To receive information about the Council’s procedures for the disposal of assets.
(Oral report)
Minutes:
Officers provided a verbal report on the Council’s processes for the disposal of assets. An accompanying document, containing further information, was also provided for the consideration of Members (Appendix B). This handout contained a Minor Land Sales Flowchart, which demonstrated the Council’s process for disposing of minor land assets; extracts from the Council’s Asset Management Plan, which was in the process of being reviewed and updated; and an extract from the Council’s constitution which contained the scheme of delegation to relevant Officers.
Officers explained that assets could be broadly defined as any interest in land that the Council owned or held. This included buildings and also the Council’s vehicle fleet, though the report focused on the disposal of property assets.
Members were informed that there were four main types of property asset disposals. Firstly, there were disposals of non-physical minor assets such as removal of restrictive covenants and granting rights of way. Officers had adopted a practice of providing ward Councillors with advance notification about cases considered to have potentially contentious issues. Secondly, there were right of way disposals, which involved the sale of Council houses to sitting tenants under the terms of the Housing Act 1985. Thirdly, there were Minor Land Disposals, which involved the disposal of land which covered an area of up to half an acre and was valued at £10,000 or less. Finally, there were the Major Land Disposals, which involved assets which covered more than half an acre or had a value that was more than £10,000.
The Council’s arrangements for Minor Land Disposals had been considered and approved by Members at Committee level in 2003. Members had agreed that the original £10,000 value threshold should be reviewed on an annual basis, although this had not subsequently occurred. Officers were delegated with a number of powers to manage the disposal of minor land assets. However, Officers had to consult with ward Councillors over the disposal of land which had formerly been play areas.
Officers advised that individuals who were seeking information about acquiring minor land assets did receive an acknowledgement in writing. They were also advised about the timeframes involved and the potential legal costs. Applications would also be referred to planning Officers for an informal assessment about whether it was likely that the applicant would obtain permission to make use of the asset in the manner in which they had applied to do so. There was no standard outcome to applications as each was assessed individually.
The Council had been assessing the availability of resources for the Minor Land Disposal programme. Following this review it was likely that there would be a concentration of resources of Major Land Disposals. Consequently, it was likely that the time that would be taken by the Council to process applications pertaining to Minor Land Disposals would increase.
The Council received approximately ten – fifteen Minor Land Disposal enquiries every week, of which one or two a week would eventually progress through the full disposal programme. Applications were assessed in chronological order. Officers were asked to provide further information about the amount of revenue generated through this process per annum.
The Council utilised a different process for the disposal of major land assets. Officers assessed the background of the asset including, maintenance costs and service requirements, and would enquire with other public bodies to determine whether the asset could be utilised by them to provide services to the public. In the event that Officers determined that the asset was surplus to requirements it would be recommended for disposal as a surplus asset. A report to declare the asset surplus would be produced and would contain information detailing how the asset should be disposed.
Assets could be disposed of in a number of different ways by the Council. The options for selling assets included the formal tendering process, informal tenders and sales at auction. The decision about the method for selling the assets tended to be made by the Officers, based on their professional expertise, using their delegated powers. However, when the Council sold major land assets the decision about which method of disposal to use could be made at Committee level as could approval of the sale price.
Officers explained that covenants were sometimes incorporated into the terms of the sale of an asset by the Council. In cases where the covenant was breached the Council attempted to reach negotiated settlements or would launch legal proceedings for continued breach. On occasions the Council would seek to dispose of assets that had been acquired with restricted covenants attached. In these circumstances the Council could enter into negotiations with relevant parties to resolve the situation with a view to maximising the value of the land to be sold. Restrictive covenants remained attached to land regardless of whether planning permission was granted.
RESOLVED that
a) further information about the amount of revenue generated through the disposal of minor land assets per annum; and
b) the report be noted.