Thursday, 4 September 2014

Kirklees Cabinet taking a clearly planned route in changes to s106 policy

To ensure public understanding of the Cabinet response to a recent question from a Lib-Dem councillor, the real context can be found below. There is no reluctance to act on the wishes of full council, as claimed (see tweet below), but clearly a well planned route based on the realities of current policy, legislative changes as of April 2015 and best use of time and resources to achieve this.

The question above related to both the planning process and the final implementation which is administered by colleagues in school places an additional comment is being prepared by them about consultation with heads and school place planning..From the planning services’ perspective the outcome of the 2012 Scrutiny report has seen significant work to ensure S106 information is held centrally and is accessible by Members.

Following March Cabinet meeting a reminder of the location and a brief guide how to use S106 database was sent around all Members. This database contains information relating to both draft and signed S106 including a copy of the agreement and a summary of contributions with notes on where this will be spent.

It is important to note that S106 law requires that infrastructure needs, including education, must be fully justified in terms of where the money is spent. In practice this inevitably results in contributions going towards local needs as a matter of law .Under these circumstances there is no further need to embed this process in a council policy.

Notwithstanding this, under current legislative arrangements, particularly the Community Infrastructure Levy, the future will see changes from April 2015 to how contributions are received and used by the council. Work is currently being undertaken to prepare how in the medium and long term the changes will affect the negotiation of future S106 agreements.

In light of the current statutory arrangements and eventual further changes to S106 arrangements, it is considered unnecessary to introduce short terms amendments to the S106 process.