Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Rodney Chambers (Leader) and Councillor David Wildey (Children’s Social Care).

To approve the record of the meeting held on  

The record of the meeting held on 9 November 2010 was agreed and signed by the Deputy Leader as correct.

Councillor Jarrett declared a personal interest in agenda item 7 (Landscape Character Assessment), as he had an interest in a company which owns land referenced in the report.

Councillor Phil Filmer declared a personal interest in agenda item 18 (Gateway 3 Contract Award: Quality Public Transport Corridors Road Improvement Works – North Dane Way Improvement Scheme), as his company had some business dealings with one of the companies mentioned in the report.

To follow.

This report set out the Council’s draft capital and revenue budget for 2011/2012. In accordance with the Constitution, Cabinet was required to develop initial budget proposals and refer these to the Overview and Scrutiny Committees before finalising the budget and setting council tax levels in February 2011.

The draft budget was based on the principles contained in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) 2011/2014, which had been approved by Cabinet in September 2010. The report set out details of the influences upon the level of funding and it was noted that the Government’s Spending Review 2010 had not provided the detail to inform the budget setting process.

The initial budget proposals showed a current forecast funding gap of over £21.5 million for both Dedicated Schools Grant and General Fund services. It was noted that the capital budget proposals for 2011/2012 had been confined to a continuation of the existing approved capital programme, as the Government had not yet announced funding allocations to individual authorities. Budget proposals incorporating pressures and current year savings were summarised within the appendices to the report, with major pressures identified in the report.

The report set out details and the main factors/assumptions that would form the basis of the 2011/2012 Housing Revenue Account (HRA) budget. It was noted that until notification of the final Housing Subsidy Determination, the HRA budget process could not be completed. A revised page 13 of the agenda was tabled at the meeting clarifying that a detailed HRA budget report would be presented to the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 27 January 2011 and Cabinet on 15 February 2011. Council would set the Housing Revenue Account budget, rents and service charges for 2011/2012 on 24 February 2011. Furthermore, as part of the budget process, there would also be consultation with a Tenants Forum on 9 February 2011.

The Cabinet agreed to accept this report as an urgent item to facilitate the budget consultation process in accordance with the timescales in the Constitution.

Reasons:

It is the responsibility of the Cabinet to develop draft budget proposals for consideration by Overview and Scrutiny Committees. These draft proposals are the first stage of the budget consultation process leading to further discussion by Cabinet on 15 February 2011 and formal council tax setting on 24 February 2011.

This report requested Cabinet to consider the recommendations of the review undertaken by a task group of the Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee, into the effectiveness and future of Partners and Communities Together (PACTs) in Medway. The Committee had considered and recommended the review to Cabinet on 16 November 2010.

A copy of the review document had been circulated separately to Members.

The report detailed and commented upon the key findings from the review, as they related to:

·              the provision of PACTs in Medway and best practice,

·              the difficulty of the same issues being raised at meetings over time and whether each scheme’s priorities were being achieved and maintained,

·              the benefits and disadvantages of PACT schemes and engagement of partners in the process, especially when compared to areas not covered by a scheme and whether they benefited the communities involved,

·              whether PACTS provided value for money and assisted with delivery of Local Area Agreement indicator NI 4 (% of people who feel they can influence decision-making in their locality),

·              possible future work activities for PACT schemes.

In summary it was noted that the review had identified that, overall, PACTs worked well and were a good way of bringing residents together to develop priorities and action plans at neighbourhood level alongside other opportunities for community engagement currently on offer. A series of recommendations were proposed to improve and develop PACTs further.

The review document incorporating the key findings and recommendations would be referred to the Kent Police Authority and the Community Safety Partnership for consideration and response.

This report provided details of a review of the Council’s Risk Management Strategy and Risk Register. The report provided some proposed amendments to the Risk Register following review by the Strategic Risk Management Group and the Council’s Management Team.

The Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report on 4 November 2010 and its comments were set out in paragraph 5 of the report.

Reasons:

The establishment of a corporate framework for risk management is recommended by CIPFA and SOLACE and will complement and support the work already being carried out within each directorate to manage risks.

This report set out details of the Medway Landscape Character Assessment. A copy of the assessment had been circulated separately to Members.

The assessment was a technical document to support landscape-related planning decisions within Medway’s countryside and urban-rural fringe areas. It provided an evidence base in support of the landscape and countryside policies within the Local Development Framework Draft Core Strategy. It also set out landscape guidance for planning officers, developers and the local community when considering proposed development within the rural and urban-rural fringe areas of Medway.

