Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Kay Harris (Tenant and Leaseholder Representative), Diana Minns (Tenant and Leaseholder Representative - Alternate) and Diana Best (Tenant and Leaseholder Representative). 

Members are asked to declare at this stage any interests that they may have in an item shown on this agenda. If any member of the Committee is unsure whether or not they should declare an interest on a particular matter, they should seek advice from the Head of Legal Services before the meeting.

 

Councillor Blencowe

12/73/CS

Former full time employee of the YMCA

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 28^th June were agreed as a true and accurate record. 

The public questions were taken at the start of the relevant items, and for clarity are recorded with the relevant agenda item. 

Under section 4.2.1 of the Council procedures the Chair re-ordered the agenda to take item 7 first. For the ease of the reader, the minutes are listed in the same order as the agenda.

 

Matter for Decision: To consider the built assets maintenance procurement strategy for 2012-2017.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing:

 

The Executive Councillor resolved;

 

i.        To approve the appointment of Eastern Shires Purchasing Organization (ESPO) to carry out a procurement exercise with officers of the City Council to select two main contractors to carry out planned maintenance works for the City Council with effect from April 2014 to March 2019, with an option to extend for a period of up to three years.

 

ii.       To authorise the Director of Customer and Community Services to invite and evaluate tenders and, following consultation with Executive Councillor, the Director of Resources, Chair and Spokes of the Committee to award two contracts for the appointment of main contractors to carry out planned maintenance works in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution with effect from April 2014 to March 2019, with an option to extend for one or more periods up to a maximum extension of three years.

 

iii.      To approve the use of the Scape National Minor Works framework contract to call off contracts with Kier Services for a period of up to three years from October 2012 for the purpose of carrying out parts of the Council’s planned maintenance works programme.

 

iv.      To approve a procurement budget of £60,000 for legal and other costs associated with the procurement and implementation the new planned works contracts and other contracts referred to in this report.

 

 

v.       To authorise the Director of Customer and Community Services to invite and evaluate tenders (or call off services from an existing framework agreement if appropriate) and, following consultation with the Executive Councillor, Director of Resources, Chair and Spokes of the Committee to award contracts for the appointment of contractors to carry out certain types of responsive maintenance work listed in this report for a period of up to three years to supplement the Council’s direct provision of repairs and voids, in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution.

 

vi.      To approve the use of the ESPO framework contract “2930 - “Installation of Gas Fired Domestic Central Heating Systems” to call off a contract for a period of up to three years to carry out heating installations and in void properties and carry out emergency boiler replacements.

 

 

vii.     To authorise the Director of Customer and Community Services to invite and evaluate tenders (or call off services from an existing framework agreement if appropriate) and, following consultation with the Director of Resources to award a contract for the appointment of a supplier to provide a web-based NEC3 contract management application.

 

 

viii.    To approve the recruitment of 3.5 full time equivalent additional contract management surveyors and 2 full time equivalent asset officers within the Estates and Facilities Asset Management team in order to manage the delivery of additional capital investment.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Asset Manager regarding the Built Assets Maintenance Procurement Strategy 2012-2017.

 

In response to questions from members of the committee the Asset Manager made the following points

 

i.                    The meaning of “call off” was explained.

 

ii.                  It was confirmed that no level of work was guaranteed to any company through this procurement process.

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed them by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations

 

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Mid-Year Business Plan Update.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

Revenue – HRA

 

i.        To agree the HRA budget strategy, process and timetable for the 2013/14 budget cycle as outlined in Section 9 [pages 84 to 97 refer] of the committee report.

 

ii.       To agree the revised HRA revenue, funding and reserves projections as shown in Appendix E, and the associated decisions in section 9 [pages 84 to 97 refer], of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update document (Committee Report).

 

iii.      To approve the mid-year unavoidable expenditure items and savings, as detailed in Section 9, on pages 85 to 88 of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update document .

 

iv.      To authorise the Director of Customer & Community Services, in consultation with the Director of Resources, to calculate and communicate final cash limits or savings targets based on the decisions taken in this report, as outlined in Section 9 of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update document.

 

Treasury Management

 

v.       To approve the approach to determining the most appropriate borrowing route in respect of any additional HRA borrowing requirement, as outlined in Section 8 of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update, delegating responsibility to the Director of Resources for the final decision, in consultation with the Executive Councillor, Chair, Vice Chair and Opposition Spokesperson for HMB.

 

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to recommend to Council;

 

Capital

 

vi.      To agree in-year re-allocation of funding for decent homes and other investment in the housing stock, to allow unavoidable expenditure items to be met and to make best use of the current procurement arrangements, as detailed in Section 9, on pages 96 and 97 of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update document.

