Agenda and minutes

To appoint a Member to Chair the Task Group.

Resolved:  To appoint Councillor Funnell as Chair of the Scrutiny Review Task Group.

At this point, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

Members were asked to declare, at this point in the meeting, any personal interests, not included on the Register of Interests, or any prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interests they may have in respect of business on the agenda. No additional interests were  declared

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered their wish to under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme may do so.  The deadline for registering is 5.00pm on Tuesday 26 July 2016.

Members of the public may register to speak on:

·        An item on the agenda

·        An issue within the remit of the task group

Residents are welcome to photograph, film or record Councillors and Officers at all meetings open to the press and public. This includes the use of social media reporting, i.e. tweeting.  Anyone wishing to film, record or take photos at any public meeting should contact the Democracy Officer (whose contact details are at the foot of this agenda) in advance of the meeting.

The Council’s protocol on Webcasting, Filming & Recording of Meetings ensures that these practices are carried out in a manner both respectful to the conduct of the meeting and all those present.  It can be viewed at https://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/file/6453/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_council_meetingspdf

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

This report presents introductory information in support of this new scrutiny review.  Members are asked to identify and agree a suitable review remit with a number of objectives, and the timeframe for the review’s completion.

Consideration was given to a scoping report which provided introductory information in relation to the Council’s new approach to community engagement through working with local neighbourhoods and revised ward committees and commissioning through Ward Budgets. The report followed a request by the Communities and Environment Policy and Scrutiny Committee for a Task Group to undertake a review to assess achievements to date in this area and ambitions for the future.

In order to support Members’ consideration of a suitable remit for the review and to enable the Task Group to focus on a way forward, the Head of Communities and Equalities with the assistance of a Student Intern presented details of the present Neighbourhood Working Model and the differing responsibilities of both Officers and Members in the following areas:

·       Ward Priorities

·       Ward Committees

·       Ward Funding

·       Ward Action Plans (optional)

·       Ward Team Meetings

·       Feedback to Residents

·       Different Roles

In answer to Members questions, it was confirmed that, in an effort to embed the new Ward Committee process, following a number of Executive reports, the Communities and Equalities team had met with all Members to explain the new arrangements, held a number of Member briefings, and produced fact sheets outlining the process in more detail. Articles had also been included in the Members’ Newsletter.

An exercise with the Task Group was then carried out to identify barriers and issues within the process. The Head of Communities and Equalities provided feedback from Officers supporting the process:

·        New Members and staff changes in the Communities and Equalities team

·        Increase in ward budgets from £75k to £1m

·        Introduction of new system

·        The options of allocating ward budgets through local grants or the commissioning of services

·        Individual Members responsibility to understand the process

·        Generally poor feedback/responses from Members/Officers

·        No collective agreement on how Ward monies were spent

·        Confusion of roles

·        Accountability – monitoring the spend of ward budgets

·        Ward meetings were not always representative of the community

·        Need for resident meetings or activities designed to be more responsive to local needs

·        The same style of engagement did not always work

·        Members often missed ward team meetings

·        Difficulties in agreeing meeting dates

·        Members unsupportive of process

Members highlighted their issues and concerns:

·     There had been no requirement for Members to attend any of the meetings/briefings

·     Mixed ward issues

·     Each ward had different issues

·     Need for all Members to understand each stage of the process

·     Level of staff support (each Officer now covered four wards)

·     Loss of local knowledge when supporting Officers change

·     Need to build on learning e.g. organisational memory, good practice

·     Need for audit trail

·     How the process has worked and is working for local groups

·     Assistance when applications do not suit ward grant process

·     Structures to deal with joint commissioning

·     Useful to obtain the views and experiences of bodies seeking funding, those already in receipt of funding and those who have been refused funding

Members requested further information in relation to the Highway Wards Programme and the highway improvements processes to include Ward examples.

Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.