The Overview and Scrutiny Committee of Reigate and Banstead Borough Council met to discuss key performance indicators, budget monitoring, sustainability efforts, and community asset management, and agreed the membership of the Budget Scrutiny Panel. The committee reviewed performance reports, budget forecasts, and strategies, providing observations to the Executive for further consideration. A significant focus was placed on a proposal regarding community assets, with the aim of safeguarding local services in light of upcoming local government changes.

Here's a more detailed look at the topics discussed:

Community Assets

The committee discussed a report on community assets, with a focus on how the council can best utilise its assets and resources to provide the most value for the borough and its residents, in light of the upcoming local government reorganisation (LGR). Councillor Green, Executive Member for Finance, Assets & Governance, highlighted the importance of safeguarding non-statutory services and ensuring residents retain the benefits of having their own local council.

The report identified three main points of proposed activity:

• Adoption of a new Community Asset Transfer Policy to make the process of moving an asset into community control clearer and smoother.
• Setting up a programme inviting local community groups to apply to take over assets or obtain grant funding to acquire or improve community assets, and fast-tracking affordable housing schemes in the borough.
• Allocating a portion of revenue reserves to allow spending of up to £18.757 million to support these purposes.

The discussion covered several aspects of the proposals:

• Community Asset Transfer Policy: The policy aims to establish a clear process for transferring assets to community organisations, defined as not-for-profit organisations including charities, Community Interest Companies (CICs), and residents' associations. Most transfers would involve long leases rather than freehold ownership, subject to conditions to ensure proper maintenance.
• Governance: Concerns were raised regarding the level of detail in the policy and the governance arrangements. The proposed Community Asset Group (CAG) would play a central role in reviewing applications. Some members requested that all members could contribute on a cross party basis.
• Officer Delegations: Concerns were raised over the scope of officer delegations, which were acknowledged to be broader than usual but necessary due to the limited timeframe.
• Affordable Housing Delivery: Officers require delegated authority to procure properties for affordable housing purposes, subject to the usual processes and a full business case.
• Freehold versus Leasehold: The committee discussed the merits and risks of transferring assets via freehold versus long lease arrangements. Freehold transfers would only be supported where the applicant demonstrated strong organisational stability and a reliable funding source.
• Timeline: The anticipated timeline for the rollout of the Community Asset Transfer programme would be to open the expression of interest process by the end of October or early November 2025.
• Partnership Working: A £2.5 million budget had already been allocated to assist Registered Providers (RPs) with development schemes, and a further £1 million delegation was due to be considered by the Executive the following week to support viability on RP-owned sites.
• Use of Reserve: A Member requested that individual budget envelopes be established out of the £18.757 million reserve, for the various elements (residential properties, development pipeline mobilisation, community asset transfers and support).
• Resourcing: The Chief Executive commented regarding organisational capacity in the context of the forthcoming Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), noting that the Council's capacity to deliver both business-as-usual services and additional project work would be increasingly constrained as staff were drawn into the implementation of LGR.

In light of the concerns raised, Councillor Nick Harrison, Residents Association Group Leader, proposed that Group Leaders meet in the coming week before the Executive meeting to discuss these issues.

The committee noted the information regarding community assets and made observations to the Executive.

Q1 Performance 2025/26

Councillor James King, Executive Member for Corporate Policy & Resources, presented the Quarter 1 Performance Report 2025/26, which contained new and revised Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the new reporting year.

Of the 12 Key Performance Indicators reported on in Quarter 1, nine were on target or within the agreed tolerance. Three indicators were off-target and outside of the agreed tolerance:

• KPI 7 – Affordable housing permissions: There were no permissions granted in the quarter.
• KPI 10 – Recycling: In Q1 the result was just below target, which was relatively consistent with the percentage from Q1 2024/25.
• KPI 11 – Reduction in the Council's Carbon Footprint: Carbon emissions continued to fall but were at a level that remained below the target.

Other points raised:

• Recycling: A Member requested information on the amount of recycling collected at bring sites, and how that had changed in recent years. Officers agreed to provide further detail. The Chair noted that since closing the bring site at Tattenham Corner, this area was now very clean, but that the problem of clutter had now moved to the Asda site, and this needed attention.
• Reduction in the Council's Carbon Footprint: A Member questioned whether these targets were realistic and whether they required review.
• Homelessness positive outcomes: It was confirmed that levels of emergency accommodation were reasonably similar to those of the previous two years.
• Customer contact: A Member asked if there was an explanation for the steep increase in Facebook social media contact in April 2025. Officers agreed to provide a written answer.
• Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) Programme Dashboard: The Chair requested that this dashboard be made available to Members monthly. A Member suggested that the use of acronyms be avoided, or the acronyms be explained within this document and also that a one-page summary be provided to illustrate the headlines.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the Key Performance Indicators for Q1 2025/26 and the Local Government Reorganisation Internal Programme Dashboard and made observations to the Executive.

Q1 Revenue and Capital Budget Monitoring 2025/26

Councillor Green, Executive Member for Finance, Assets & Governance, gave an overview of the Council's Revenue and Capital Budget position for Quarter 1 to 30 June 2025.

Officers were now projecting a revenue overspend for the full year of £1.1 million, with the key driver being the result of property vacancies, and action was being taken to mitigate that. The Executive Member stated that no new commercial investments would be entered into, and over the coming year one piece of work would be to divest the Council of underperforming commercial assets, which would help resolve this issue.

