The Strategy and Resources Committee met on 8 December 2025, and among other things, decided not to proceed with the Genr8 Kajima Regeneration Ltd (GKRL) bid for the Sutton Civic and Town Centre Regeneration, but will continue to develop proposals for housing on the current Civic Centre site and review options for relocating services within the town centre. The committee also approved a contract with Amazon Web Services (AWS) for cloud data centre services and noted the Resilience Standards for London Self Assessment 2025.

Sutton Civic and Town Centre Regeneration

The committee decided not to enter into a development agreement with GKRL for the Sutton Civic and Town Centre Regeneration project, terminating the procurement process. The project aimed to develop a new civic centre, improve the St Nicholas Shopping Centre, and develop surplus sites for housing.

Lucy Taylor, Programme Manager for Sutton Civic and Town Centre Regeneration, explained that the proposals were not affordable to the council due to significant cost increases identified during the preferred bidder stage. These increases were attributed to additional construction and refurbishment work required, new fire and building regulations, and the risk of further cost increases.

Councillor Barry Lewis, Leader of the Council, said that it was the right decision not to proceed with the GKRL bid, and that the council was still ambitious to provide housing on the Civic Centre site, Gibson Road and the Secombe Centre.

Councillor Neil Garratt raised concerns about proceeding with demolition without a replacement plan for council offices and the library. Councillor Lewis responded that the council would not proceed with one without the other.

Councillor Tim Foster proposed an amendment to recommendation 2.2 to examine the economic options for future use of the civic offices and St Nicholas Centre and report back on those. This was seconded by Councillor James McDermott-Hill, but was not agreed.

The committee agreed to continue to develop proposals for housing on the current Civic Centre site and to continue to review options to relocate services within the town centre.

Finance and Performance Update

The committee discussed the Finance and Performance report for Quarter 2 of 2025/26, which provided an update on the council's financial and other performance.

Richard Simpson, Strategic Director of Resources, reported that the forecast general fund revenue outturn overspend for 2025/26 had decreased from £1.262m to £0.456m. However, he noted that adult social care and temporary accommodation continued to be key areas of overspend. He also highlighted concerns over the dedicated schools grant (DSG) and how it is funded.

Councillor Sunita Gordon, Lead Member for Resources, said that councils across the country were under huge pressure, but that Sutton was managing these pressures responsibly.

Dedicated Schools Grant

Mr Simpson noted that the overspend on the dedicated schools grant (DSG) had decreased slightly, but that the council was still anticipating a cumulative deficit of £22.5 million by 31 March 2026. He explained that the government had accepted that something needs to change because the system is no longer affordable, and that a policy paper is expected in the new year.

Councillor Tom Drummond asked what the council's plan B would be if the government said that the deficit was coming back onto the books. Mr Simpson responded that the council would need to look at exceptional financial support from the government.

Adult Social Care Forecasting

Councillor Drummond raised concerns about adult social care forecasting, noting that the council always seems to under forecast for this. She asked why the council forecasts at the lower end of the range.

An officer responded that forecasting is a complicated process, and that the council has to take into account a number of factors, including the number of young people who will turn 18, inflationary uplift, and demand from the NHS¹. He added that the council has a robust savings plan in place to manage demand.

Councillor Gordon said that from a corporate perspective, she was pushing hard to manage the budget so that the council can agree a balanced budget across the realm and not have to cover other frontline services in order to pay for that.

Neighbourhood Fund and Public Realm Programme Consolidation

Councillor Richard Clifton asked about the proposal to consolidate the neighbourhood fund with the public realm programme. He said that it seemed sensible, but that he was concerned about the balance of decision-making between officers and councillors.

An officer responded that the proposal was seeking to simplify the process by which councillors make decisions around funding, and to make it as simple and transparent as possible for community groups and residents to put forward funding requests. He added that the decision-making will be via local committees.

Councillor Foster said that the wording of the proposal was too complicated and subject to interpretation. She asked for clarification on whether the allocation of neighbourhood funds would be determined by the strategy and resource committee and full council, or by the relevant chief or deputy chief officer.

