Agenda and minutes

The Committee noted the evacuation and housing keeping procedure.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the last meeting held on 15^th December 2025

Clarification was requested regarding the funding for the Elton Interchange project discussed at minute number PLA/40/25 Scrutiny Review of Governance of Capital Projects. Officers noted that when the funding was originally applied for it was a grant however during the process of securing the funding the conditions changed. This funding had to be utilised to forward fund the development prior to any funding being secured from developers. Once developer contributions were received the funding would then have to be recycled to unlock future developments. The fund should perhaps have been called a recoverable grant i.e. the Council recovered it upon receipt of the Developer contributions. 

AGREED that the minutes of the meeting held on 15^th December 2025 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive information from Officers in relation to this scrutiny topic (papers to follow).

The Committee received a presentation outlining the governance structure of the Capital Programme, which included:

• The “macro” decision making governance structure. It was noted that for every project there was a project group made up of a project manager, officers from finance, legal, and procurement, and other relevant officers. These reported to the relevant working group which were chaired by Assistance Directors and oversaw progress. The working groups reported to the Placemaking (Regeneration) Mission Board (PMB) who held responsibility for the capital programme. The PMB progressed projects to Corporate Management Team (CMT), Powering our Futures Board (POF), and Cabinet/Council for formal approval.
• The “micro” capital projects lifecycle and governance process which was a five-stage process from Foundation and Discovery through to Design, Delivery and Review. There were gateways at each of the stages to approve progression to the next stage, monitor delivery, and highlight closure/benefits. Funding was addressed at each of these gateways. Every scheme had to be fully funded before a project could progress to the next stage.

The Committee questioned member engagement within the process and were informed that the type of member engagement was dependent on the project. Ward members were consulted when appropriate for Ward specific schemes and when there were boards for a project, e.g. the Thornaby Town Deal, member were represented on that board. For all projects there was regular dialogue with the relevant Cabinet member and, where appropriate, with the Leader and Deputy Leader. Members further questioned how they were informed of changes to the Capital Programme. Officers explained that following the Programme being agreed as part of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) Budget Report in February, Members received quarterly MTFP updates to note which contained any changes to the Programme. 

It was questioned how projects were identified for the Capital Programme. Officers noted the projects could be identified through consultation with members and/or the public, as a response to a specific issue, or through funding opportunities that arose. Officers explained that benefits of a project were defined at the Foundation and Discovery stages, monitored throughout the stages, and the effectiveness of the project reviewed at the final stage.

Members raised the funding of projects via Section 106 agreements, questioning how it was ensured that the projects agreed were carried out. Officers noted that Section 106 projects were agreed to mitigate the impact of a development on the surrounding area and may include a condition that the project would take place once an agreed number of properties had been built, with contingency built in to the agreement for increasing costs of the project. Once that point had been reached it would be included in the Capital Programme and subject to the governance structure outlined.

Risks within a project was discussed. Projects could only be placed on the capital programme and move through the lifecycle and governance stages if the funding was identified. The Discovery stage established the expected costs of a project and potential risks, which could include inflation, supply chain, labour  ...  view the full minutes text for item PLA/45/25

Consideration was given to the Work Programme.

AGREED that the Work Programme be noted.