Agenda and minutes

Members were invited 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 held on 27 June 2012.

RESOLVED:       That the minutes of the meeting of 27 June 2012 be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

To consider excluding the public and press from the meeting during consideration of the Joint Strategic Intelligence Assessment (JSIA) at agenda item 9.

The JSIA is a  Police restricted document that contains data and information which can only be shared under Section 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 between responsible authorities defined within that Act.  None of the paragraphs under Schedule 12A of the Local Government apply, but the document is a Police document and therefore not within the gift of the Local Authority to share in the public domain.

RESOLVED:       That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of agenda item 9 - the Joint Strategic Intelligence Assessment (JSIA) on the grounds that the JSIA is a Police restricted document that contains data and information which can only be shared under Section 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 between responsible authorities defined within that Act. 

It was noted that none of the paragraphs under Schedule 12A of

the Local Government Act applied, but that the document was a

Police document and therefore not within the gift of the Local Authority to share in the public domain.

It is at this point in the meeting that members of the public who have registered their wish to speak can do so. The deadline for registering is by 5pm on Monday 16^th July 2012. Members of the public can speak on agenda items or matters within the remit of the committee.

To register please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting, on the details at the foot of this agenda.

It was reported that there were no registrations to speak at the meeting under the council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Members will be asked to consider the information provided to them at the previous meeting on this topic and agree a remit for the review. Supporting documentation will be provided at the meeting. [briefing note attached]

A briefing note was tabled which provided an overview of the work of the Animal Health Team and issues in respect of dealing with tethered horses. [A copy of the briefing note is attached to the on-line agenda papers for this meeting].

Discussion took place around the following issues:

(i)           Stray Dogs

In response to questions raised by Members, officers clarified that during the week officers would go out and collect a stray dog once this was reported.  There was, however, no out of hours collection service during the evening or at weekends, although stray dogs could be taken to the kennels.  Details were given of the collection fees, which included a statutory fee of £25 in addition to a £25 admin fee.   The kennel costs were around £9 per day.  Officers also explained about the efforts that were made to re-house stray dogs when they were not collected, usually through the RSPCA or the Dogs Trust. 

(ii)          Staffing

Details were given of proposed changes to staffing.  Currently there were four full-time equivalent posts and most of these officers covered the dog warden and the animal health service.  It was proposed that two officers would be part of the street environment team and be the designated dog warden service.  One officer would be part of the trading standards team and be responsible for issues in respect of animal health.   The reduction in staffing for this function reflected the fact that there had been an increase in self-regulation in this area.

(iii)        Horses on City of York Council Land – New Project

An update was given on a new project, headed by the Assistant Director of Housing and Community Safety, which sought to find a long term solution to the problem of horses on CYC land.   Members were informed that there were between 150 and 200 tethered horses within the city.  There had not previously been a co-ordinated approach to this issue.  The new project had three main strands:

·        Obtaining land where horses could be kept as an alternative to the roadside/private land.   This may be council owned land but officers were also in discussion with the National Farmers Union to identify land that could be considered.  The legal implications of putting such an arrangement in place were also being considered.  The likelihood was that there would be a charge made for using the land.

·        Where it was possible to identify the owner of a horse that was tethered on the roadside, owners would be encouraged to move their horses to the site.

·        If the horse was not moved, enforcement action might be taken depending on the circumstances.  Possible options would include, engaging with the RSPCA or appointing a contractor to act on the council’s behalf.

Officers stated that they were mindful that horse ownership was part of traveller culture and the horses were generally well cared for.  The council had, however, had some success in working with travellers and encouraging them to reduce the number of horses that they owned.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Members are asked to consider the committee’s work plan and to agree a remit for the Domestic Recycling topic (suggested remit to be tabled at the meeting). [remit now included]

Members were asked to consider the committee’s work plan, including further consideration of proposed scrutiny reviews.

(i)           Domestic Recycling Task Group

Members were asked to agree a remit for the Domestic Recycling Task Group scrutiny review.  A suggested remit for the review was tabled at the meeting [a copy has been attached to the on-line agenda papers].

Members of the task group reported on the meeting that they had held with officers.  Details were given of the proposed remit, including gathering evidence from other local authorities and the Local Government Association Waste Group.

A briefing note on the Waste Management and Minimisation Strategy 2012-15 was also tabled [a copy has been attached to the on-line agenda papers].

(ii)          CCTV

Further consideration was given to the work that the CCTV Monitoring Task Group would carry out prior to the relocation of the service to West Offices.  It was agreed that, before carrying out a visit to the control room, the Task Group would meet with officers to discuss issues including the arrangements that would be in place in the new offices and how the Network Management Team worked with the Police.

RESOLVED:       (i)      That the proposed remit for the

Domestic Waste Recycling Scrutiny Topic be approved.

(ii)          That the Committee’s work plan be updated to reflect the above.

REASONS:         (i)      To progress work on the review.

(ii)          To ensure that the committee has a planned programme of work in place.

Superintendent Lisa Winward, York Safer Neighbourhood Commander,  was in attendance to discuss crime and disorder issues.

