Apologies were received from Councillors Holmes-Smith, James, King, and Wilby.  Councillor Wright was present as a substitute for Councillor James.

a)     To agree the revised paper that considers the purpose of the Group.

The Executive Director explained the document that outlined the revised purpose of the Board.  Members were asked if they felt it reflected the outcome of discussions at the previous workshop.

Councillor Jermy asked that reference to the ‘Greater Thetford Forum’ that would be convened every 6-months, be changed due to a social media page already called ‘Thetford Forum’ and he felt that could cause confusion. 

ACTION: Councillor Jermy to consider an alternate name for the forum and feedback to the Board.

Councillor Jermy asked for clarity in that there would be two opportunities for the public to engage with the Board.  The first would be at the ‘Greater Thetford Forum’ (to be re-named) that would allow public debate.  The second opportunity would be an invitation for engagement partners to attend a meeting which would be themed to ensure wider understanding of progress, connections and opportunities, which would be open to the public.

Councillor Poulter asked that the strategic partners include: Network Rail; Clinical Commissioning Group; and, NHS England.

It was confirmed that the meeting of the Board would in future be held in a private session and that focussed public engagement meetings would be held going forward.  In addition, the current sub-group model would cease to enable work towards stakeholder and public opportunity.

To discuss the draft job description for a new role to support the partnership.

The Board were asked to approve the draft job description that would specifically support the Partnership in driving and delivering the objectives of the Board forward.  Members had been asked to seek agreement from their respective parties to make a financial contribution to assist with funding towards the post.  Whilst the post holder would be accountable to the Board it was the assumption that Breckland would be the responsible body for day to day management and paid terms and conditions.  Indicative figures would be shared with the board privately.

Councillor Jermy suggested that an organisational structure chart together with a salary scale would help to seek approval from respective parties.  In addition it was proposed that the role be based in Thetford.  It had been added to the Town Council agenda to be discussed.

Councillor Brame had not been able to have discussions with Norfolk County Council due to time restrictions.

Both Croxton and Brettenham and Kilverstone Parish Councils were content with the role, and would be happy to make a contribution to the funding of the role.

The Chairman was disappointed that the Board were unable to progress with the recruitment of this as there had not been agreement in principle from each of the interested parties.

Action: The Executive Director to forward indicative salary costs to the Members of the Board via email, in order for each party to agree their financial contribution.

a)     To discuss and review the draft delivery plan for Greater Thetford.

The Executive Director of Place presented the Draft Delivery Plan that bought together a clear plan of action which supported the strategic objectives.  Members were asked for their views and if they supported the approach.

Councillor Jermy was supportive of the document that encompassed a number of issues, but felt the criticism would be where the document had not been kept up to date. 

It was asked that a timeline be produced to show the visibility and length of the programme, which would be asked of the new Support Officer to do this.

ACTION: All Members to provide updates to Cassie Ruffell, Regeneration Manager

To discuss the Transport study for Greater Thetford.

Richard Doleman from Infrastructure Development at Norfolk County Council updated the Board and the final draft of the network improvement strategy had been sent out for consultation with key stakeholders and organisations to ensure that all representations had been made before the final document could be shared.  Once a signed-off version had been agreed it would be shared with the Board.

Councillor Jermy had seen sight of the report as a Norfolk County Councillor but asked if a timeline of implementation process had been agreed. Members were informed that some improvements had been triggered as part of the planning requirement however the transport study aimed to solve additional issues around Thetford of which an action plan would be developed to outline timescales for delivery.  It was hoped the action plan could be published soon.

It was asked if the Improvement Strategy had been sent to the Parish Councils for their feedback.  It was not clear if this had happened but would be looked into.

ACTION: Richard Doleman to ensure the Parish Councils had sight of the Network Improvement Strategy as part of the consultation process.

Councillor Jermy raised his concern that the Board had specifically asked to be consulted on the Network Improvement Strategy, but as yet it had not been presented to them.

The Chairman asked if consideration had been given to the report that the GTDP Sub-Group (Communities) had submitted regarding Walking and cycling routes.  Councillor Brame added that he had seen the draft report and references had been made to cycling and walking routes.

Councillor Jermy asked that the walking and Cycling report be cross checked with the Transport Improvement Strategy to understand where there shared priorities had been identified.  This should also include information from the Waterspace Study that had been undertaken and shared with Norfolk County Council.

To receive updates from the Thetford Business Forum and Sub-Groups.

The Regeneration Manager confirmed the information received from the partnership group would feed into the public meetings (twice a year).

Councillor Robinson asked what the Business Forum could do to support the Board.  The Regeneration Manager said the Business Forum Board consisted of a number of different organisations across the town and work was underway to understand the information that could be gathered and shared with the Board.

a)     High Street Fund

The Executive Director of Place informed the Board that the bid for the High Street Fund submitted for Thetford had not been successful but thanked Members for their support.  Members of the Board heard that over 300 applications were submitted and only 50 were selected. 

It was asked the minutes of the previous meeting held on 20 March be added to the next meeting in September to be agreed along with the minutes from the meeting held on 17 July. 

To note the date of the next meeting of the Greater Thetford Development Partnership will be held on Wednesday 11 September at 2.00pm in Kings House, 20 King Street, Thetford, IP24 2AP.

The arrangements for the next meeting were noted which would be a private meeting of the Board.