An extensive consultation process had been undertaken that sought the views of statutory consultees in the planning process and key stakeholders and it was noted that the study had received a high level of support from all parties.

The report proposed that the Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture was delegated authority to make minor amendments to the assessment, as detailed within the Diversity Impact Assessment accompanying the report. During the discussion on this item is was also agreed that the entry for Motney Hill, on pages 94 and 95 of the supplementary agenda, would be reconsidered under this delegated authority; specifically clarifying the designation as a Designated Country Park and the inclusion of wildfowling uses as an issue/problem.

Reasons:

The landscape guidance document will enable better informed planning decisions.

This report set out the recommendations from the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee, following consideration of a feasibility study into the potential for developing an assessment centre for people requiring temporary accommodation in Medway. The Cabinet had requested the study was undertaken when considering the findings of the Temporary Accommodation Task Group in November 2009.

The feasibility study set out the advantages and disadvantages of the three options: taking no action, developing an assessment centre or improved procurement of temporary accommodation.

It was noted that to take forward the proposal for a procurement process by way of a framework of providers, officers would undertake a formal procurement process starting with a Gateway 1 Options Appraisal.

Reasons:

Provision of temporary accommodation through a framework of providers offers the possibility of greatest flexibility, cheapest residual unit cost and quality and level of service.

This report sought delegated authority to let vacant space within the Innovation Centre upon commercial terms.

Cabinet had considered a report in November 2008 setting out proposals for letting the commercial floor space within the building. At that time it was proposed the ground and first floors would be operated as an innovation centre and the top floor would be let to one or more anchor tenants. It was now proposed that in order to maximise the buildings potential that the top floor was divided and incorporated within the Innovation Centre facility.

As a standing delegation this would be added to the Employee Scheme of Delegation, as set out in the Council’s Constitution.

Reasons:

To enable the Council to act quickly and secure occupational tenants for the Innovation Centre and the consequential rental income. 

This report presented a list of nine sites for investment in Year 2 of the Playbuilder Programme.

It was noted that Cabinet had originally approved the Year 2 sites on 30 March 2010. However, following government announcements and then confirmation as to a revised funding allocation for Medway, the grant allocation had been reduced to £381,518. The proposed Year 2 sites for Playbuilder investment were set out in table 1 of the report. Appendix 1 to the report showed the geographical spread of the Playbuilder programme (Year 1 and 2) and other playground investment that had been made through the Big Lottery Fund Programme and the Member Priority Scheme.

A Diversity Impact Assessment (DIA) had been carried out on the proposals and the findings indicated that the Playbuilder programme did not need a full diversity impact assessment.

Reasons:

The implementation of the Playbuilder Programme will help to meet a number of the Council’s wider aspirations and results in the refurbishment of a number of play areas across Medway.

The proposed sites have been identified through a rigorous process including public consultation, assessment of existing play quality and indices of multiple deprivation.

This report presented details of the Council’s performance for the second quarter of 2010/2011. In particular it included performance against indicators and actions agreed in the Council Plan 2010/2011.

It was noted that of the 53 key measures that could be reported this quarter 33 (62%) had achieved or outperformed the target and a further 8 (15%) were below target but within acceptable variance limits. 12 (23%) key measures were below target and outside acceptable variance limits.

The report also explained how the Council Plan 2011-14 would be developed to ensure it reflected the current financial situation, priorities for Medway and likely funding reductions. The plan would be developed alongside the budget setting process.

Reasons:

Full and accurate performance reporting to Members is consistent with best practice, and allows them to review the Council’s performance. 

This report summarised the revenue monitoring position for the current year based on actual income and expenditure to September 2010.

It was noted that on 25 February 2010 the Council had set gross revenue spending at £625 million and a General Fund net budget requirement of £182.713 million for 2010/2011. It was noted that Council had revisited this in response to the public expenditure reductions announced by the government in May 2010.

The monitoring report indicated that after management action, the outturn forecast for 2010/2011 currently stood at a £1.236 million overspend, which all related to general fund services. After allowing for the approved reserve contribution towards achieving the spending reductions, the forecast for general fund services would be for an overspend of £0.897 million.

An analysis of the budget position for each directorate was set out in the report and accompanying appendices.

Reasons:

Cabinet has the responsibility to ensure effective budgetary control to contain expenditure within the approved limits set by Council. Where a budget overspend is forecast, Cabinet supported by the corporate management team must identify measures to remove any excess expenditure.

This report presented the capital monitoring for the period to September 2010, with an outturn forecast for 2010/2011. This incorporated the latest notified public spending reductions.

