Agenda item

As requested at the Consultation Event held on 16 March 2015, Annex A of the report for agenda item 4 contains details of the current financial arrangements and usage figures for Yearsley Pool.

Members considered Annex A of the report presented under agenda item 4.  The annex contained details of the current financial arrangements and usage figures for Yearsley Pool. 

 

Officers gave a presentation on the figures, including information in respect of:

·        Trends

·        Key users

·        User figures

·        Outturn figures

·        Income and expenditure

·        Capital investment

·        Operating costs

 

Officers stated that expenditure had been significantly reduced.  Members noted that the pool costs approximately £121 per hour to operate and currently generates income of approximately £75 per hour.  All activities, including use by clubs, were subsidised.

 

Members questioned officers on the following issues:

 

(i)           Staffing costs

 

It was noted that staffing ratios were in line with health and safety guidelines.  Members asked how the operating costs of Yearsley Pool compared with those of Energise.  They were informed that the staffing structure was the same at both pools although Yearsley Pool had additional lifeguards because of its size.  There were, however, no receptionists. 

 

Officers were asked if a review of staffing arrangements had been carried out to identify whether savings could be made.  Officers stated that consideration had not yet been given to the possibility of using volunteers but that this would have implications in terms of ensuring that they were a qualified lifeguard and had received the relevant training.

 

Clarification was sought as to whether staffing levels would remain the same when GLL took over the running of the pool.  Members were informed that, in accordance with TUPE regulations, the existing staff would transfer under the new contract and that they would be paid a living wage.  The situation could, however, be reviewed if a vacancy arose.

 

Members requested that they be provided with the hourly operating costs for Energise so that this could be compared with the £121 per hour costs at Yearsley Pool.

 

(ii)          Capital Investment/Improvement

 

Officers were questioned about the arrangements that were in place to plan for general repairs and maintenance improvements.  They were informed that a plan for future improvements was in place and, if funding was available, these were implemented.  Attention was drawn to improvements that had been carried out, as listed in Annex A. 

 

(iii)        “Other Expenditure”

 

At the request of Members, officers agreed to provide a more detailed breakdown of £69k of expenditure contained within the budget heading of “other expenditure”.

 

(iv)        Usage figures

 

Members questioned officers regarding the number of people using the pool at particular times of the day.  They were informed that the figures varied significantly. It was expected that there would be a minimum of 25 users at all times but that for activities such as the inflatable sessions the number could be as high as 120.  It was not possible for usage to be higher for such sessions for safety reasons.  

 

Officers gave possible reasons for a fall in usage of the pool including:

·        It reflected a national trend

·        There was more competition in the area

·        There had been a big development of other sports in York, for example cycling

·        ASA was in a review phase and may receive less funding from Sport England

 

Noting that the totals were incorrect in the user figures statistics provided for 2013/14, Members requested that the figures be checked and the correct version presented to them.

 

(v)         Pricing

 

Officers confirmed that the cost per session for an adult with a Yorcard was £3.65.  This was the same cost as for Energise.

 

(vi)        Clubs

 

Officers were asked how many clubs used Energise Pool.  They stated that although there was some usage by clubs, the figures were not as high as Yearsley Pool.  Clubs provided a guaranteed income whereas usage of the pool by casual swimmers tended to reduce at particular times of the year.

 

Officers were asked if clubs had been consulted regarding the design and facilities of the new pool.  Officers stated that this had not been the case but that the experience of the bidders and the lessons learned from Energise had been taken into account.

 

(vii)      Historic Operating Costs

 

Noting that the statistics that had been provided related to 2009-10 onwards, Members asked if earlier figures could be provided.  Officers explained that, under the previous arrangements, a compulsory competitive tendering process had been in place and hence a price had been provided for delivering the service and there had not been transparency regarding costings.  Officers stated that, over the last five years, costs had been decreasing and savings had been made, including a reduction in management costs. 

 

(viii)     Increasing Revenue Streams

 

Members queried whether an Annual Development Plan was in place and asked to receive information regarding the strategies that had been implemented over the last two years to increase revenue streams and how the effectiveness of these had been tracked.

 

Members asked if a review of income from vending machines had taken place.  Officers explained that the contract was at its end and it was anticipated that GLL may be able to negotiate a better deal.  However ancillary spend was not likely to provide a significant area of growth.

 

Members asked if consideration had been given to the generating of power through solar or wind.  Officers confirmed that consideration had been given to the installation of solar panels but that the costs of installation had been an issue.

 

(ix)        Energise

 

At the request of Members, officers gave details of the service level agreement that was currently in place with York High School regarding the running of Energise.  It was noted that these arrangements would change and that Energise would be included as part of the overall leisure contract with GLL.

 

(x)         Economies of Scale

 

Members queried whether savings were likely to be achieved because of GLL’s purchasing powers as a large organisation.  Officers confirmed that, although overhead costs were fixed, GLL was likely to be able to achieve economies of scale in respect of the purchasing of fuel and chemicals.

 

(xi)        GLL Contract

 

Members noted the current situation in respect of the GLL contract:

·        At the consultation event clarification had been sought as to whether a competition clause had been included in the contract with GLL.  It had been confirmed that there was no competition clause in the contract as it currently stood.  

·        The GLL proposals were due to be considered at a forthcoming Planning Committee meeting.

·        The leisure contract would not be signed until after the election.  Members requested that any amendments to the leisure contract that would impact on Yearsley Pool be presented to the committee.

 

Members requested that a timeline of the decision making be made available.

 

Next Steps

 

Consideration was given to the committee’s work plan, as detailed in Annex B of the report.

 

Members agreed that it would be useful to make the following visits to progress the scrutiny review:

 

·        Nestle and York St John (April 2015)

·        New Earswick Swimming Pool (May/June)

·        York Sports Village (May/June)

·        Tadcaster Swimming Pool (May/June)

 

Members clarified that the informal meeting schedule to take place in May 2015 would be open to the public.

 

Members requested that the latest contractual information be included on the agenda for the meeting scheduled to take place on 5 June 2015.

 

Resolved:  (i)      That the information provided regarding funding

arrangements and user figures, as detailed in Annex A of the report, be noted.

 

(ii)      That the following additional information be provided to the committee:

·        A breakdown of expenditure contained within the budget heading “other expenditure”

·        Operating costs for Energise (to enable comparisons to made)

·        Corrected statistics on user figures

·        Capacity limits for other pools in York

·        Further information on club usage at Yearsley Pool and usage by clubs of other pools in York

·        Examples of the marketing strategies that have been implemented, the costs involved and the effectiveness of these initiatives (including the Development Plan if applicable)

·        Financial figures prior to 2009 and an explanation of the situation prior to 2005

·        A timetable of the decision-making process in respect of the GLL contract and the latest contractural information.  A timetable of the decision-making process in respect of the GLL contract and the latest contractual information.  The Committee would also wish to see any future amendments to the leisure contract that would impact on Yearsley Pool¹

                       

(iii)     That the committee’s work plan be as detailed in Annex B subject to the agreed additions. 

 

Reason:     To support the Ad Hoc Committee’s consideration of

the possible future options for Yearsley Pool and to progress the work of the committee.