Treasury and Resources
Ministerial Decision Report
P121/2011 CLOS DES SABLES: FURTHER DEVELOPMENT – PETITION: Minister for Treasury and Resources response
- Purpose of Report
The Minister is asked to consider the proposed response (attached as Appendix A) to Proposition P121/2011 of Deputy Tadier (attached as Appendix B) with regard to the potential disposal of four plots of land at Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables, St Brelade.
- Background
As part of its function as the States ‘landlord’, Jersey Property Holdings (JPH) is charged with ensuring the efficient use of public land and building assets within its span of control. This requires, inter alia, identifying sites that are surplus to operational requirement, which have a realisable alternative use value.
The public has a land interest in the Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables estates. JPH undertook an exercise with a local Architect towards the end of 2010 to identify potential areas of the estates that were capable of residential infill building.
JPH identified the four plots indicated in the appendix to the Deputy’s proposition as capable of being built out, either by the States for operational purposes or by a private developer, subject to the necessary planning approval.
An officer of JPH and the consultant Architect met with the Deputy and the Connétable of St Brelade on 13 January 2011 to discuss the outline proposals for the estate. This was followed by further meetings on 6 April 2011 and 11 April 2011 involving the Deputy and others.
The plots have not yet been brought forward to the Assistant Minister for consideration for disposal, as is required under Standing Order 168.
- Proposed Response
A proposed draft response, in the form of a report to the States, is attached as Appendix B to this report.
The main issues contained in the response are:
a) The Deputy’s proposition refers to two of the four plots identified in the report. The response deals with all four plots.
b) In part (a) of the Proposition, the Deputy requests the Minister not to proceed with disposals. However, the petition and report focus on future development.
Should part (a) be adopted, there would be no barrier to the States developing out the plots as rental units, for example. The proposition is, therefore, inconsistent with the report.
c) There appears to be confusion between the role of the Minister for Treasury and Resources in considering the disposal of land and the role of the Minister for Planning and Environment in determining what may be built on a plot of land.
It is important to ensure that the two roles are kept clear and distinct such that the States Assembly does not seek to influence decisions that are to be made under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law.
The proposed disposal of the four areas of land does not pre-judge their future use. Whilst it is likely that these sites may be suitable for small scale residential development, there may be other uses, such as parking, that may be acceptable to planning and desirable to a purchaser.
d) Disposal of land and building assets require approval by the Minister for Treasury and Resources (as delegated to the Assistant Minister) under Standing Order 168.
Paragraph 3 of the Standing Order states that:
“The Minister for Treasury and Resources must, at least 15 working days before any binding arrangement is made for the disposal, acquisition, letting or rental of land on behalf of the public of Jersey which does not, by virtue of paragraph (2), require the prior agreement of the States, present to the States a document setting out the recommendation which he or she has accepted.”
This provides members with an opportunity to raise any questions about, or objections to, the proposed transaction.
The Planning and Building (Jersey) Law includes measures for interested parties to comment on, and object to, development or change of use proposals.
e) The thrust of the petition is that the estate has ‘...more than its fair share of development.’
The estate density is not high when compared with more recently developed estates, such as the completed Belle Vue estate. A calculation of habitable rooms per acre could be undertaken, but this would be quite time consuming to produce accurate figures. Should the four plots be developed to provide a further four houses (for example), the increase in density would be marginal, as the plots represent less than 1% of the estate area.
f) The States, in approving successive Business Plans, have set financial targets for to be achieved from the disposal of surplus land and buildings. The target for 2011 is £9million in 2011, with a further £8.8million in 2012 and 2013.
The value of the four plots identified will be largely dependent on what planning approval can be obtained and whether there is a political decision to utilise the plots for uses that do not maximise value.
The recent Island Plan recognises the need for more affordable housing and has set a target of 150 units to be delivered from publicly owned sites. These plots have the potential to realise four of the 150 units.
The report also refers to delay in bringing forward the proposed development on the ‘Lesquende plot’ (also known as the Belle Vue site). There has been a protracted process to develop an acceptable scheme. The revised drawings were submitted on 29 July 2011 for a scheme of 35 two bed apartments and 20 two bed houses, all of which have been designed for the over 55s and to the "life long home standards".
g) JPH incurs the cost of the maintenance of the grassed areas around the estates, which is provided by TTS. The annual cost is in the order of £46,000, although this will reduce to around £21,000 as JPH’s progresses its initiative to dispose of the public’s interest in 99 year leasehold properties. The cost of maintaining the four plots is some £2,800 per annum.