An officer responded that the wording was there to allow the flexibility for each local committee to decide how they want to run that funding and decision-making process.

Councillor David Hicks asked for confirmation that the pots will be divided up between local committees at the strategic level, and that the local committees will then decide what to spend. An officer confirmed that this was the case.

Councillor Gareth Roberts said that the form of words seemed to be a shift of power from the whole local committee to the local committee chair. An officer responded that this was reflective of current arrangements, and that it enables local committees to take a flexible approach.

Housing

Councillor Foster asked about the shortfall on rental income due to voids². An officer responded that there were very few voids, and that they were usually empty for a particular reason, such as someone having vacated them. He added that some of the voids are left in a certain condition that takes time to be brought back to a standard that can then be occupied again.

Councillor Foster also asked about the additional million pounds for the Grove development to Southern Living Limited, questioning how the additional price of £100,000 per apartment was being justified. An officer responded that the full amount of a million wasn't made up from additional receipts, but also from Southern Living Limited making less profit on the development.

Councillor Foster asked why Southern Living Design, a sister company of Southern Living Limited, had a final notice of compulsory winding up in April this year. An officer responded that he had no idea, but would follow it up.

Local Government Association Corporate Peer Challenge Progress Review

The committee discussed the Local Government Association Corporate Peer Challenge Progress Review and the Residents and Staff Survey findings.

Councillor Lewis said that the Corporate Peer Challenge was a good report, and that the progress review was good on the 11 recommendations that were made. He also highlighted some encouraging results from the resident survey, including that 90% of residents were satisfied with Sutton as a place to live.

An officer added that the peer team also spoke about the importance of the charity growth community sector in the work the council does, and noted the good progress that has been made in terms of developing and continuing to invest in the relationships that the council has in that sector.

Councillor Drummond asked about the second lowest score in the staff survey, which was that staff understand and feel committed to the vision of the corporate plan. She noted that the lowest score was in public health and wellbeing, and asked what the council was doing to address this.

An officer responded that a 7.46 score was a pretty high score in any local authority for engagement with the corporate plan. He added that the particular challenge in public health is that the council has a large number of staff who are also working inside the NHS.

Councillor Neil Garratt said that the staff survey did not include questions about whether staff feel confident that they are well equipped to do what they need to do, or whether they feel proud about the service that they deliver for residents. He asked why these questions were not included.

An officer responded that the appendix only included a selection of the highest and lowest scores, and that the full list of questions could be provided.

Councillor Marian James said that she spends a lot of time talking to staff, and that she often hears from them how supported they are by their managers and how much they enjoy working for Sutton.

Sutton College Annual Report

The committee discussed the Sutton College Annual Report 2025-26.

Councillor Lewis said that there had been a great turnaround since September 2022, when the college got a requires improvement Ofsted rating. He congratulated Jan Underhill and Tom Dillon, the principal of Sutton College, on the latest Ofsted report, which has been upgraded to good.

Ms Underhill said that the report updated members on some of the achievements and progress that has been made since the last report. She said that there were three main things in the report: the good outcome from Ofsted, the impact that the college is having in adult education, and the new college site.

Mr Dillon said that the trailblazer programme is a government funded initiative, and that the college is working with the South London partnership to deliver this programme.

Councillor Garratt congratulated the college on getting from requires improvement to good. He said that he found it puzzling that the Ofsted report did not provide a roadmap from good to outstanding.

Councillor Drummond asked if the two areas that the college needed to improve on were something that the college was aware of, or if it came as a shock. Mr Dillon responded that it was not a shock, and that it was part of the college's quality improvement plan.

Councillor Foster asked if the college was taking any steps to partner with local employers in the area. Mr Dillon responded that the college does work with a number of local employers, and that it has an extensive list that it can demonstrate who it works with and how it works with them.

Councillor Richard Clifton said that he has always regarded the college as an absolute jewel in Sutton's crown. He asked if the balance between formal skills and general interest and wellbeing has changed over the years. Ms Underhill responded that there are a number of elements offered to the college's operations, including national and local initiatives, local employers' needs, and learner demand.