 

vii.     To approve additional investment in 2012/13 in respect of the warden call system at Rawlyn Court, as identified on pages 96 and 97 of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update document.

 

viii.    To approve re-phasing of £3,800,000 of resource, ear-marked for investment in Ditchburn Place, from 2012/13 into 2013/14, recognising that the feasibility work undertaken in the current year will not result in a decision that will be implemented until 2013/14 at the earliest.

 

ix.      To agree the revised Housing Capital Investment Plan as shown in Appendix F of the HRA Mid-Year Business Plan Update.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Director of Customer and Community Services regarding the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Mid-year Business Plan Update.

 

Clarification was requested on how other authorities had been able to reduce the level of rent increases without affecting their business plans. The Director of Customer and Community Services advised that each authority’s business plan was unique, and that it was very difficult to compare plans. The committee was reminded that any reduction in level of rent increase would have a cumulative effect, and that those savings would need to be found in each year of the business plan going forward and not just the single year.

 

In response to a question from a member of the committee the Executive Councillor for Housing confirmed that it was not the intention to look at the option of reducing the level of rent increases

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed them by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations

 

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

1.      Clare Blair

 

Mrs Blair addressed the committee and made the following comments

 

·        With reference to Water Lane and Green End Lane the process had been a disaster, and previously agreed policies for managing the consultation had been disregarded.

 

·        Consultation had been insufficient and the meetings organised had not provided an opportunity to discuss the process. It was explained that residents had been encouraged to speak at the Scrutiny Committee if they wished to discuss the proposals. It was highlighted that many of the residents were vulnerable and old, and either not able or willing to appear and speak at a public meeting.

 

The Executive Councillor for Housing responded and acknowledged that the process was not satisfactory. The Executive Councillor explained that it was difficult to find a balance between advising residents too soon and creating undue distress, and too late where the process appears to be complete. The Executive Councillor clarified the arrangement details for the residents meeting, but again acknowledged that the process wasn’t satisfactory.

 

Mrs Blair made the following comments in response

 

·        The EQIA supplied is inadequate and doesn’t meet the required standard. It was questioned whether an EQIA had been prepared for the schemes proposed.

 

·        Questioned whether the tenant consultation could actually influence the process.

 

The Executive Councillor for Housing responded that an EQIA should be produced. The Executive Councillor highlighted the successful development projects undertaken with sheltered housing schemes.

 

At the request of the Executive Councillor, the Head of Strategic Housing confirmed that the scheme was covered by an EQIA produced for the Enabling and Development Service.

 

2.                Leah Arnold

 

Leah Arnold addressed the committee and made the following comments

 

·        She was supportive of the proposals, although was aware that some residents were against the proposals.

 

·        Ms Arnold explained that the existing units at Aylesborugh Close were unsuitable for families with young children for the following reasons.

 

o      The un-secure gardens

 

o      Lack of adequate storage

 

The Executive Councillor thanked Ms Arnold for attending and speaking, and explained that the issues raised would be addressed in the plans.

 

Ms Arnold welcomed the response,

 

3.          Michael Bond

 

Mr Bond addressed the committee and explained that he was Chair of Old Chesterton Residents Association and Age UK Cambridge. Mr Bond made the following points

 

·        The site was already of a low density compared with equivalent private sector lead developments, and the proposals would further reduce the density of the development.

 

·        There were already in excess of 8,000 people on the waiting list, and the proposals would result in a reduction of a further 9 homes.

 

·        The site (Aylesborough Close) was currently car free and enjoyed a large green open space. The proposals would result in the green open space becoming a car park.

 

·        Reconsideration of the proposed decision was urged.

 

The Executive Councillor for Housing explained that the plans were indicative, and that there was still opportunity to influence the site plans. It was explained that whilst the number of units would be reduced, the units proposed were larger and could each accommodate more people. The Executive Councillor agreed that green open space and building at an appropriate density were really important considerations.

 

At the request of the Executive Councillor, the Head of Strategic Housing explained that the proposals were designed to increase the floor space (40m2 to 60m2 for 1 bed room units) and improve the accessibility.

 

Mr Bond responded to the response from the Executive Councillor with the following points

 

·        There was a need to be smarter with the use of land, and ensure that a range of options were available.

 

·        Noted that only 3 equivalent properties would be provided for the current 24.

 

The Executive Councillor re-iterated that the layout and designs were still indicative and subject to planning approval.

 

4.      Dr Guskov

 

Dr Guskov spoke in objection to the proposals for Aylesborough Close and made the following comments

 

·        The project was not in the interest of leaseholders, tenants, neighbours, Cambridge citizens and British Public, nor was it financially realistic.

 

·        Clarification was requested whether any officer or Councillor had declared an interest in relation to the project.

 

Dr Guskov tabled an un-validated petition in objection to the proposals for Aylesborough Close.