JPH is currently undertaking research of the original deeds of sale to determine whether provision exists to recharge these costs to the residents. The public, through the Housing Department until 2007 when the land was transferred to JPH, have always maintained these areas without raising a recharge.
The report refers to the need to realise value to help offset this cost burden that is currently being met by the general taxpayer. The report does not extend to propose that a charge be put in place in the future.
h) Part (b) of the Proposition seeks consultation with ‘residents and parish representatives before any future proposals are pursued for the sale or development of public land...’.
Acceptance of Part (b) has limited implications for the estate, as JPH considers that extensive consultation has taken place with regard to property matters currently in train. However, acceptance of this may be seen to be setting a wider precedent for future disposals elsewhere.
Consultation with such stakeholders is an essential precursor to any significant development proposals and JPH prides itself in the level of consultation that it undertakes. Notwithstanding the relatively minor nature of the proposals, JPH did consult with parish representatives on this matter.
The Deputy, in his report, refers to a meeting held on 11th April 2011 with the Assistant Minister T&R and officers of JPH.
What is not stated is that this was preceded by a meeting with the Deputy, Assistant Minister and officers of JPH on 6th April 2006 and before that a meeting with the Deputy, the parish Connétable a JPH officer and the consultant Architect in January 2011. At this first meeting, the option of calling a Public meeting at Communicare was discussed but discounted by all.
JPH has also undertaken extensive consultation with estate residents and parish officials as part of the successful programme to dispose of the States landlord interest in the 99 year lease properties. At least twelve meetings took place between June 2009 and the present; most of which were in the evening to best suit the needs of the residents.
- Recommendation
That the Minister for Treasury and Resources rejects the proposition of Deputy Tadier and lodges a report in the form attached as Appendix B to this report.
- Reason for Decision
Under Standing Order 62 of the Standing Orders of the States of Jersey, and Schedule 1 thereof which relates to petitions submitted by Members of the Public, the Minister with assigned responsibility for the matter to which the petition relates shall have the petition and proposition referred to him by the States and must present a report on them within 8 weeks of the referral.
- Resource Implications
It is not possible to accurately assess the foregone disposal proceeds should the States determine that the four plots should not be sold. At full market value with planning approval, the plots may reasonably expect to achieve an aggregate figure in the range of £500,000 to £750,000.
Disposal of the four plots would remove the States grounds maintenance liability of some £2,800 per annum, which is currently provided through TTS.
Report author : Assistant Director, Finance & Strategy JPH | Document date : 05/08/11 |
Quality Assurance / Review : Head of Decision Support | File name and path: document2 |
MD sponsor : Acting CEO/ToS. |
APPENDIX A
Report
Introduction
On balance, and after careful consideration, the Minister is minded to accept both parts of the proposition in order to provide some comfort to the residents of Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables. However, he has a number of points he wishes to raise regarding Deputy Tadier’s proposal not to proceed with plans to dispose of the two plots identified at Clos des Sables or the two plots referred to in the report at Les Quennevais Park.
Impact of Proposition
Part (a) of the Proposition requests the Minister not to proceed with disposals. However, the petition and report focus on future development. Should part (a) be adopted, there would be no barrier to the States developing out the plots as rental units, for example. The proposition is, therefore, in some respects inconsistent with the report.
Notwithstanding this technicality, the proposition seeks to prevent development on these four plots by maintaining them in the ownership of the public. In so doing, the public would be prevented from realising the potential value of these sites and there would be no possibility to test the planning system to determine what may be constructed on the plots.
Background
The Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables Estate was built in 1964/65, with the houses being subsequently sold as freehold private dwellings and the apartments being sold on a 99 year leasehold basis.
The Parish took over the administration of the estate roads and pavements, and the public retained ownership of the extensive common areas of the estate, including various footpaths, car parks, vehicular access ways to garages, and the landscaped areas. These common areas have been maintained at the public’s expense since completion in the mid 1960s – the areas being initially under the administration of the Housing department until 2007 when the land holding was transferred to the Treasury and Resources Department under the administration of Jersey Property Holdings (JPH).
