Minutes of the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee
29 July 2026
Present:
Councillor G. Neall (Chair)
Councillor C. Bateson (Vice-Chair)
Councillors:
|
M.M. Attewell M. Buck J. Button D.C. Clarke |
S.M. Doran S. Gyawali M.J. Lee D. Saliagopoulos
|
J.R. Sexton H.R.D. Williams
|
|
|
|
|
79/25 |
Apologies and Substitutes
|
Apologies were received from Councillors Boughtflower, Geach and Turner.
Councillors Howkins, Burrell and Nichols were in attendance as their substitutes.
|
80/25 |
Disclosures of Interest
|
Councillors Attewell and Sexton declared that they were also Surrey County Council Councillors.
Councillors Attewell, Bateson and Sexton declared that they were also West Surrey Authority Councillors.
|
81/25 |
Disposal of Commercial Asset A
|
The Committee considered a report that sought a recommendation for Council to approve the disposal of the Summit Centre on the terms set out in the report.
A recorded vote was requested.
|
For |
Councillors Neall, Bateson, Attewell, Burrell, Button, S Doran, Gyawali, Nichols, Sexton, Williams – 10 votes |
|
Against |
Councillors Buck, Clarke, Howkins, Lee, Saliagopoulos – 5 votes |
|
Abstain |
0 votes |
Committee resolved to:
1. Agree in principle the offer and the proposed disposal,
2. Recommend that the Council:
2.1 approve the proposed disposal on the terms set out in this report,
2.2 delegate authority to the Chief Finance Officer and Group Head of Assets, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Corporate Policy and Resources Committee to agree minor variations to the Heads of Terms and adjustments to the sale price; and
2.3 delegate authority to Group Head of Corporate Governance to enter into a transfer to complete the disposal and any ancillary legal documentation required in relation to the proposed disposal.
|
82/25 |
Disposal of Commercial Asset B
|
The Committee considered a report that sought a recommendation for Council to approve the disposal of Thames Tower on the terms set out in the report.
The Committee were advised that the Summit Centre was an underperforming asset and that there had been a significant fall in value since it was purchased. A marketing exercise had been undertaken by Knight Frank and several bids had been received. A preferred bidder had been selected for Council approval and was supported by a recommendation from Knight Frank.
Concerns were expressed about the marketing of the property and the amount offered by the preferred bidder. Members felt that the property could be retained to see if the commercial rental market improved and a better asking price could be achieved. The Committee were advised that if the property was not disposed of, in line with the Statutory Direction to reduce the Council’s debt, the Council would continue to incur holding costs. Current instability within the Commercial Property Market also meant that it would be hard to predict whether the property would increase in value over the next 5 to 10 years.
A recorded vote was requested.
|
For |
Councillors Neall, Bateson, Gyawali, Nichols – 4 votes |
|
Against |
Councillors Attewell, Buck, Clarke, Howkins, Lee, Saliagopoulos, Sexton, Williams – 8 votes |
|
Abstain |
Councillors Burrell, Button, S Doran – 3 votes |
Committee resolved:
1. Not to Agree in principle the offer and the proposed disposal,
2. Not to recommend that Council:
2.1 approve the proposed disposal on the terms set out in this report,
2.2 delegate authority to the Chief Finance Officer and Group Head of Assets, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Corporate Policy and Resources Committee to agree minor variations to the Heads of Terms and adjustments to the sale price; and
2.3 delegate authority to the Group Head of Corporate Governance to enter into a transfer to complete the disposal and any ancillary legal documentation required in relation to the proposed disposal.