 

The Executive Councillor confirmed that no declarations had been made by officers or members involved in the project. The Executive Councillor also explained in response to questions regarding finance, that the budget would be re-fined and included in the budget process. It was confirmed that the figure stated for home loss payments was incorrect and would be update through the budget process.

 

5.      Mr Hinton

 

Mr Hinton addressed the committee and made the following comments regarding the proposals.

 

·        Mr Hinton explained that he had moved to Aylesborough Close in 1976, and had lived there ever since.

 

·        His property had received significant investment in recent years and this would be wasted.

 

·        The majority of the tenants were against the proposals.

 

The Executive Councillor explained that the improvements had been undertaken under a different funding system, and that without the change to the housing revenue account projects of this nature would have not been possible. It was explained that the exact details of the changes were not known until very recently.

 

Mr Hinton suggested that the properties would continue to be suitable for 20/30 further years, if investment was undertaken.

 

Councillors Bird, Todd-Jones and Price addressed the committee with the approval of the Chair.

 

Councillor Bird

 

Councillor Bird spoke in opposition to the proposals for Water Lane and Green End Road and made the following comments

 

·        Residents were very upset about the proposals.

 

·        Consultation was insufficient.

 

·        Only three of the existing residents would be allowed to return.

 

·        An EQIA had not been completed for the project despite the proposals affecting the most vulnerable members of society. Based on the insufficient EQIA, the Councillor requested a suspension of the project.

 

·        An un-validated petition was presented to the committee in opposition for the proposals for Water Lane and Green End Road.

 

·        The process was progressing too fast and provided inadequate opportunities for challenge.

 

·        Concern that the proposals would result in elderly residents feeling forced into moving into White Friars.

 

Councillor Price

 

Councillor Price spoke in opposition to the proposals for Water Lane and Green End End Road and made the following comments

 

·        Not against development per se, but the proposals were progressing too fast.

 

·        There had insufficient consultation, with only 10 days notice given for the residents meeting and insufficient opportunity at the residents meeting to question the proposals.

 

·        The development would not result in an increase in the number of units available.

 

Councillor Todd-Jones

 

Councillor Todd-Jones spoke and made the following comments

 

·         Previously raised concerns were re-iterated.

 

·        Clarification was requested on how a guarantee could be given to existing residents, if there were going to be fewer units in the new proposals.

 

·        Clarification was requested on residents would receive support if their new rent was higher.

 

The Executive Councillor explained that the guarantee had related to the sheltered housing programme, but whilst there was no guarantee it was likely that existing residents would be able to return if they wished.

 

Councillor Price in response expressed concern about the lack of consultation and other shortcomings in the process.

 

Matter for Decision: To consider scheme approvals in the Council New Build Programme.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing:

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to

 

i.        Note the indicative mix, design and layout of the schemes and that they are subject to planning approval.

 

ii.          Approve the scheme capital budget highlighted in the report to cover the Construction Cost of the scheme; Home Loss Payments to tenants and leaseholders and professional quantity surveyor fees.

 

iii.          Approve that delegated authority be given to the Director of Customer and Community Services following consultation with the Director of Resources and the Head of Legal Services to seal a Development Agreement with our preferred house-builder/developer partner.

 

For the following schemes

 

a. Aylesborough Close Ph 1 (1-8a and 39-50 Aylesborough Close and adjacent garages)

 

b. Water Lane (6-14a Water Lane and 238-246 Green End Road)

 

c. Stanesfield Road Scouts Hut

 

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Strategic Housing regarding the Affordable Housing Scheme.

 

The committee made following comments

 

i.          Councillors were encouraged to vote against the schemes for Water Lane and Green End Road.

 

ii.       The proposals were presented as a done deal.

 

iii.      The use of affordable rent levels as the method for calculating rents would result in significant increases in rent levels vis a vis the existing stock.

 

iv.      A “life changing” decision should not be made until sufficient information was available to make a properly informed decision.

 

v.       In comparison to the information supplied to Councillors in other forums such as through the planning policy process, the information supplied was insufficient to make an informed decision.

 

vi.          Concern that some residents had already resigned themselves to moving.

 

vii.     The process was flawed and adversely affected the most vulnerable members of society.

 

The Executive Councillor addressed the comments received, and explained that it was a tricky job for Ward Councillor to balance the needs of their residents against the wider needs of the city. The committee were reminded that it had the responsibility for scrutinising the strategic overview of housing in the city.

 

The Executive Councillor explained that she didn’t normally attend residents meetings, because her attendance didn’t assist residents but was willing to attend when requested by residents.

 

The Head of Strategic Housing confirmed that an equalities assessment was not produced for each scheme, but had been for the programme of 146 new homes. The Head of Strategic Housing and the Director of Customer and Community Services outlined the steps undertaken to support residents.