JPH is presently researching the title deeds of the estate houses to seek confirmation that each private dwelling has a contractual obligation to contribute towards the maintenance of the common areas. A typical clause which has been researched to date reads:
9. That the purchasers shall have right of way on foot only at all times over not only the public footpath to the south of the first corpus fundi but also the other roads and pavements in ‘Quennevais Park’ in order to come and go to ‘La Route des Mielles’ or ‘La Route des Quennevais’, the purchasers being charged to contribute their fair proportion of the cost of maintenance of the footpath, road and pavements over their whole expanse.
With regard to the 136 leasehold flats on the estate, the terms of the leases place an obligation on the leaseholders to meet the cost of maintaining the landscaped areas which surround the blocks, including the footpaths. However, in February 1968[1], the then Housing Committee decided to cease charging the leaseholders for grounds maintenance as the work was being undertaken by the Parks and Gardens Section of the then Department of Public Building and Works. The grounds maintenance is still undertaken by Parks and Gardens, but the cost of the works is charged to JPH (c £47,000 pa). It should be noted that the leases have never been varied to remove the recharge provisions.
JPH has continued to maintain the common areas at public expense, but has taken a more pro-active estate management role.
Firstly, JPH is progressing the sale of the public’s freehold interest in the 99 year leasehold apartments. As the remaining lease period reduces the leasehold interest is becoming increasing difficult to assign as financial institutions are becoming reluctant to lend against the residual lease term. This programme is progressing well with three Clos des Sables Blocks having completed to date and a further two Blocks at Clos des Sables and three Blocks at Quennevais Park expected by the end of 2011.
In addition, in 2010, JPH undertook a review of the public’s land holdings on the estate to determine if any plots were capable of development for residential purposes. The review identified the four plots shown on Appendix A and Appendix B to the Deputy’s report as potentially able to be developed, subject to the necessary approvals. A consultation process then commenced with ‘Planning and Building Services’ and the local Deputies and Connétable.
The Plots and Estate Density
The thrust of the petition is that the estates are ‘...already very built up...’ and any further development would be detrimental.
The four plots comprise an area of 1,679 sq m within an overall area of 181,967 sq m within the Clos des Sables and Les Quennevais Park estates, representing less than 1% of the overall area.
In comparison to more recent housing estates such as Belle Vue, St Brelade, the typical plot size for a three bedroom dwelling is considerably more generous at Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables, at 342 sq m, when compared with a typical plot size of 204 sq m at Belle Vue. This indicates that the overall density of Quennevais Park/Clos des Sables compares favourably with other estates.
The estates were designed before large scale car ownership and, as with many estates of a similar age, suffer from a lack of adequate parking. This has been remedied to some extent through the creation of off street parking within the curtilage of properties through the conversion of front gardens to hard standing. The public has not, to date, sought to prevent such conversion or charge for access over its land holding.
The Minister does not accept the contention that the estate has ‘...more than its fair share of development...’ and considers that any development on the four plots is not likely to have a material impact on density.
However, such decisions are a matter for the Environment Minister to determine, having due regard to any representation. The Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 contains measures for interested parties to comment on, and object to, development or change of use proposals.
The recent Island Plan recognises the need for more affordable housing and has set a target of 150 units to be delivered from publicly owned sites. These plots have the potential to realise four of these 150 units.
The report also refers to delay in bringing forward the proposed development on the ‘Lesquende plot’ (adjacent to the current Belle Vue development). There has been a protracted process to develop a scheme that is likely to be acceptable to Planning.
The revised drawings were submitted on 29 July 2011 for a scheme of 35 two bed apartments and 20 two bed houses, all of which have been designed for the over 55s and to the "life long home standards".
Disposal Approvals Process
In approving Standing Order 168, the Assembly delegated to the Minister powers in relation to the disposal of land on behalf of the public of Jersey. In order to dispose of these, or any other sites, the Minister must comply with Standing Order 168, part (3), which requires the Minister to:
“...at least 15 working days before any binding arrangement is made for the disposal, acquisition, letting or rental of land on behalf of the public of Jersey ... present to the States a document setting out the recommendation which he or she has accepted.”
The 15 day period provides an opportunity for any member to raise questions about, or objections to, the proposed transaction. This is the appropriate point in the decision making process to raise such objections.
