| 109 | An Apology for absence was received from Councillor Parr. |
| 111 | None declared. |
| 112 | The Head of Finance submitted a copy of the Annual Letter received from the Council's external auditors, that had been circulated to all Members of the Council. It was also being reported to the Personnel and Resources Committee
This was a joint audit and inspection Annual Letter and covered not just the Council's Accounts but also the Comprehensive Performance Assessment, in addition to financial aspects of corporate governance and best value.
The report showed satisfactory progress and it was pleasing to note that there were no issues arising from the audit of accounts which required separate reporting to members.
Representatives from the Audit Commission presented the letter and also answered Members questions. |
| 113 | The Head of Housing updated Members on the outcomes of the Housing Stock Option Financial Appraisal and the consultation carried out by the Independent Tenant Advisers.
The report proposed that officers be asked to further investigate the possibility of Stock Transfer
A presentation on the Housing Stock Options appraisal was also given by the Consultants HACAS Chapman Hendy. |
| 114 | The Head of Engineering & Property submitted a report advising Members of the County Council's proposals for decriminalisation of parking enforcement in the County and to consider the implications for the Borough Council.
A presentation explaining the proposals was also given by Peter Lowe of RTA Associates. |
| 115 | The Head of Housing reported that the Council was required to submit a comprehensive Housing Strategy which was both central to local planning and delivery of housing and demonstrated strategic fit to national, regional and local priorities. Essentially, therefore, it should be a working document which clearly demonstrated how priorities had been arrived at and how they were going to be achieved based on robust analysis of housing needs and markets in all housing sectors.
The Council had submitted a comprehensive Housing Strategy in 2002 which aimed at meeting the then new ‘fit for purpose' criteria. In common with the majority of other Council's housing strategies the 2002 strategy fell short. It had therefore been necessary to update the strategy with this criteria in mind in consultation with the Government Office of the East Midlands.
It was anticipated that a comprehensive new strategy would be developed once a final decision had been made as to the future of the Council's housing stock. |
| 116 | The Head of Direct Services reported that at the meeting of the Cabinet on 7th October 2004, a report was submitted for a chargeable organic garden waste collection service available to all domestic properties within the Borough.
The Cabinet had approved the concept of introducing a chargeable organic garden waste service at the annual rates submitted in the report. A full consultation exercise had also been approved with the outcome of this process being reported to this meeting of the Cabinet.
The report outlined the scheme proposed in more detail taking into consideration the findings from the consultation and the operational issues, which needed to be addressed. |
| 117 | The Chief Executive reported that
a letter has been received from the Deputy Leader of the County Council suggesting that the County Council would be prepared to make a contribution towards the cost of providing Neighbourhood Wardens and PCSOs in the Borough and also asking whether the Borough Council was prepared to increase its own expenditure on these matters.
A copy of the letter received from the Deputy Leader of the County Council was submitted for members information.
Members were reminded that this Council currently provided funding of up to £130,000 per annum to Nottinghamshire Police to enable them to employ an additional six PCSOs in the Borough on top of the six that they provide out of other funds. The Council also currently employed four Neighbourhood Wardens at a total cost of £153,000 per annum.
The Cabinet was asked to consider a response to this letter. |
| 118 | The Chief Executive reported that a request had been received from the Greater Nottingham Partnership for this Council's contribution to be increased from £9,000 in the current year to £12,000 in 2005/06. Attached to the report was a copy of the letter from GNP which explained the background to this request and listed some examples of the funding which had been secured by the GNP for projects outside the city.
As well as those items listed, the Borough had received other SRB funding for Netherfield, £50,000 in respect of the "Pub Watch" Radio Scheme and the promise of £100,000 towards CCTV improvements. It was also expected that GNP would be prepared to contribute £20,000 towards the cost of employing consultants to assist with the proposed re-development of the Arnold Leisure Centre car park site and also £40,000 towards general town centre improvements (dependent on £10k Council contribution, which had not yet been agreed by Members).
Members' instructions on this request for an increase in contributions were requested. |
| 119 | The Chief Executive reported that consideration needed to be given to the arrangements for two particular Cabinet meetings during 2005.
It would be helpful for there to be a special meeting of the Cabinet in February in order to give consideration to the budget and to recommend the budget and Council Tax levels for 2005/06 to the budget Council meeting in March. Given the significance of the items that the Cabinet would need to consider in connection with the budget, it was not considered that this would be best done as part of the agenda for an ordinary Cabinet meeting.
