Agenda and minutes

At this point Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on this agenda.

Members were asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on the agenda.  None were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 22 September 2009.

RESOLVED:That the minutes of the meeting of 22 September 2009 be confirmed and signed by the Chair 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.  The deadline for registering is Monday 30 November 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 presents information on the management changes which have now been implemented within North Yorkshire Police, and an analysis by the Safer York Partnership of the possible advantages and disadvantages to York.

Members received a report that presented information on the management changes which had now been implemented within North Yorkshire Police, and an analysis by the Safer York Partnership of the possible advantages and disadvantages to York. The report had been prepared in response to concerns expressed by the Committee at their last meeting that the proposed changes to organisation and staffing structures for North Yorkshire Police may be detrimental to the city and have an adverse effect on crime figures.

The Director of the Safer York Partnership outlined the key changes and explained that the work undertaken by North Yorkshire Police formed part of the “Towards 2012: The Next Steps” programme.  It was currently too early to ascertain how the changes would impact on the Safer York Partnership, but meetings were held with the Safer Neighbourhood Commander for York on a regular basis and the situation was being closely monitored.

It was noted that the Committee received statistics on recorded crime levels within the Finance and Performance Monitoring reports and it was agreed that the Committee would also find it useful to receive the quarterly reports that were presented to the CDRP Board.

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

(ii)That a review of this topic not be undertaken at this time.

REASONS:            (i)            To inform the work of the committee. 

(ii)               Sufficient time has not passed for the effects of the changes to become clear.

The Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services had been invited to the meeting to report on forthcoming priorities.  The Committee’s attention was drawn to the report that had been presented to Council on 15 October 2009, which had provided details on the work of the directorate. 

The Committee was informed of recent successes including:

·        Silver Gilt Award in Yorkshire in Bloom

·        Registrar’s Service awarded a rating of “good” and was just three marks short of “excellent” in the Delivery Inspection that took place in March 2009

·        Customer Service Excellence Standard was awarded to Environmental Health, Trading Standards, Licensing and Bereavement Services

·        176 staff in Civil Engineering, Highways, Neighbourhood Pride and Building Maintenance departments gained either NVQs or Institute of Leadership and Management Qualifications

The Executive Member also highlighted ongoing challenges:

·        Recycling rates continued to rise whilst the total tonnage of waste collected reduced

·        The latest survey on street cleaning had shown a distinct improvement in respect of litter and detritus

·        There would be implications arising from the More4York programme that would need to be addressed

Members questioned the Executive Member about issues related to her portfolio.

Concerns were expressed regarding the safety and security of people using the disabled toilets.  The Executive Member gave details of the arrangements that would be in place when the new Silver Street toilets opened.  An attendant would respond if the alarm and light came on during the day.  If the alarm was raised at other times, it would trigger a telephone call to the night-coordinator at Hazel Court.  The situation with regard to the security of the locks would be monitored, but as the Radar keys were a national scheme this may have wider ranging implications.

At the request of Members, statistics were provided regarding fly tipping, including the number of warning letters that had been issued.  It was noted that the council’s performance in this respect compared well with that of other local authorities.

Concerns were expressed as to whether regulations in respect of city centre parking, cycling on the footpaths and the use of blue badges were being enforced. It was noted that the authority did not yet have powers to address moving traffic offences as further enactments of the Traffic Act were not yet in place.  Officers did make checks to ensure that blue badges were used appropriately and there had been instances when the badges had been removed.

In response to questions from the Committee, the Executive Member gave details of how salt bins were maintained and funded.  

Members commented on the multiple planning applications that had been received in respect of Harewood Whin and suggested that rather than treating such applications on an individual basis, consideration should be given to putting in place an overall planning strategy.  The Executive Member stated that this was an issue that the managers were aware of and they believed that the site should be recognised in the Local Development Framework.  The issue would be raised with the City Development Team.

This report presents two sets of data:

• The latest projections for revenue expenditure for the Neighbourhood Services portfolio
• Progress against the directorate plan priorities and key performance indicators

Members received a report that presented the following data:

• The latest projections for revenue expenditure for the Neighbourhood Services portfolio.
• Progress against the directorate plan priorities and key performance indicators.

Members noted that the Neighbourhood Services portfolio was forecasting an overspend of £292k after identification of in year savings of £200k.  This was a variation of 0.9% of the net expenditure budget.  Officers gave details of the significant variances, as outlined in paragraph 7 of the report. 

Members were updated on key issues for the directorate, as detailed in paragraph 12 of the report, and noted progress against LAA indicators.

RESOLVED:That the financial and performance position of the portfolio be noted.

REASON:      In accordance with budgetary and performance monitoring procedures.

This report presents the Council’s current policy on alleygating for Members’ information and asks Members to consider whether they wish to carry out a review of that policy.

Members received a report that presented the Council’s current policy on alleygating and asked them to consider whether they wished to carry out a review of that policy. It was noted that the policy was in the process of being reviewed. The review would consider issues including the consultation process, roles and responsibilities and timings.

Officers were asked about the impact on crime when gates were installed and whether there was evidence that crime was displaced to neighbouring areas.  Officers agreed to email data to Members and explained that although there was evidence that crime reduced when gates were installed it also appeared that crime reduced in neighbouring areas. 

Members expressed concern regarding the maintenance of existing gating and detailed particular problems regarding the fastening of double gates.   Officers stated that they were aware of the situation and that a different design had been used for gates that had been installed more recently.  Staff sought to inspect the gates approximately every six weeks but this was not always possible. 

RESOLVED:(i)         That, having considered the Council’s current policy on

alleygating and the information provided in the report, a review of the policy not be carried out at this stage.

(ii)               That, six months after implementation of the revised policy, the committee would reconsider whether a scrutiny review of its impact was required.

REASON:            To assist officers with developing a robust policy on alleygating.

Members are asked to review the Committee’s workplan for 2009-10.

The Executive Leader and the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services have been invited to attend the meeting to report on forthcoming priorities and to discuss the committee’s workplan in relation to the Executive Member’s portfolio.

Consideration was given to the work plan for the committee for 2009-10.  Members were reminded that they could submit possible topics for scrutiny by the committee by raising them at the meeting, contacting the scrutiny officer or registering on-line.  The scrutiny officer agreed to email details of the remit of the committee to assist Members in proposing possible topics for a scrutiny review.