal and Democratic Services and the Property Development Manager with any review being undertaken by a Strategic Director. One Councillor suggested that there should be Member input in taking decisions on whether assets should be listed. The group considered the role of elected members in supporting their local communities putting forward nominations and whether it was a technical decision that could be taken by officers within parameters agreed by Councillors.

Conclusion:

1.    That nominations for community assets should be considered by officers against criteria approved by Councillors.

2.    That the definition of community assets should be taken from the legislation.

Following recommendations from the PDG, a report would be presented to the Constitution Committee on 6 December 2012 and referred on to full Council on 13 December 2012 for consideration.

Recommendation:

That the provisions in respect of the Community Right to Bid proposed in report number LDS082 should go forward to the Constitution Committee and Council subject to the inclusion of parish meetings and the Grantham Charter Trustees as bodies eligible to put forward nominations and that further consideration should be given to the number of people required to form an unincorporated group.