The Minister assures members that he will respond to queries within that time frame and will not conclude any transaction without giving due consideration to the issues raised. This may include bringing the proposal to the States Assembly should that course of action be warranted.
The Deputy’s report appears to confuse the role of the Minister for Treasury and Resources in considering the disposal of land and the role of the Minister for Planning and Environment in determining what may be built on a plot of land. It is important to ensure that the two roles are kept clear and distinct such that the States Assembly does not seek to influence decisions that are to be made under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002.
The proposed disposal does not pre-judge the future use of the plots and any objection to proposed use, by the States or a third party, may be made at the appropriate time through the mechanisms contained within the Planning Law.
Part (b) - Consultation
Part (b) of the Proposition seeks consultation with ‘residents and parish representatives before any future proposals are pursued for the sale or development of public land...’.
The Minister fully supports appropriate consultation with stakeholders as an essential precursor to any significant development or disposal proposals. The Minister refutes the implication that there has been insufficient consultation.
The Deputy, in his report, refers to a meeting held on 11th April 2011 with the Assistant Minister T&R and officers of JPH. What is not stated is that this was preceded by a meeting with the Deputy, Assistant Minister and officers of JPH on 6th April 2011 and before that a meeting with the Deputy, the parish Connétable a JPH officer and the consultant Architect in January 2011.
At this first meeting, the option of calling a Public meeting at Communicare was discussed but discounted by all.
JPH has also undertaken extensive consultation with estate residents and parish officials as part of the successful programme to dispose of the States’ landlord interest in the 99 year lease properties. At least twelve meetings took place between June 2009 and the present; most of which were in the evening to best suit the needs of the residents.
Financial Implications
Disposal Receipts
The States, in approving successive Business Plans, have set financial targets for to be achieved from the disposal of surplus land and buildings. The target for 2011 is £9million in 2011, with a further £8.8million in 2012 and 2013. Disposal receipts from these four plots will contribute to this target and support the balance held in the Consolidated Fund.
The value of the four plots identified will be largely dependent on what planning approval can be obtained and whether there is a political decision to utilise the plots for uses that do not maximise value.
Revenue Costs
JPH incurs the cost of the maintenance of the grassed areas around the estates, which is provided by TTS at an annual cost of some £46,000, although this will reduce to around £21,000 as JPH progresses its initiative to dispose of the public’s interest in 99 year leasehold properties. The cost of maintaining these four plots is some £2,800 per annum.
Summary
The Minister visited the sites which are the subject of this proposition on Wednesday, 10th August 2011 in order to be able to clarify his response. On balance, and after careful consideration, the Minister is minded to accept both parts of the proposition in order to provide some comfort to the residents of Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables. However, when considering whether to approve the proposition he would wish States Members to consider the following points:
- The proposition as worded does not preclude development provided the plots in question remain in public ownership.
- Part (b) is accepted insofar as it is taken to refer to the existing consultation processes of JPH which the Minister considers to be satisfactory.
- JPH will continue its review, as requested by the current Minister, of whether residents could or should be contributing to some costs, for example maintenance. Previous charging arrangements (or lack of them) under previous Ministers should not be taken as precluding changes.
- There will be an impact on projected capital receipts which may require compensating adjustment elsewhere.
- This proposition does represent involvement of the States Assembly in implementation matters, as opposed to policy and strategy. The Minister is generally and normally opposed to such involvement. The Minister regards arrangements under Standing Order 168 to be sufficient to allow review by States Members of property-related decisions taken under policy direction that they themselves have set.
Minister for Treasury and Resources
Report
Introduction
The Minister does not supporthas a number of points he wishes to raise regarding the Deputy Tadier’s proposal not to proceed with plans to dispose of the two plots identified at Clos des Sables or the two plots referred to in the report at Les Quennevais Park.
Impact of Proposition
Part (a) of the Proposition requests the Minister not to proceed with disposals. However, the petition and report focus on future development. Should part (a) be adopted, there would be no barrier to the States developing out the plots as rental units, for example. The proposition is, therefore, in some respects inconsistent with the report.
Notwithstanding this technicality, the proposition seeks to prevent development on these four plots by maintaining them in the ownership of the public. In so doing, the public will would be prevented from realising the potential value of these sites and there will would be no possibility to test the planning system to determine what may be constructed on the plots.
Background
The Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables Estate was built in 1964/65, with the houses being subsequently sold as freehold private dwellings and the apartments being sold on a 99 year leasehold basis.