An issue might also arise with regard to the May Cabinet meeting. This was due to be held on Thursday 5th May, which was of course the day of the County Council elections in May and could well also be the date for the Parliamentary Election. In the circumstances, it was suggested that this Cabinet meeting should be deferred until Thursday 12th May. |
| 120 | The Head of Legal and Democratic Services reported that the Lord Chancellor's Code of Practice issued under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 recommended that the Council had a Records Management Policy in place dealing with the management of its records.
The policy document submitted at Appendix 1 had been produced by the Freedom of Information Working Group and had been endorsed by the Senior Management Team, in compliance with the Code of Practice. |
| 121 | The Deputy Chief Executive reported that Local Area Agreements (LAA) were the central government version of work on joining up public services at the local level that has been progressed by the LGA, Treasury and the Innovation Forum of 'excellent' councils. However the LAA approach was unlike other government initiatives in that formal rules for implementing LAAs had not been published and flexible approaches were being encouraged to maximise the opportunities that they potentially offer.
This paper draws extensively on the work of the LGIU, its 2 policy papers and a recent seminar. This reflected the fact that LAAs were very new and that no formal guidance had been issued.
Despite this lack of detail there were significant implications for the Council in the way that LAAs would operate and potentially in its relationship with the LSP and community Strategy. LAAs were seen as an opportunity for Local government to demonstrate that it could work in a joined up way and deliver national and local priorities in innovative and cost effective ways. There appeared to be a sub-text that failure to do so will strengthen the hand of ‘anti-local government' lobby in Whitehall.
The proposals were based on four principles,to be achieved through a five point package details of which were included in the report.
Further reports would be presented once the pilots had submitted their proposals and it would become clearer how LAAs will actually work and the potential implications, particularly for districts, become clearer. |
| 122 | The Head of Cabinet Office submitted a repoprt informing members of proposed publicity initiatives planned for coming months.
The Council regularly produced a Forward Publicity Programme, to flag up issues that would require publicity in the immediate months ahead. The Programme was produced three times a year, to feed into the next edition of "Contacts" magazine.
The Forward Publicity Programme for Winter/Spring 2005 was submitted for members' information at Appendix A to the report. It was based on information provided by departments at 10 December 2004.
It was reported that a range of techniques would be used to deliver the programme. These included the Council's website and intranet and the next edition of "Contacts" magazine. |
| 123 | The Head of Cabinet Office informed members of key elements of the above two two White Papers recently published by the Government, and of the potential implications for the Borough Council and its partners.
It was as yet too early to say what the resource implications of these proposals would be for the Council. It was possible that additional responsibilities would be placed on the Council (for example, through the possible role in enforcing smoke-free public buildings) but the implications of these were not yet known.
However, it did seem likely that issues raised in both papers would impact on the negotiation and development of Local Area Agreements in 2005/06 and beyond, which would have resource implications. |
| 124 | Councillor Wright asked whether the Council were intending to do any additional publicity with regard to the launch of the additional module on the Web site in March/April 2005.
The Portfolio Holder for E Government and Member Services reported that Press releases and information would be available in due course. |
| 125 | The Head of Finance on behalf of the Leader and Deputy Leader submitted a report that detailed the likely General Fund base budget for 2005/06 based on provisional settlement figures, the likely position in respect of capital financing, and assumed changes to the base budget in respect of inflation, pay award etc.
There was potential for growth in the Revenue Budget, and new schemes for Capital Expenditure had identified.
The specific aims of the report were to identify Members expectations in respect of new revenue and capital schemes and to seek comment on the key tasks for the year 2005/06.
At appendix C to the report was a summary, previously circulated to all Members, of the provisional Local Government Finance Settlement for 2005/06. This showed an additional cash allocation of £554,000 or 8.5%, in addition to this specific departments had announced other monies that were to be made available. In all cases these amounts were provisional and/or represented Officers best assessments of likely resource to be allocated to this Council.
Cabinet had requested feedback from Scrutiny Committees on the proposals for the 2005/06 Budget especially in respect of Revenue and Capital Development bids that fall within Category B prior to submission to Council on 2 March 2005.
Comments on other aspects of the budget and improvement tasks were also welcomed. |