Other points raised:

• Debt Position: A Member asked for further information on the debt position in comparison to other years and other authorities. The Chair asked if information about provisions held against overdue debts could be shared with Members after the meeting.
• The Harlequin Theatre: The Executive Member confirmed that the theatre was on track to re-open in December 2026.
• Merstham Recreation Ground: A Member asked when the pavilion might open and also reported that the problem with sewage spill on one of the pitches persisted. Officers confirmed that the pavilion was expected to open on 25th of September 2025.
• Banstead FC: A Member asked what the planned works for Banstead FC were.
• Marketfield Way underspend: The Marketfield Way underspend primarily related to the retention on the construction contract.
• Redhill Distribution Centre: It was explained that there had been a long-standing tenant at Redhill Distribution Centre who had now retained only a portion of the site.
• Commercial Risk Fund: It was confirmed that the Commercial Risk Fund existed to assist with covering void costs in Council owned properties but it was not sufficiently large to handle this scale of void.
• Emergency and temporary accommodation: A Member raised concerns over the cost of £1.31 million to deliver five bedsits. It was confirmed that officers were revising the plan to reduce the estimated costs.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the Revenue Budget Forecast, the Outstanding Debt Summary, the Capital Budget Forecast, and the Treasury Management Prudential Indicators and made observations to the Executive.

Reigate & Banstead 2025 Annual Report 2024/25

Councillor King, Executive Member for Corporate Policy & Resources, introduced the Reigate & Banstead 2025 Annual Report 2024/25, which was the fifth and final annual report on the Council's corporate plan for 2020 to 2025.

The last five years had been a challenging time, both locally and for the local government sector as a whole. Despite this, the Council has been able to deliver consistent high-quality services for the borough, avoiding the cuts many others have had to impose.

Other points raised:

• Targets and success measures: Officers acknowledged that there were opportunities to review targets, success measures, and how they are monitored and reported on.
• Financial efficiency: It was confirmed that when considering residents' view on value for money, residents were likely to include the combined cost of Council Tax with Surrey County Council, as well as the Police and Crime Commissioner.
• Survey: Officers confirmed that there was a good response to the resident survey.
• Affordable homes and the housing waiting list: A Member noted that the number of residents on the housing waiting list was increasing, and that the Council had not met its key performance target regarding the delivery of affordable housing.
• Crime figures: It was confirmed that crime figures included in the report were based on Police crime figures.
• Obesity: A Member was concerned at the statistic that 64% of those living in the borough were classified as obese or overweight and asked what action the Council was taking to combat this.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the Reigate & Banstead 2025 Annual Report for 2024/25 and the Equality Objectives Progress Report for 2024/25 and made observations for consideration by the Executive.

Environmental Sustainability Annual Report 2024/25

Councillor Moses, Executive Member for Greenspaces & Environmental Sustainability, outlined the work that had taken place over the past year in delivering the Council's Environmental Sustainability Strategy.

Good progress on actions across all themes of the strategy had been made and the report included examples of completed actions that improve nature, help residents and businesses reduce waste and save energy, money and carbon, and embed sustainability in the Council's decision making.

Also included was an addendum recommending that delegated authority is given to enter into new energy contracts to supply both renewable electricity and green renewable gas¹.

Other points raised:

• EPC levels: A Member noted that there were four Council-owned properties below EPC and asked how improvements would be progressed.
• Low carbon transport: A Member noted that bus travel was of high importance in rural areas, and asked what action was being taken to ensure the best travel options for residents, and how that would help to reduce carbon from transport.
• Potential carbon reduction from retrofit programme and switch to HVO: Officers confirmed that once the refuse fleet was running on HVO, a 25% reduction of the entire carbon footprint should be realised.
• Decarbonisation: In terms of the feasibility study to decarbonise the Depot, officers reported that a tender had closed the previous week, and the results were currently being analysed.
• Electricity and gas usage: A Member noted that in Annex 2, electricity and gas usage was broken down into Town Hall, Depot, Harlequin, and other. He requested a breakdown of the sites, current energy usage and carbon footprint contained in other .
• Redhill bus station: It was confirmed that officers from this Council had a regular liaison with officers from Surrey County Council and had requested to be involved in the forthcoming study regarding the redevelopment of Redhill bus station.
• Red-rated items: A Member raised concerns about the number of red-rated items, particularly those relating to fleet decarbonisation and building retrofit.
• Warm Homes Local Grant: A Member asked for information on the Warm Homes Local Grant, such as eligibility to apply, and when the Council would be promoting this grant.
• EV chargers: Officers explained that the Council's Electric Vehicle (EV) Position Statement, served as a foundation for future strategy development, if required.
• Surrey Wildlife Trust: It was explained that there was a continuing engagement with partner organisations, such as Surrey Wildlife Trust, for the Nature and Environment Theme.
• Orchard Drive playground, Horley: A Member noted that the playground at Orchard Drive, was in need of repair and currently partly shut, and asked when works on this playground might be completed.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the Environmental Sustainability Strategy progress report and the recommendation that Delegated Authority is given to the Head of Property Services to enter into a new fixed rate contract(s) to supply REGO renewable electricity and green gas for a two-year period.

Constitution of Budget Scrutiny Panel 2025/26

The Committee agreed membership of the Budget Scrutiny Panel as follows:

Councillors Michael Blacker, Paul Chandler, Victoria Chester, Nick Harrison, Simon Parnall, Mark Smith, Sam Walsh and Tim Wotton.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed the membership of the Budget Scrutiny Panel and timetable for scrutiny of the Budget for 2026/27 and the scope of the Budget Scrutiny Panel's work during 2025/26.

Overview and Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme

The Chair noted that Thames Water would be in attendance at the next meeting on 9 October 2025.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme 2025/26 and the action tracker.

Other Items

It was reported that there were no items arising from the Executive that might be subject to the call-in procedure.