Agenda item

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 5:00 pm on Monday 23 March 2015.  To register to speak please contact the Democracy Officer for the meeting, on the details at the foot of the agenda.

Filming, Recording or Webcasting Meetings

Please note this meeting may be filmed and webcast and that includes any registered public speakers, who have given their permission.  This broadcast can be viewed at: http://www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

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: http://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/download/3130/protocol_for_webcasting_filming_and_recording_of_council_meetings

It was reported that there had been four registrations to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Fiona Evans of the Yearsley Pool Action Group raised a number of issues in respect of the finance and usage of Yearsley Pool.  She stated that the one year attendance figures did not provide sufficient data to analyse long-term trends and underlying factors.  She gave details of the data that had been obtained during the first campaign when archived documentation dating from 1906 had been obtained.  Ms Evans stated that, during the first ten years of recorded figures starting from 1994, attendance at Yearsley Pool had ranged from 98,000 to 134,000. She stated that low attendance had coincided with aspects such as a major price hike in 2000 and mini closures linked to roof problems, as it was before the refurbishment had been undertaken.  Ms Evans stated that figures for the next decade had varied widely due to a huge surge in attendance post refurbishment amongst other factors such as the free-swimming initiative. She stated that the figures provided to the committee demonstrated that usage had returned to the old average of the first decade even though this was a time of recession.  Ms Evans stated that, in the past, Yearsley Pool had been the cheapest Council run pool to operate.  In 1999/2000 the pool had cost £95,000 compared to Edmund Wilson Pool costs of £170,000.  After refurbishment, with a more energy efficient building and plant, Yearsley Pool should have been more cost effective however the operational management approach had changed. 

Ms Evans stated that the Action Group’s preferred option was to significantly reduce the subsidy by reverting back to an arrangement whereby three staff (one duty manager and two lifeguards) largely ran the pool. Cleaning had been carried out between timetabled sessions and during quieter sessions. The manager and his staff had carried out routine maintenance work and small jobs in house and the facility had closed for a week at Easter to enable painting and repairs, which were again carried out by Council staff.  Ms Evans urged that a more detailed approach be undertaken to properly assess usage and finance at Yearsley Pool.

Richard Van den Heever stated that he had previously worked at Yearsley Pool and gave details of operational arrangements, budget planning and financial management that had been in place.  He expressed concern at the level of expenditure currently recorded as “other expenditure” and stated that a more detailed explanation was required regarding expenditure within this budget heading.   Mr van den Heever stated that it was essential to have full information as to how funding was being spent in order to identify where savings could be made.

Sue Horsfield stated that she had swum at Yearsley Pool for thirty-eight years and gave details of the benefits of swimming as a form of exercise.  She stated that it was also an essential skill, especially for children living in a city with two rivers.  Ms Horsfield stated that Yearsley Pool was the best pool in York in terms of its size and layout and commented on its use by sports clubs.  She expressed concern at the current managerial arrangements in place at the pool and the associated costs.  She also queried whether funding was being spent on non-essential items.   She stated that the people of York were incensed by the threat to close Yearsley Pool once again.

Mike Jones stated that he intended to concentrate on issues in respect of swimming pool costs. He stated that the figures provided regarding running costs had been cursory and vague and that little or no explanation had been given for tens of thousands of pounds of spending.  Dr Jones stated that like for like comparison between Yearsley Swimming Pool and Energise had been virtually impossible.

Dr Jones stated that there were serious concerns regarding the present pool management structure and subsequent costing and he believed that significant cost reductions could be made.  He stressed the importance of ensuring that, as well as running costs, the expected lifespan and cost to build should also be factored into the costs.

Dr Jones stated that repeated requests had been made for information on the cost of previous pool builds (Barbican, Edmund Wilson, Waterworld) but this had not been made available and neither had the costs of the proposed new pool. The only figures provided had been for a standard 25 metre pool with additional learner pool (£6M). The proposed new pool appeared to have an optimistic proposed life expectancy of 50 years and the specification suggested that it would cost more than £6M, resulting in a capital cost depreciation of at least £120,000 per year.

Dr Jones stated that, other than maintenance and refurbishment (i.e. running costs), current evidence suggested that Yearsley Pool would not present large ongoing capital costs.  There had been no problems in a hundred years and a detailed structural survey in the 1990’s had given it a clean bill of health. The roof and plant machinery replacement within the last ten years had been the first major investment since the 1960s.  Dr Jones stated that this needed to be taken into account if the true cost of each pool was to be established.

Dr Jones stated that he was concerned that the information necessary to make rational decisions had not been made available by City of York Council. He urged that the Scrutiny Committee ensured that a full and accurate financial assessment was made before a new swimming pool was funded as this would be costly to build and run and would be at the expense of Yearsley Pool which was reliable and well used.

The speakers were thanked for their contributions.  The Chair stated that any member of the public who had further suggestions to put forward was welcome to forward these to the scrutiny officer.