Agenda item

Decision

That Cabinet approved;

1.    The proposal to transfer responsibility for Tring Sports Centre to Tring School in line with the conditions and requirements outlined in this report to enable significant investment in Tring leisure facilities.

2.    Recommendation 1 above is conditional on the successful completion of due diligence and following formal approval from Tring School.   

3.    For DBC to mutually agree to terminate the existing Dual Use Agreement and enter into a new Funding Agreement to reflect the terms as set out in the Cabinet report. This will be undertaken in consultation with the Section 151 Officer and the Monitoring Officer. 

Reason for decision

For Cabinet to review and approve the proposal to transfer responsibility for Tring Sports Centre to Tring School in line with the conditions and requirements outlined in report

Corporate objectives

These reliefs will support the corporate objectives of:

·         Clean, Safe and Enjoyable Environment

and;

·         Modern and Efficient Council

Monitoring Officer/S.151 Officer comments

Monitoring Officer:  

No comments to add to the report

S.151 Officer

This investment is within the budget previously approved by Council for the improvements at Tring Pool.

In order to ensure the required returns from the investment, the new Funding Agreement with Tring School must adequately capture the appropriate guarantees over continued public use of the facility. The Service will need to work closely with Finance throughout the drafting of the Agreement.

Advice

RSmyth provided a verbal update further to discussions with Tring School that had taken place today (13/02/18); and was comfortable with everything outlined in report.  Tring School have some concern about timings as dependent on the Government signing off on a contract for 1^st April (EFSA will sign off).  We have developed a backup position, still involving Tring school taking over from the 1^st April, but allowing us more time to develop the contract should the EFSA take longer than the 4-6 weeks they suggest.  All parties happy we will be able to take this forward in the timescales proposed.

RSmyth added, construction work to be delivered by Kier, expecting final design and schedule of works in next couple of weeks but all progressing well.  Once received, will share this with the school to put a definitive timeline in place to start works (expected May 2018)

Cllr Marshall asked, what is the extent of the community use, will the School provide ‘X’ amount of hours over the duration of the contract?  RSmyth advised they will have to mirror the arrangements and hours that are already in place.

Cllr Marshall asked, will the contract allow the Council and the School to amend those hours in the future if needs arise?  RSmyth clarified that the school must, as a minimum, honour the existing hours. 

Cllr Williams confirmed, for clarity, that we will be ending the existing dual use agreement and starting a new dual use agreement, protections will be in place for those facilities covered by the agreement.

Cllr Harden asked, under Item 3.3 in the report around the potential of the facility not being financially viable in the future, is there a scenario where the school could say it is not financially viable but we disagree with them?  MBrookes advised that we would go through a process of testing the information to ensure we are satisfied with the position before any decision would be made.

Cllr Marshall suggested the school could decide it is not viable to keep the facility open outside of school hours and may decide to close it to the community, what would be the position should that happen?  MBrookes advised there is a penalty clause built into the contract to cover that.

Cllr Hicks asked if the proposal is yet at the stage where the information can be shared, he would like to see the specification.  RSmyth advised that as soon as the works are signed off and the information is available it can be shared.

Cllr Hicks referred to the disabled facilities at the pool, stating that they require upgrade.  RSmyth advised that the upgrade of the pool lift equipment has been included in the specification.

Cllr Hicks referred to the 10 year contract period and asked, are there any plans for what will happen in terms of refurb of equipment after the 10 years?  RSmyth responded that it would be a policy decision for Members at that time to look at what the next options will be for the facility.

Cllr Douris referred to the 10 year duration of the contract and asked what the break notice is within that 10 years, is there any scope for Tring School to devolve the running of the facility to a 3^rd party company, and what would happen if the 3^rd party then decided it was not financially viable for them?  RSmyth responded that the breakage notice is 2 years, with financial penalties built in.

Cllr Douris referred to Item 3.12 in the report, noting that it would imply that the 2 years notice period is in reference to after the 10 years of operation, not before. 

RSmyth confirmed it is the same notice period prior to the 10 years.  MBrookes confirmed that within that 10 years there would be significant financial penalty.

RSmyth confirmed that Tring School can appoint a 3^rd party to run the facility for them.  Tring have advised that in the long term they want to run the facility themselves but may need to bring an operator in while they get up and running.  It would remain the responsibility of Tring School to maintain any operator, who would have to continue to work within the confines of our specification.

Cllr Douris asked if we as the Council would have oversight of any contract with a 3^rd party to ensure that the community is not being overlooked.  RSmyth confirmed it would be for Tring School to run, but one of the things we are very clear about is that this is a partnership, the School wants the same thing as us so we would fully expect they would talk to us, however it would remain their decision.

Cllr Williams added that should Tring School appoint an operator that does not operate within our specification they then the school would be in breach of the contract.

Voting

None.