Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Virtual Meeting via Microsoft Teams
Contact: Committee Manger Email: democratic.services@cambridge.gov.uk
Note: If members of the public wish to participate in the meeting please contact Democratic Services by 12 noon two working days before the meeting. Questions can also be submitted throughout the meeting to Democratic.Services@cambridge.gov.uk and we will endeavour to respond to questions during the discussion on the relevant agenda item. If we run out of time a response will be provided to members of the public outside of the meeting and published on the relevant Area Committee meeting webpage.
No. | Item |
---|---|
Welcome, Introduction and Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies were received from City Councillor Davey and County Councillor Shailer. |
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: No interests were declared. |
|
Notes from the Last Meeting PDF 146 KB Notes to follow. Minutes: The notes of the meeting held on 13 October
2022 were noted. |
|
Matters and Actions Arising from the Minutes PDF 8 KB Minutes: Councillor Pounds provided an update on a question asked by a member of the public at the previous East Area Committee Meeting on 13 October 2022. Question: Was there going to be any further rounds of applications for Public Art Grants? Councillor Pounds investigated this matter since the previous meeting and stated that there was no round of Public Art Applications for Grants running currently. |
|
Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods PDF 326 KB Representatives from the local Police Team and Council’s Community Safety Team will present the latest report and answer questions. Minutes: The Committee
received a report from Sergeant Stevenson regarding policing and safer neighbourhoods trends. The report outlined
actions taken since the last reporting period. The current emerging
issues/neighbourhood trends for each ward were also highlighted (see report for
full details). Previous local areas of concern and engagement activity noted in
the report were: i.
Anti-social driving ii. Cycle theft iii. Drug dealing, ASB, and the protection of local young people –child
criminal exploitation. The virtual Area Committee would not be making a
decision, so would not vote on priorities set by the Police. The Police reported
back on the local areas of concern they were
currently focussing on. Councillors and members of the public could not change
these, but they could suggest ideas/issues for the Police to focus on. The
Committee discussed the following policing issues: i.
Operation Helix was the Policing Operation around
the murder of Jesse Nwokejiobi. The operation
occupied 100 full and part-time members of policing staff across
Cambridgeshire. This was about 8% of the total staff. Sergeant Stevenson was
the school’s liaison officer. The Police had already been going into schools
speaking to young people, especially year 9 to year 11 range. The Children’s
and Young People’s team at Police Headquarters are refreshing and revamping the
presentation that they delivered in schools. ii.
Retail crime was managed by another officer and
local police operations were run working with retailers. Sergeant Stevenson had
not noticed an uplift in retail crime that he would link to food poverty. The
bulk of retail crimes were driven by addiction issues by offenders. When
someone was arrested for retail crime the Police did attempt to get to the
bottom of what drove this behaviour. When offenders were released from police
custody, they were handed a document with a list of support agencies. iii.
The Anti-Social Behaviour Officer stated that there
was a monthly peer group ‘People and Places' meeting. This was in response to
an increase in youth related ASB post COVID 19 and attempted to put early
interventions into place. iv.
Sergeant Stevenson stated that the young people who
had spoken to him were worried about how to fit in, be accepted by peers and
how not to feel isolated in their community. v.
Sergeant Stevenson was running a police cadet group
in his free time. There were other groups run by the Fire Service and Ambulance
Service. This was so young people could interact with people and make a
positive contribution to society. vi.
Sergeant Stevenson advised that he did not know the
total number of police officers in Cambridge. He believed that they were on
target. They were also actively recruiting. |
|
Greater Cambridge Partnership Item - Making Connections Consultation Representatives from the GCP will inform Councillors of the
current consultation which runs until 23 December 2022. Minutes: The Committee received a presentation from the Greater Cambridge
Partnership (GCP) Senior Delivery Project Manager on the Making Connections
consultation which runs until 23 December 2022 GCP Making Connections 2022 |
Consult Cambridgeshire (engagementhq.com). In response to comments made by the Committee, the GCP Senior Delivery
Project Manager, and the Transport Planning Director for WSP, said the following: i. Officers had not captured responses to the
consultation in person/verbally, instead they directed residents to go online,
email, or write in, to respond to the consultation. ii. If rural residents were not represented
in the bus service proposal, they would look at this issue as it had now been
captured because of Councillors bringing it to their attention at this meeting.
Demand Responsive Transport services were proposed for rural areas
but the technical team would reflect on this. iii. A workplace parking levy would require
further consultation and furthermore, would require Secretary of State for
Transport permission iv. The GCP Communications team had been
focussing on trying to reach as many people as possible, particularly those
from harder to reach groups. v. GCP Officers had been going into schools
to engage with young people. They had also been going into sixth form Colleges.