The Parish took over the administration of the estate roads and pavements, and the public retained ownership of the extensive common areas of the estate, including various footpaths, car parks, vehicular access ways to garages, and the landscaped areas. These common areas have been maintained at the public’s expense since completion in the mid 1960s – the areas being initially under the administration of the Housing department until 2007 when the land holding was transferred to the Treasury and Resources Department under the administration of Jersey Property Holdings (JPH).
JPH is presently researching the title deeds of the estate houses to seek confirmation that each private dwelling has a contractual obligation to contribute towards the maintenance of the common areas. A typical clause which has been researched to date reads:
9. That the purchasers shall have right of way on foot only at all times over not only the public footpath to the south of the first corpus fundi but also the other roads and pavements in ‘Quennevais Park’ in order to come and go to ‘La Route des Mielles’ or ‘La Route des Quennevais’, the purchasers being charged to contribute their fair proportion of the cost of maintenance of the footpath, road and pavements over their whole expanse.
With regard to the 136 leasehold flats on the estate, the terms of the leases place an obligation on the leaseholders to meet the cost of maintaining the landscaped areas which surround the blocks, including the footpaths. However, in February 1968, the then Housing Committee decided to cease charging the leaseholders for grounds maintenance as the work was being undertaken by the Parks and Gardens Section of the then Department of Public Building and Works. The grounds maintenance is still undertaken by Parks and Gardens, but the cost of the works is charged to JPH (c £47,000 pa). It should be noted that the leases have never been varied to remove the recharge provisions.
JPH has continued to maintain the common areas at public expense, but has taken a more pro-active estate management role.
Firstly, JPH is progressing the sale of the public’s freehold interest in the 99 year leasehold apartments. As the remaining lease period reduces the leasehold interest is becoming increasing difficult to assign as financial institutions are becoming reluctant to lend against the residual lease term. This programme is progressing well with three Clos des Sables Blocks having completed to date and a further two Blocks at Clos des Sables and three Blocks at Quennevais Park expected by the end of 2011.
In addition, in 2010, JPH undertook a review of the public’s land holdings on the estate to determine if any plots were capable of development for residential purposes. The review identified the four plots shown on Appendix A and Appendix B to the Deputy’s report as potentially able to be developed, subject to the necessary approvals. A consultation process then commenced with ‘Planning and Building Services’ and the local Deputies and Connétable.
The Plots and Estate Density
The thrust of the petition is that the estates are ‘...already very built up...’ and any further development would be detrimental.
The four plots comprise an area of 1,679 sq m within an overall area of 181,967 sq m within the Clos des Sables and Les Quennevais Park estates, representing less than 1% of the overall area.
In comparison to more recent housing estates such as Belle Vue, St Brelade, the typical plot size for a three bedroom dwelling is considerably more generous at Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables, at 342 sq m, when compared with a typical plot size of 204 sq m at Belle Vue. This indicates that the overall density of Quennevais Park/Clos des Sables compares favourably with other estates.
The estates were designed before large scale car ownership and, as with many estates of a similar age, suffer from a lack of adequate parking. This has been remedied to some extent through the creation of off street parking within the curtilage of properties through the conversion of front gardens to hard standing. The public has not, to date, sought to prevent such conversion or charge for access over its land holding.
The Minister does not accept the contention that the estate has ‘...more than its fair share of development...’ and considers that any development on the four plots is not likely to have a material impact on density.
However, such decisions are a matter for the Environment Minister to determine, having due regard to any representation. The Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 contains measures for interested parties to comment on, and object to, development or change of use proposals.
The recent Island Plan recognises the need for more affordable housing and has set a target of 150 units to be delivered from publicly owned sites. These plots have the potential to realise four of these 150 units.
The report also refers to delay in bringing forward the proposed development on the ‘Lesquende plot’ (adjacent to the current Belle Vue development). There has been a protracted process to develop a scheme that is likely to be acceptable to Planning.
The revised drawings were submitted on 29 July 2011 for a scheme of 35 two bed apartments and 20 two bed houses, all of which have been designed for the over 55s and to the "life long home standards".
