7 February 2006 - Minutes

BABERGH DISTRICT COUNCIL

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (COMMUNITY SERVICES) COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (COMMUNITY SERVICES) COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, COUNCIL OFFICES, CORKS LANE, HADLEIGH ON TUESDAY 7 FEBRUARY 2006

PRESENT: Mr C J Hunt – Chairman

Mr C W Arthey, Babergh’s Representative on the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategic Member/Officer Steering Group attended the meeting for the discussions referred to in Minute Nos. 60 to 62 below.

Mr J A B Long was unable to be present at the meeting.

51     DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Mr D G Grutchfield subsequently declared a personal interest in Agenda item 7, Budget Scrutiny (see Minute No. 56 below), by virtue of his membership of the Suffolk County Council but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

Mr R E Kemp subsequently declared a personal interest in Agenda item 7, Budget Scrutiny (see Minute No. 56 below), by virtue of his membership of the Suffolk County Council but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

Mr J R A Sayers subsequently declared a personal interest in Agenda item 7, Budget Scrutiny (see Minute No. 56 below), by virtue of his membership of the Sudbury Town Council but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

Mr D L Wood subsequently declared a personal interest in Agenda item 7, Budget Scrutiny (see Minute No. 56 below), by virtue of his membership of the Suffolk County Council and the Suffolk Police Authority but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

52     MINUTES

RESOLVED

(1)     That the Minutes of the meeting held on 29 November 2005 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

(2)     That the Minutes of the joint meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny (Stewardship) Committee and the Overview and Scrutiny (Community Services) Committee held on 12 December 2005 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

53     PETITIONS

None received.

54     QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

None received.

55     WORK PLAN

The Acting Head of Legal and Administrative Services submitted a report (Paper E265) which provided details of the Committee’s anticipated work for the remainder of 2005/06, including items that may be the subject of “call in” procedures.

It was noted that the report on a proposed Safeguarding Policy which formed Item 10 of the Agenda for the meeting, had been withdrawn. A revised Policy Statement would be submitted to the meeting of the Committee scheduled for 28 March 2006.

It was noted that the Annual Monitoring of Anti-social Behaviour Initiatives would be carried out at the meeting scheduled for 28 March 2006. It was agreed to ask Officers to consider the Community Safety Consultation currently being undertaken by the Suffolk Police Authority and the effectiveness of CCTV in reducing anti-social behaviour, and to include these issues in their report.

It was agreed that Planning Assessment Sheets should be completed so that consideration could be given to adding to the Work Plan for 2006/07 items relating to sustainability/alternative energy and a review of the free Bus Pass Scheme.

RESOLVED:

That the Work Plan submitted as Paper E 265 be noted.

56     BUDGET SCRUTINY

Geoff Kistner, Corporate Director, presented a report (Paper E251) inviting Members to scrutinise the draft Budget which had been approved by the Strategy Committee at its meeting on 12 January 2006. He drew Members’ attention to paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 of the report which summarised issues which had arisen since the Strategy Committee meeting and which could affect the General Budget for 2006/07.

In the ensuing discussion the following were among the points noted:-

• The Overview and Scrutiny (Stewardship) Committee at its meeting on 31 January 2006 had not supported any increase to the allocation for “Suffolk Speaks”, but it was noted that there could potentially be difficulties if Babergh were the only Local Authority unwilling to increase its contribution. It was agreed that the current “Suffolk Speaks” consultation arrangements were in need of revitalisation.
  
• In relation to the possible Feasibility Study on the redevelopment of the Sudbury Town Centre (Bus Station) site, it was noted that the Overview and Scrutiny (Stewardship) Committee had recommended that the Study be not supported by Babergh unless it could be funded from alternative sources.
  
• It was noted that the Study was supported by the Sudbury Town Council. Members considered the Bus Station area to be an important gateway to Sudbury and one which had long been in need of redevelopment. They called upon Officers to explore every avenue in seeking external funding to support the scheme.

RECOMMENDED TO STRATEGY COMMITTEE

(1)     That the Council Tax increase for 2006/07 should not be more than 2.7%.