Discussion took place regarding the following issues, which had previously been put forward by the committee or identified at the Scrutiny Work Planning Event that had taken place in May 2012:

101 non-emergency police telephone number 

This issue had been raised as a possible scrutiny topic by Councillor Hodgson.  Superintendant Winward explained that the introduction of the 101 number was a national initiative.  Concerns were also expressed regarding the introduction by North Yorkshire Police of an automated telephone answer service. Members were informed that this arrangement was anticipated to save £1m in staffing costs over a four-year period.

Superintendant Winward stated that Jane Larkin – Force Control Room Manager, had offered to meet with the committee to discuss these issues should they so wish.  A visit to the control room could also be arranged if required.

Members commented that the new arrangements had not yet had time to become embedded and hence it would not be appropriate for the committee to carry out a scrutiny review at this stage.  It would, however, be useful to raise awareness of the non-emergency telephone number and suggested that an article be included in a future publication of “Your Voice”.

Fear of Crime

Councillor Douglas had suggested that consideration could be given to a scrutiny review on addressing the fear of crime.  It was agreed that the Chair would meet with Superintendant Winward to discuss this issue and would report back to the committee.

Addressing Hate Crime

Councillor Jeffries had suggested that a scrutiny review be carried out on the reporting systems in place in respect of hate crime across the city.  Members noted that work on a CYC Hate Crime Strategy was currently ongoing and was due to be presented to Cabinet in September.  Members requested that they had an opportunity to consider and comment on the draft strategy at their next meeting.

RESOLVED:       (i)      That Councillor Hodgson be offered the

opportunity to meet with the Force Control Room Manager to discuss any concerns he may have regarding the 101 number and the automated response service.

(ii)          That Members recommend that an article be included in “Your Voice” to raise awareness of the 101 non-emergency telephone number and the circumstances in which it should be used.

(iii)        That the Chair meet with Superintendant Winward to discuss the issue of fear of crime.

(iv)        That, at the next meeting, consideration be given to the draft Hate Crime Strategy.

REASON:            To ensure that issues identified as possible topics for scrutiny review were given full consideration.

Members will be asked to consider the Safer York Partnership Bi-Annual Performance Report.

Members had received the Safer York Partnership Bi-Annual Performance Report. 

Members were pleased to note that total crime in York had dropped by 10% (1623 crimes) in 2011-12 compared to 2010-11 and the statistics for the previous two months indicated that the number of incidents was continuing to fall.

The Chair informed the committee of her involvement in the Shop Watch Scheme that had been set up on Burton Stone Lane.

Officers were asked about the effectiveness of the cold calling control zones.  Officers explained how the system worked and stated that many residents, particularly the elderly, were reassured by having such a scheme in place.  The number of distraction burglaries in York was low.

Officers were asked if there was evidence to demonstrate that the “20’s Plenty” initiative reduced the number of road traffic accidents.  They stated that unless this was implemented along with other traffic calming measures there was no evidence that it reduced the number of incidents.  It was not enforced by the police.  Members requested that in future bi-annual reports, more detailed information be provided to them regarding road traffic incidents.

RESOLVED:       (i)      That the Safer York Partnership Bi-Annual

                                      Performance report be noted.

(ii)      That future reports contain more detailed statistics on road safety incidents¹.

REASON:                      To ensure that the committee is kept

informed of the performance of the Safer York Partnership.

Member are asked to consider a refreshed Community Safety Plan which responds to new legislative requirements and good practice.  The Plan is based on the priorities agreed at the first Crime Summit hosted by the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety in April 2012, and the 2011-12 Joint Strategic Intelligence Assessment (JSIA).  The JSIA  focuses on key progress, changes and wider developments affecting the community safety and policing landscape at a local level. 

Members are asked to consider both documents ahead of them being considered by the new Police & Crime Commissioner later this year.

Members were asked to consider a refreshed Community Safety Plan which responded to new legislative requirements and good practice.  The Plan was based on the priorities agreed at the first Crime Summit hosted by the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety in April 2012, and the 2011-12 Joint Strategic Intelligence Assessment (JSIA).  The JSIA focussed on key progress, changes and wider developments affecting the community safety and policing landscape at a local level.

Members were asked to consider both documents ahead of them being considered by the new Police and Crime Commissioner later this year.

Members were concerned to note the statistics on the number of secondary school children who had been sexually assaulted.  They requested that further information be provided on this matter, including the provenance of the statistics.

RESOLVED:       (i)      That the Safer York Partnership Report on

the Community Safety Plan and the Joint Strategic Intelligence Assessment 2012 be noted.

(ii)      That further information be provided in respect of the statistics on sexual assaults on young people¹.

REASONS:         (i)      To ensure that the committee is aware of

the contents of the Community Safety Plan and the JSIA.

(ii)      To ensure that the committee is informed of crime data and can identify topics for possible scrutiny review.

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on financial performance, service plan improvement actions and performance measures for Environmental Services and Public Protection. 

Members considered a report that provided an update on financial performance, service plan improvement actions and performance measures for Environmental Services and Public Protection.

At the request of Members, officers explained the savings target and outturn figures in respect of the fleet project.

RESOLVED:       That the report be noted.

REASON:            To ensure that the committee is informed on financial and performance issues.