Agenda, decisions and minutes

The record of decisions from the meeting held on 16 February 2010 was agreed.

There were none.

Background:

This report provided details of the formal objections relating to theStatutory Notice proposing to close St. John’s Church of England Voluntary Controlled Infant School from 31 August 2010.  The Cabinet originally considered a report on the formal objections on 15 December 2009. However, it agreed to instruct officers to reconsider the ratio of denominational places taking into account the Cabinet decision on St. Nicholas Church of England Voluntary Controlled Infant School and All Faiths Children’s Community School (decision no. 205/2009), and that officers publish a new notice and proposal taking this into account.

The new Statutory Notice and full proposals were subsequently published on 11 January 2010 and the deadline for representations ended on 21 February 2010. The Council received 15 formal objections to the content of the first Statutory Notice in which the Council proposed to close St. John’s CEVC School, a further 65 responses were sent to the Church of England Diocese of Rochester Board of Education, which were also passed onto Medway Council. A further 20 formal objections were received in response to the second Statutory Notice, including a formal objection from the Church of England Diocese of Rochester Board of Education. The majority of objections received had been from parents with children who currently attend the school. Responses were also received from the head teacher of the school and the governing body of the school and were appended to the report.

A diversity impact assessment had been completed and it was noted that this series of proposals had been designed to ensure primary age children across Medway were provided with opportunities within first class learning environments to succeed in learning.

Reasons:

The suggested reasons for the decision are set out in paragraphs 4.1-4.2 of this report. In summary the main reasons are: the high level of surplus places at the school and the risk therefore to future viability; the need to ensure effective use of resources and in turn raise standards across schools; and the need to secure value for money in public services.

Rolls have fallen since 2003 and, though they are projected to rise to 2014, the school will remain small at less than 80 pupils. 

The school’s most recent OfSTED report in September 2009 commented, “St John’s is providing a satisfactory education with strengths in some important areas... overall progress is satisfactory rather than good.

Small schools in Medway receive a curriculum protection element within their budgets: this is calculated on a sliding scale so that the smallest schools receive the highest payments.  In the case of St. John’s, this amounted to £47,274 in 2009/10.  The school also attracts private donations – these have varied between £892 and zero  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

The Leader adjourned the meeting following the above item in accordance with section 10.2.3 of the Council Rules for a period of 10 minutes.

Background:

This report provided details of the scheme on how the Council would co-ordinate applications to schools, and the arrangements on the detailed entry arrangements to community and voluntary controlled schools. This included a scheme for coordinating in-year admission arrangements, which had been developed for 2010/2011 to meet the requirement of the Co-ordination Regulations 2007.

The report provided details of the consultation process undertaken concerning the arrangements and schemes which ran from 15 December 2009 to 9 February 2010 in accordance with the requirements of the Schools Admissions Code to consult for a minimum of 8 weeks.

The proposals had also been considered by the Children and Adults Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 11 February 2010 and its comments were set out in paragraph 5 of the report.

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

Reasons:

The Council is required to undertake a detailed consultation exercise prior to the determination of its school admission arrangements and schemes. The decisions take into account the responses from consultation.

Background:

This report presented details of Council performance for the third quarter of 2009/2010. In particular it included performance against indicators and actions agreed in the Council Plan 2009/2012.

Performance on 73 key measures of success were reported this quarter – 41 (56%) were on track (rated green), 15 (21%) were off target but assessed as capable of reaching target within the year (rated amber), and 17 (23%) were off target and required improvement (rated red). However, it was noted that 7 of these 17 were behind target but showing an improving trend towards target. Details of proposed remedial action was set out in appendix 1 to the report.

Reasons:

Full and accurate performance reporting to elected Members is consistent with best practice, and will allow Members to monitor the Council’s performance during the year. 

Background:

This report provided details of an urgent decision recently made by the Leader following concerns raised relating to the use of delegated authority concerning the Chatham Dynamic Bus Facility.

Following Cabinet’s decision on the bus facility on 24 November 2009, the Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture was acting as both the applicant for the planning permission and also had delegated authority to consider any objections and determine whether or not to appropriate the public open space for the bus facility. Therefore, the Leader had made an urgent, non-key, decision to reassign this delegated authority to the Assistant Director, Housing and Corporate Services in place of the Director of Regeneration Community and Culture.

Reasons:

To ensure that the objectors do not consider that there is a perception of conflict of interest.

Background:

This report presented information on a vacancy 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 post and included supporting Portfolio Holder comments.

Reasons:

The post presented to Cabinet supports the efficient running of the Council.

Background:

This report provided details on the progress made to date with the procurement of the schools and other establishments waste contracts and provided recommendations for progressing this procurement in the shorter term and longer term.

It was noted that the Procurement Board had considered the report on 17 February 2010 and that the Board had supported the recommendations, as set out in the report.

Reasons:

This procurement is intrinsically linked to that of the larger household waste collection and disposal contracts. All of the separated contracts must commence on the same day, currently programmed to be in September 2010, to ensure service continuity.

Advice from Eversheds and Strategic Procurement (in section 2 of the report) was that due to the huge amount of time since the original OJEU notice was published, it is best to conclude with current process and commence a new EU process (in due course).

In addition, the Council needed to revisit its requirements for schools and internal waste collection and disposal in light of other contractual arrangements for waste services, increasing costs and the needs of the schools and council buildings.

To mirror the short tem arrangement, and following on from the proposed consultation with the schools, a second gateway one report will be returned to Cabinet detailing the proposed longer term arrangements. This will also allow internal dialogue to take place with facilities management regarding the internal waste collection arrangements and opportunities for saving to be made in joint procurement of services.

Background:

This report provided details of the review of strategic issues concerning the procurement of the clinical waste collection and disposal contract. It considered the options in terms of the methods of procurement to ensure that Medway maintained a quality service for its stakeholders.

It was noted that the Procurement Board had considered this report on 17 February 2010 and that the Board had supported the recommendations, as set out in the report.

Reasons:

This procurement is intrinsically linked to that of the larger household waste collection and disposal contracts. All of the separated contracts must commence on the same day, currently programmed to be September 2010, to ensure service continuity.

Advice from Eversheds and Strategic Procurement (in section 2.2 of the report) is that due to the amount of time since the original OJEU notice was published, it was best to conclude with the current process and commence a new EU process.

In addition, the Council needed to revisit its requirements for clinical waste collection and disposal in light of other contractual arrangements for waste services.

Background:

This report provided details of the options appraisal for the Twydall Accessibility Scheme. The reasons for the proposed scheme were reducing through vehicular traffic use of the local roads and reducing general traffic speed to around 20 mph, in the interest of improving road safety and pedestrian accessibility. The scheme was prepared towards the end of 2008 and proposed the introduction of traffic calming measures on most roads within the identified area, through the provision of speed cushions.

The Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the report in December 2009 and its comments were set out in paragraph 2 of the report. A plan detailing the proposed scheme had been circulated separately to Members.

Reasons:

In order for the project to be progressed and delivered in agreement with Local Members, residents and Sustrans.

Background:

This report provided details of the development of this project since the Cabinet report of 24 August 2009 with an update on the first stage contractor’s performance (Contract Management Gateway 4) and a recommendation for the appointment of the contractor for the main works (Contract Award Gateway 3).

The Cabinet accepted this as an urgent item to enable the contract for the main works to be let and to commence as soon as possible.

Reasons:

This enables the project to proceed at the earliest opportunity. Delay to the project at this time will mean additional cost being incurred, continued occupation of temporary accommodation by the school, delay in commencement of works, and associated delay to completion.