(2)     That an additional allocation of £5,000 be made to the 2006/07 Budget for the “Suffolk Speaks” consultation arrangements.

(3)     That with regard to the Sudbury Town Centre (Bus Station) Feasibility Study, if external funding were not available to support the scheme, a sum of up to £10,000 should be taken from reserves, but that Officers should not commit the funds until the position on alternative sources of funding had been fully explored.

57     DRAFT CORPORATE PLAN

The Corporate Support Manager presented a report (Paper E252) concerning the draft Corporate Plan for 2006/07.

He outlined the comments made by the Overview and Scrutiny (Stewardship) Committee at its meeting on 31 January 2006.

In the discussion on the plan the following were among the points noted:-

• In partnership with other relevant Authorities, the Council should aim to become more proactive in promoting healthy living.
  
• Members considered that in the 2007-11 Corporate Plan more attention should be paid to issues of sustainability and energy use. It was agreed that these issues should be included in the Committee’s Work Plan for 2006/07 and it was suggested that a day be set aside for discussion of the topic by all Members of the Council.
  
• It was noted that services and facilities for young people were referred to throughout the Plan. It was suggested that feedback from delegates at Youth Conferences via School Councils should be encouraged.
  
• It was noted that the Plan would form part of a Babergh Matters! Article on State of the District feedback.

RECOMMENDED TO STRATEGY COMMITTEE

That in future the issue of sustainability be further addressed in more detail in any review of the Corporate Plan.

RESOLVED

That the issue of sustainability/alternative energy be included in the Committee’s Work Plan for 2006/07.

58     CAPITAL PROGRAMME MONITORING

The Head of Technical Services and the Head of Finance submitted a joint report (Paper E256) setting out progress on the current year’s Capital Programme to the end of December 2005 under the agreed Management Performance arrangements.

Members’ attention was drawn to paragraph 4.5 of the report which indicated that approximately 44% of the total £7.4M adjusted Budget had been spent so far. This meant that the Council was in a slightly better position than at the equivalent time in the previous year. The staff involved were congratulated on this achievement.

It was noted that because of delays in starting the Sandringham Court Scheme, there would be no expenditure on Stour House in the current financial year. The Head of Housing was working with the Housing Panel on a number of further options for Stour House.

RESOLVED

That the overall position on the Capital Programme at the end of December 2005 as set out in Paper E256 be noted.

59     REVIEW OF PROCESS FOR MANAGING VOID PROPERTIES

The Head of Housing and the Head of Technical Services submitted a joint report (Paper E270) concerning proposed terms of reference for a review of the process for managing void properties.

It was noted that the proposals were in accordance with the views expressed at the meeting of the Committee held on 29 November 2005 (Minute No. 47 refers).

RESOLVED

(1)     That a review of the process for managing void properties be carried out with the following terms of reference:-

• To review the processes involved in achieving the Council’s target for re-letting void properties, with particular reference to BV212.
  
• To consider the possibility of introducing a “Tenant Deposit” to safeguard against future potential liabilities to the Council.
  
• To review the processes for recovery of costs where properties have been neglected.
  
• To review the systems of inspection currently used by the Council as landlord in the course of each tenancy.
  
• To make recommendations for improvements where possible in the above processes.

(2)     That the Head of Housing and the Head of Technical Services be requested to submit a report on these issues to a future meeting of the Committee.

60     HAVEN GATEWAY PARTNERSHIP

Mr D L Wood, the Council’s representative on the Haven Gateway Partnership’s Management Committee, presented a report (Paper E271) concerning the Partnership.

RESOLVED

That the contents of Paper E271 be noted.

61     UPDATE ON PROGRESS OF RECYCLING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT

The Head of Environmental Services presented a report (Paper E267) updating Members on the Council’s current recycling activity and identifying current issues and future challenges. He drew attention to the fact that the Council was diverting well over 30% of household waste from landfill, that operational costs were amongst the lowest nationally, and that both statutory and Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets had been exceeded.