It was noted that on 25 February 2010 the Council had approved a capital programme for 2010/2011 and future years of £116 million. Having incorporated some further funding announcements the capital programme now approached £128 million.

The report commented on the delivery of the capital programme, which was now in excess of 200 individual schemes, and updated Members on a number of issues. The current forecast showed that £90.148 million of the programme was forecast for spend during 2010/2011. Details of five schemes that had been added, or vired, to the capital programme under delegated authority were given, together with two schemes that would be referred to Council for approval.

Reasons:

Cabinet has the responsibility to ensure effective budgetary control to contain expenditure within the approved limits set by Council.

This report presented information on vacancies that officers had requested approval to commence recruitment for, following the process agreed by Cabinet on 7 January 2003 (decision number 9/2003).

Appendix 1 to the report provided details of the posts.

Reasons:

The posts presented to Cabinet support the efficient running of the Council.

This report sought permission to commence the procurement process to invite tenders for the Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School new design/technology building scheme from contractors selected from the Medway Council approved framework.

This project would provide better quality accommodation for English, Science, Design Technology and Art and would support the Council’s 14 – 19 strategy.

A programme timeline and risk register was attached to the report. An exempt appendix set out the finance and whole life costing implications to the Council.

The Procurement Board had considered this report on 20 October 2010 and referred it to Cabinet for formal consideration and approval.

Reasons:

The new facilities are required to enable the school to deliver the quality of curriculum offer for the key subjects as described in the business case section of the report and the capital programme approved by Cabinet in February 2010 included funding for the project.

This report set out the outcome of the procurement process to secure two year contracts for bailiff services with an option for a two year extension.

The contracts would include the recovery of council tax, national non-domestic rates, housing benefit overpayments, parking fines and sundry debts.

An exempt appendix set out a summary of the award of contract from initial expression of interest to the contract award including tender evaluation.

It was noted that the Procurement Board had considered this report on 10 November 2010 and referred the matter to Cabinet for approval.

Reasons:

The procurement process identified that bailiff services for Revenues and Benefits required different skills to those needed for parking services and as such different contractors are needed for these services.

The ability to monitor and benchmark performance is a key requirement to a service that is both critical to the Council’s cash flow but also highly visible and potentially a risk to the Council’s reputation.

In accordance with the published evaluation criteria, the contractors submitted the most economically advantageous tenders for the specified services.

This report recommended the award of the tender for routine maintenance works in connection with public lighting and traffic signs for the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2016 including provision for a 24 month extension.

The contract would enable the Council to meet its duty of care obligations in respect of public lighting and facilitate the installation of new lighting and the maintenance and upgrading of existing stock. The contract would also enable effective response to customer requests for service and complaints.

A procurement timeline was attached to the report and an exempt appendix identified the tenderers for the contracts and provided details of the procurement and evaluation process.

The Procurement Board had considered and recommended this report to Cabinet on 10 November 2010.

Reasons:

After the evaluation of all tenders received in accordance with the Council’s published evaluation criteria, the tender submitted by the contractor was considered to be the most economically advantageous. The award of the contract will ensure that service continuity can be adequately planned and financial award decisions made through the 2011 budget setting process.

This report detailed the reasons for the engagement of the recommended contractor, Interserve, for the completion of works for the North Dane Way Quality Public Transport Corridor QPTC improvement scheme. The preferred contractor has been procured through the Highways Agency East and South East Asset Management Framework.

The scheme involved the provision of a new northbound bus lane along North Dane Way to its junction with Capstone Road, by-passing the roundabout, improved pedestrian crossing facilities and cycle route enhancements.

An exempt appendix detailed the reason for the engagement of the recommended contractor and set out financial information detailing the costings used for the original tendering of the Highways Agency East and South East Asset Management Framework.

The Procurement Board had considered and recommended this report to Cabinet on 10 November 2010.

Reasons:

This procurement process is part of a wider strategy to improve the reliability, quality and attractiveness of public transport across Medway. For works to be completed by 31 March 2011, and for funding to be retained, it was imperative be considered by Cabinet on 30 November 2010.

This report provided details of the performance of the contract awarded in 2008 for a Floating Support service for Young Adults on behalf of the Council.

It was noted that this was a key service for Medway’s residents in terms of the Council’s priority for vulnerable young people maintaining their independence. The report explained how the contract was being managed and the lessons learnt.

The Procurement Board had considered and recommended this report to Cabinet on 10 November 2010.

Reasons:

It is important to continue this contract so that continuity of service is maintained and to allow for the development of this service. This will ensure that a high quality service is delivered that is increasingly responsive to the needs of the service users and contributes to the preventative agenda.