Teachers had assigned students homework to fill in the consultation. vi. Two events at the Mill
Road Mosque had already taken place. vii. They had been to Blackwell Road Traveller’s
site and would be doing a further visit to the Fen Road Traveller’s site (post
meeting note: this took place on 15th December). viii. They had met with the Citizens Advice Bureau
(CAB), particularly in connection with the proposed low-income discount. The
CAB had offered to pass along information to users of their service. ix. QR codes were going on the back of bus
seats that direct people to the consultation to fill in survey. x. Bus wraps, signs at bus stops, a leaflet
drop (over 200,000 distributed) and newspaper and radio media campaign were used to advertise the
consultation. xi. Had already engaged with the University of
Cambridge and Anglia Ruskin University Students. They were going to the West
Cambridge site to engage there next. xii. They were unable to advise which areas of
the city were responding most to the survey. Would take this question back to
the team. Post-meeting note: the geographic spread of responses would be part
of the analysis once the consultation closed. xiii. Regarding those doing charity work in their
own vehicles, they stated that they must maintain balance between people doing
good work and additional administration involved for the system to administer
discounts/exemptions for this. This was an area that needed to be looked at in
more detail. xiv. They were engaging with Food Banks e.g. FoodCycle Cambridge,
delivering leaflets there and encouraging attendees to fill out the surveys.
Councillor Smith clarified that they should be engaging with Food Hubs. Stated
they will look into this. xv. Advised that paper copies of the brochure
were available at libraries. Needed to check if the survey was also there.
Post-meeting note, hard copies of the survey were also sent to libraries. xvi. Had been engaging with GP Surgeries about
the consultation. Would check on text/push service at GP surgeries. Would
investigate how to work with immunocompromised people. xvii. Would be willing to work with affected groups
to ensure they were aware of all exemptions and discounts. xviii. The most inexpensive way to run the scheme was
for users to be registered with an account. |
|
Environmental Improvement Programme - 2022/23 Project Applications PDF 806 KB Councillors will review the projects received noting that the decisions will be taken by the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces in January 2023. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee received a report from the Project Leader regarding the
Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP). The report outlined new suggested
schemes for 2022/23. The Project Leader updated the report (paragraphs 3.1 and 3.3) to
confirm that there was a total of £170,000 for the EIP programmes this was
broken down into £100,000 allocated to Area EIP for which the funding is split
proportionately to each Committee areas population and then the remaining
£70,000 is for strategic environmental improvement projects. Current Project updates could be found at https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/media/11531/environmental-improvement-project-summary-2022-23.pdf. It was noted that the Executive Councillor for
Open Spaces, Food Justice, and Community Development would ultimately make
the decision on which environmental improvement projects would be taken
forward. In response to Members’ questions the Project Leader said the following: i.
If residents were able to assist with the funding
and delivery of projects, they were happy to have this conversation with them
and try to assist. ii.
They had attempted to engage with residents more
this year regarding the EIP scheme through the Citizenlab engagement tool. iii.
Residents’ ideas and projects had been taken into
account and put forward for approval in the Strategic EIP for a total of £25,000
funding outside of the Area EIP funds. iv.
They were happy to keep reviewing how the EIP
programme was managed. The main challenge was Officer resource required to
assess quality of project submission and in the development and delivery of
projects. v.
Many of the schemes put forward by councillors were
based on suggestions from residents. Cllr Robertson produced a ‘help’ spreadsheet
to enable councillors to go through the proposed projects, whilst considering
the amount of funding available.
Suggestions for re-allocation of funding per project were made
particularly for those rated amber/green in order to fund more projects across
all wards in the area. These suggestions would be presented by the Officers to
the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice, and Community
Development, who would make the final decision, taking into consideration all
of the discussions at East Area Committee. |
|
Open Forum Minutes: A member of the public (Representative from the charity ACORN) raised
the following issues:
i.
Stated
there were 600 more HMO’s operating without a licence
in the city.
ii.
Landlords
were charging exorbitant rates.
iii.
Requested
a timeline/target of when the Council would be dealing with these properties.
iv.
They
would like a published online register of licensed HMO’s. Councillor Pounds stated that she and
Councillor Holloway had already met with ACORN about this issue. She wanted to
reassure the representative from ACORN that she would be meeting with Officers
and that action would be moving forward on this issue in due course. |