Mr C W Arthey, the Council’s representative on the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategic Member/Officer Steering Group, expressed the view that much of the success of the Suffolk Authorities was due to the high level of co-operation between the bodies. It was anticipated that there would need to be consideration of options for closer joint working. He indicated that a joint bid had been made for Beacon Status.

In the ensuing discussion the following were among the points noted:

• Efforts were being made to establish markets for recovered materials such as waxed containers. The list of targeted material was subject to revision.

• In the future the Government might encourage Local Authorities to produce energy from waste. The next important step forward might be the introduction of mechanical and biological treatment, but this would require a major capital investment.
  
• The charges for garden waste collection might have been set too low. If so, Members would be able to recommend an increase through the Service and Financial Planning process.
  
• The Council would be receiving an additional £42,000 in Waste Efficiency Grant over the period 2006/07 and 2007/08. It would be for Members to decide how to use these funds. It was suggested that some of the grant might be used to offset the cost of the major procurement exercise caused by the fact that the current refuse collection contract with Cleanaway Limited was due for renewal in April 2007. It was anticipated that entering into a partnership agreement with Mid Suffolk might return efficiency savings of 10 to 15% to offset an otherwise significant increase.

RESOLVED

(1)     That the information presented in Paper E267 be noted and that the satisfactory and cost-effective operation of the refuse collection and recycling service be acknowledged.

(2)     That the investigation of those matters identified in paragraph 4.12 of Paper E267 in response to the future challenges faced by the service, be supported.

63     REVIEW OF CLEAN NEIGHBOURHOODS AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 2005 – IMPLICATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT AND FIXED PENALTY FINES

The Head of Environmental Services presented a report (Paper E268) concerning the implications of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.

It was noted that the Act required “responsible authorities” including District Councils to include in their Crime Reduction Strategies measures to deal with low level anti-social behaviour and environmental crimes. This term included nuisance vehicles, littering, graffiti, fly tipping and dog and noise nuisance. The Act gave local authorities powers to impose fixed penalty fines in a number of areas, and all Suffolk Authorities were trying to adopt a single framework, as indicated in Appendices A and B to the report.

It was noted that appropriate reports would be submitted to the Strategy Committee as and when the fines were to be introduced.

RESOLVED

That the review of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 set out in Paper E268 be noted.

RECOMMENDED TO STRATEGY COMMITTEE

That at the appropriate time the adoption by the Head of Environmental Services of the proposed powers and levels of fines, as set out in Paper E268, be supported.

62     REVIEW OF REFUSE COLLECTION POLICY

The Head of Environmental Services presented a report (Paper E269) reviewing the Council’s Refuse Collection and Waste Management Policy. He highlighted the following proposed changes to the existing Policy:-

• The unacceptably high level of contamination in blue recycling bins meant that the scheme was significantly below the performance target and was involving the Council in additional landfill disposal costs. The report presented measures to tackle this problem including the introduction of a fixed penalty fine for persistent offenders.
  
• For clarity the policy on bin ownership and responsibilities had been expanded.
  
• Policy statements on dog waste and litter bin servicing as well as fly tipping had also been added to the document in order to reflect current practice.

It was noted that the proposed bin contamination enforcement procedure set out in Appendix 3 to the new policy outlined a series of steps to warn residents if their blue bins contained inappropriate material for recycling. The proposed fixed penalty fines would be imposed only as a last resort in the case of persistent offenders.

RECOMMENDED TO STRATEGY COMMITTEE

That the proposed amendment to the Refuse Collection Policy as set out in Paper E269 be approved, specifically:-

• The proposed blue bin contamination and enforcement procedure.
  
• A levy for an unscheduled collection of a contaminated bin.
  
• The principle of the proposed arrangements for acceptance of excess recyclable materials in sacks, including a nominal charge for sacks.

Notes:

1. The Committee adjourned for refreshments between 11.20 a.m. and 11.35 a.m.

2. After the meeting a group of Members visited the MRF Facility at Great Blakenham, accompanied by the Head of Environmental Services and other members of staff.

The business of the meeting was concluded at 1.40 p.m.

Chairman

Back to Top