Councillor James said that she was particularly pleased to see the work that the college is doing with SEND learners. She asked if the college promotes its courses to providers who work directly with people who expect vocational needs and or disabilities, and if the course that leads to employment is open to SEND learners as well. Mr Dillon responded that the SEND offer is promoted with other providers, and that the curriculum has been completely reformed and learners in SEND are ensured complete work experience and voluntary placements.

Resilience Standards for London Self Assessment

The committee discussed the Resilience Standards for London Self Assessment 2025.

Councillor Lewis said that Sutton is recognised as a safe borough with relatively low exposure to external threats, but that it is subject to local resilience challenges. He highlighted the gas water leaks in July 2025 on Carshalton Road, which led to some evacuations and overnight support for residents.

An officer said that the Resilience Standards for London were important in following the impact of Grenfell, and that they are aimed at improving resilience across all authorities. She added that Sutton is confident that it does fairly well on its resilience, and that it is ranked as established across 10 of the 11 categories.

Councillor Jake Short said that the communication from the modes of planning to the council during the incident in July was quite good. He asked for more information on how the council is going to take forward the standard that it is self-assessed as developing, which relates to community involvement.

An officer responded that the reason this was looked at as developing is not that the council hasn't done any work in it, but that there is always more that can be done.

Councillor Tchil said that there was an incident in his ward when the incinerator malfunctioned and unfiltered smoke poured into the community. He said that the council didn't have a plan to manage that issue at the time, and that it still doesn't have a plan to manage that issue if it were to occur again. He requested that the council consider and undertake a proactive plan to manage such incidents.

An officer responded that the council prepares based on the nature of the incidents, as opposed to specific locations.

Councillor Drummond asked when the emergency planning policy and strategy was last reviewed. An officer responded that they would need to check the exact dates, but that the council reviews its processes after any incidents.

Councillor Gareth Roberts asked how the council is adapting to the increasing number of tall buildings in Sutton, and how it is making sure that the gully cleaning process is keeping up with the more intense rain. An officer responded that the council works closely with the London Fire Brigade on tall buildings, and that it is getting better and better with its gully cleaning services.

Contract Award - Cloud Data Centre Services

The committee discussed the contract award for cloud data centre services.

Councillor Gordon said that the report asks the committee to approve awarding a cloud data center contract to Amazon Web Services for the next five years. She added that this is about making sure the council's IT systems remain reliable, secure and cost effective.

Ben Unsworth, Director for Digital & IT Shared Service, said that this is a slight change in the relationship with AWS, and that the council's relationship is now a direct one with Amazon Web Services. He added that the team are in the final phase of migrating everything out of the council's on-premise data centres.

Councillor Drummond asked if there could be any concerns with the transfer from Google to Amazon. Mr Unsworth responded that the council uses Google for its workspace and productivity applications, and as a way of authenticating its users into applications that are held within AWS, and that this gives the council some additional resiliency.

Councillor Drummond asked if the council uses customer managed keys when encrypting data. Mr Unsworth responded that the council does encrypt its data in transit and at rest, and that this means that Amazon Web Services cannot see into the council's sensitive data.

Councillor Drummond asked if the council was making itself a prisoner to AWS by saying that it can't really go anywhere else without lots of training, lots of changes and lots of cost. Mr Unsworth responded that it is possible to move between AWS, Google and Microsoft, but that it would need to be a very active choice with some significant benefits behind it.

Councillor Woolmer asked if all the data would be kept locally, in other words, in the UK or Europe, rather than in America. Mr Unsworth responded that the council uses the UK London availability zone, and that all of the data is held within the UK.

Scrutiny Committee and Audit and Governance Committee Workplans

The committee discussed the scrutiny committee and audit and governance committee workplans.

An officer said that the report arises from the audit and governance committee considering an LGA set of guidance, which looked at the work plans of the audit and governance committee and the scrutiny committee coming before this committee.

The committee noted the work plans of the scrutiny committee and audit and governance committee, and agreed that the work plans will continue to be presented to the strategy and resources committee on an annual basis.