Disposal Approvals Process
In approving Standing Order 168, the Assembly delegated to the Minister powers in relation to the disposal of land on behalf of the public of Jersey. In order to dispose of these, or any other sites, the Minister must comply with Standing Order 168, part (3), which requires the Minister to:
“...at least 15 working days before any binding arrangement is made for the disposal, acquisition, letting or rental of land on behalf of the public of Jersey ... present to the States a document setting out the recommendation which he or she has accepted.”
The 15 day period provides an opportunity for any member to raise questions about, or objections to, the proposed transaction. This is the appropriate point in the decision making process to raise such objections.
The Minister assures members that he will respond to queries within that time frame and will not conclude any transaction without giving due consideration to the issues raised. This may include bringing the proposal to the States Assembly should that course of action be warranted.
The Deputy’s report appears to confuse the role of the Minister for Treasury and Resources in considering the disposal of land and the role of the Minister for Planning and Environment in determining what may be built on a plot of land. It is important to ensure that the two roles are kept clear and distinct such that the States Assembly does not seek to influence decisions that are to be made under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002.
The proposed disposal does not pre-judge the future use of the plots and any objection to proposed use, by the States or a third party, may be made at the appropriate time through the mechanisms contained within the Planning Law.
Part (b) - Consultation
Part (b) of the Proposition seeks consultation with ‘residents and parish representatives before any future proposals are pursued for the sale or development of public land...’.
The Minister fully supports appropriate consultation with stakeholders as an essential precursor to any significant development or disposal proposals. However tThe Minister cannot support part (b) of the proposition as he strongly refutes the implication that there has been insufficient consultation.
The Deputy, in his report, refers to a meeting held on 11th April 2011 with the Assistant Minister T&R and officers of JPH. What is not stated is that this was preceded by a meeting with the Deputy, Assistant Minister and officers of JPH on 6th April 2011 and before that a meeting with the Deputy, the parish Connétable a JPH officer and the consultant Architect in January 2011.
At this first meeting, the option of calling a Public meeting at Communicare was discussed but discounted by all.
JPH has also undertaken extensive consultation with estate residents and parish officials as part of the successful programme to dispose of the States’ landlord interest in the 99 year lease properties. At least twelve meetings took place between June 2009 and the present; most of which were in the evening to best suit the needs of the residents.
Financial Implications
Disposal Receipts
The States, in approving successive Business Plans, have set financial targets for to be achieved from the disposal of surplus land and buildings. The target for 2011 is £9million in 2011, with a further £8.8million in 2012 and 2013. Disposal receipts from these four plots will contribute to this target and support the balance held in the Consolidated Fund.
The value of the four plots identified will be largely dependent on what planning approval can be obtained and whether there is a political decision to utilise the plots for uses that do not maximise value.
Revenue Costs
JPH incurs the cost of the maintenance of the grassed areas around the estates, which is provided by TTS at an annual cost of some £46,000, although this will reduce to around £21,000 as JPH progresses its initiative to dispose of the public’s interest in 99 year leasehold properties. The cost of maintaining these four plots is some £2,800 per annum.
Summary
The Minister visited the sites which are the subject of this proposition on Wednesday, 10th August 2011 in order to be able to clarify his response. The Minister urges Members to reject both parts of this proposition on the following grounds:
Part (a) would fetter the States realising maximum potential for the public from its assets
Part (b) is unnecessary as extensive consultation has already taken place. Additionally it has wider implications than the two plots of land specified in part (a).On balance, and after careful consideration, the Minister is minded to accept both parts of the proposition in order to provide some comfort to the residents of Quennevais Park and Clos des Sables. However, when considering whether to approve the proposition he would wish States Members to consider the following points:
The proposition as worded does not preclude development provided the plots in question remain in public ownership.
Part (b) is accepted insofar as it is taken to refer to the existing consultation processes of JPH which the Minister considers to be satisfactory.
JPH will continue its review, as requested by the current Minister, of whether residents could or should be contributing to some costs, for example maintenance. Previous charging arrangements (or lack of them) under previous Ministers should not be taken as precluding changes.
There will be an impact on projected capital receipts which may require compensating adjustment elsewhere.
This proposition does represent involvement of the States Assembly in implementation matters, as opposed to policy and strategy. The Minister is generally and normally opposed to such involvement. The Minister regards arrangements under Standing Order 168 to be sufficient to allow review by States Members of property-related decisions taken under policy direction that they themselves have set.
Minister for Treasury and Resources
APPENDIX B
gov.je