Agenda and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members will be invited to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal or prejudicial interests they might have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Scott declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in agenda item 6 (Extended Schools Final Report) as the parent of a child who used the extended schools facilities at Fishergate Primary School.

Councillor Simpson-Laing declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in agenda item 6 (Extended Schools Final Report) as a parent of a child who used extended school facilities, as the treasurer of an out of school committee and as a governor of a school named in the report.

Councillor Waudby declared a personal non-prejudicial interest in agenda item 6 (Extended Schools Final Report) as a school governor of Lakeside Primary School and the grandparent of a child who used out of school facilities.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2009.

RESOLVED:That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2009 be signed as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the Committee’s remit can do so. Anyone who wishes to register or requires further information is requested to contact the Democracy Officer on the contact details listed at the foot of this agenda. The deadline for registering is Friday 15 May 2009 at 5.00 pm.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

This report provides Members with update information on the implementation of recommendations made as a result of previously completed scrutiny reviews on “Guidance for Sustainable Development” and “Takeaways; Powers of Enforcement”.

Members received a report updating them on the implementation of recommendations made as a result of previously completed scrutiny reviews on “Guidance for Sustainable Development” and “Takeaways: Powers of Enforcement”.

Members were asked to consider signing-off those recommendations where implementation had been completed or to refer any outstanding recommendations to the relevant committee in accordance with the restructuring of the overview and scrutiny function in York.

Officers detailed the actions that had been taken to implement the recommendations, as outlined in the report.

Members expressed concern at the lack of progress in implementing some of the recommendations in the “Guidance for Sustainable Development Review”.

It was noted that, following the update received by SMC in February 2009, there remained two recommendations outstanding in respect of the “Recycling and Re-use Review”.  It was proposed that these would be referred to the Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED:            (i)            That the contents of the report be noted.

(ii)               That recommendation 8 of the “Guidance for Sustainable Development Review” and recommendations 1 and 2 of the “Takeaways: Powers of Enforcement Review” be signed-off as having been fully implemented¹.

(iii)             That the outstanding recommendations from the “Recycling and Re-use Review” be referred to the Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

(iv)              That recommendations 3, 4, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21 and 25 of the “Guidance for Sustainable Development Review” be referred to the Economic and City Development Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their implementation to be monitored.

(v)                That the Director of City Strategy be made aware of the Committee’s concerns regarding the delays in implementing some of the recommendations of the “Guidance for Sustainable Development Review”².

REASON:      To raise awareness of those recommendations which had still to be implemented.

This report presents best practice advice on how officers within the Council could support Members in dealing with potential CCfAs.

Members received a report presenting best practice advice on how officers within the Council could support Members in dealing with potential CCfAs.

Members were asked to consider adopting the process for dealing with CCfAs outlined in the draft guidance at Annex A of the report or revising the guidance and adopting the amended process. 

Members suggested that it would be useful for the process to include practical examples as to the types of activities that could be considered.

Attention was drawn to the staffing implications that would arise in implementing the new processes and that the release of the frozen Scrutiny Assistant post would be essential to successfully support the CCfA process.

RESOLVED:That the process for dealing with CCfA, outlined in Annex A of the report, be adopted.

REASON:            To ensure a suitable mechanism is in place for supporting

                        Members dealing with potential CCfAs.

This report presents the final report from the Education Scrutiny Committee detailing their review of the Extended Schools Agenda.

Members received the final report from the Education Scrutiny Committee detailing their review of the Extended Schools Agenda.  The Chair of the committee went through the recommendations.

Members were invited to support all, some or none of the recommendations detailed in the report and provide their comments prior to the report being considered by the Executive.

A request was made that the final reports of all ad-hoc scrutiny committees included the names of the members of the committee.

RESOLVED:            (i)            That the contents of the Extended Schools Final Report

be noted.

(ii)               That SMC supported the recommendations contained within the Final Report¹.

(iii)That the Education Scrutiny Committee be commended on their excellent report and thanks be recorded for the work they had carried out.

(iv)              That the final reports of all ad-hoc scrutiny committees include the names of the membership of the committee.

REASON:            To inform the Executive’s consideration of the final report.

This report presents the final report from the Hungate Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee detailing their review of the Hungate development.

Members received the final report from the Hungate Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee.  Details were given of the main findings of the review.

The Chair of the committee explained the delays that had arisen in completing the review, including the submission of Freedom of Information requests. 

Members were invited to support all, some or none of the recommendations detailed in the report, and provide their comments prior to the report being considered by the Executive.

Concerns were expressed that the review had not been carried out within the short timescale that had been envisaged and that the remit of the review had been such that questions remained unanswered.  It was suggested that the information collected during the course of the review should form the basis of a broader review into the wider issues raised.  Members recognised that any new scrutiny review would benefit from being carried out by the same Ad-Hoc Scrutiny Committee Members, and agreed to individually consider what questions remained unanswered.

RESOLVED:That the contents of the final report of the Hungate Ad-

hoc Scrutiny Committee be noted and the recommendations endorsed by SMC¹.

REASON:            To inform the Executive’s consideration of the final report.

This report presents an interim report from the Traffic Congestion Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee detailing their ongoing review and requests a carry forward of the monies from the 2008/09 scrutiny budget previously allocated for the carrying out of a city-wide consultation survey.

Members received an interim report from the Traffic Congestion Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee detailing their ongoing review and requesting a carry forward of the monies from the 2008/09 scrutiny budget previously allocated for the carrying out of a city-wide consultation survey.

The Chair of the Traffic Congestion Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee explained the reasons for the delay in the review, including difficulties that had arisen in obtaining appropriate evaluations of long-term scenarios.  Having gathered the information to support the review, the Committee was now in a position to start production of their planned survey.  This would have a minimum cost of around £17,000.

Having considered the findings to date contained within the draft report, Members considered the options available to them:

• To agree to request a carry forward of the remaining 2008/09 scrutiny budget in order to finance the consultation survey;
• To decide not to support the financing of the consultation survey and instruct the Traffic Congestion Ad-hoc Scrutiny Committee to conclude their review based on the information gathered to date.

Members paid tribute to the work that had been carried out by the committee and agreed on the importance of ensuring that residents were given every opportunity to express their views on these issues.

RESOLVED:            (i)            That the findings to date, as detailed in the draft final

                                    report, be noted.

(ii)               That SMC requested that the remaining 2008/09 scrutiny budget to be carried forward in order to finance the planned consultation survey.

(iii)             That, in the event of approval of the carry forward not

                                    being granted,  the matter be referred back to SMC.

REASON:      To agree a method for completing the Traffic Congestion Scrutiny Review.

The Chair reminded Members that this would be his last SMC meeting and expressed his appreciation of the contribution made by Members of the committee and by officers.  Councillor Galvin was thanked for the work that he had carried out as Chair of SMC and Members wished him well in his forthcoming duties as Lord Mayor.