 

viii.    It was noted that the existing units at Aylesborough Close were difficult to let and sometimes refused by prospective tenants.

 

ix.          Clarification was requested on how the scheme compared with similar schemes.

 

The Director of Customer and Community Services explained that strenuous efforts were made to ensure that all tenants were appropriately supported to find the best possible outcome for them. The Director of Customer and Community Services outlined the housing developments needs in the city, and current rent policy.

 

x.       The assertion that the committee had to consider the strategic housing implications of the proposals was challenged.

 

xi.           Further information was requested regarding the position of leaseholders.

 

xii.     The EQIA was inadequate.

 

The Executive Councillor explained that it would not be appropriate for tenants to have a veto on scheme proposal, but that it was important for tenants to have a say in the development of proposals. The Executive Councillor also re-iterated that she didn’t normally attend residents meetings, because her attendance didn’t assist residents but was willing to attend when requested by residents.

 

xiii.          General support was expressed for the Stanesfield Road scheme.

 

xiv.          Clarification was sought on the implications; specifically the financial implication if a decision was deferred.

 

The Head of Strategic Housing explained that that grant funding had to be spent by March 2015, and that £17,500 would be the penalty for each incomplete unit and that any delay could prejudice the ability of the City Council to deliver the schemes without penalty.

 

The committee were asked to consider the implication of deferral in terms of what positive outcomes could be realistically delivered. The committee discussed the implications of deferral.

 

Councillor Blencowe proposed an amendment to defer schemes “a” and “b” (Aylesborough Close and Water Lane) for further consultation and a re-assessment of the suitability of the scheme. The Scrutiny Committee voted four votes in favour of the amendment and four votes against the amendment. The amendment was defeated on the Chairs casting vote.

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and voted as below

 

Aylesborough Close	Four votes in favour and four votes against   The proposal was endorsed on the Chairs casting vote.
Water Lane	Four votes in favour and four votes against   The proposal was endorsed on the Chairs casting vote.
Stansfield Road	Unanimously in favour

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A

Matter for Decision: To consider the disposal of 7 Severn Place, Cambridge, CB1 1HL.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to

 

i.          Approve the principle of the disposal of the HRA asset at 7 Severn Place and the reinvestment of the associated capital receipt in the provision of new additional affordable housing, subject to agreement of the terms of the sale by the Executive Councillor for Customer Services & Resources.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

Not applicable

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider the Repairs and Maintenance Improvement Plan - Progress to date and permission to procure associated IT solutions report.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing:

 

i.        To give delegated authority to the Director of Customer & Community Services, following consultation with the Director of Resources, Executive Councillor for Housing, the Chair and Opposition Spokesperson(s) for Community Services, to select the most appropriate procurement route, whether that be by virtue of waiver of the requirements of the contract procedure rules (where permissible), direct contract or mini competition from an existing framework agreement, or by full tender exercise, and if appropriate to tender and award contracts for the provision of new IT hardware and systems for the Repairs and Maintenance Service as outlined in paragraph 3.4 and 3.5 of the committee report.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

Not Applicable

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

This decision is being taken by the Executive Councillor for Housing in their capacity as Deputy Leader of the Council.  

Matter for Decision: To consider a project appraisal for a Capital Grant Application from Arbury Communty Centre

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing in her capacity as Deputy Leader:

 

The Deputy Leader resolved;

 

Financial recommendations

 

i.        To recommend to Council that scheme (which is not included in the Council’s Capital & Revenue Project Plan) subject to resources being available to fund the capital and revenue costs.

 

ii.       To note that the total cost of the project is £80,000 funded from developer contributions and that there are no ongoing revenue implications arising from the project

 

 

Procurement recommendations:

 

iii.      To approve a Capital Grant of £80,000 to the Arbury Community Association (Reg Charity 300370) subject to the Charity completing the Council’s legal grant agreement.

 

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

Not Applicable

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

The Deputy Leader following consultation with the Leader took the decision, as the Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health had previously been a trustee of Arbury Community Centre.  

Matter for Decision: To consider a project appraisal for a capital grant application from the Centre at St Pauls.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health:

 

The Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health resolved to

 

i.          Approve a capital grant of £25,000 from the Newtown Capital Grants Programme towards the cost of fitting out the main hall. This grants programme is already included in the Council’s Capital Programme Ref: PR025

 

ii.       Note that there are no revenue implications for the City Council arising from this project.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

Not Applicable

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider the feasibility of a City Centre Youth Venue.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health:

 

The Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health resolved;

 

i.        To agree not to pursue the proposal to locate a city centre youth venue at the YMCA.

 

ii.       To ask the informal member panel to continue to meet to explore ideas for youth projects.

 

iii.      To ask officers to report back to this committee in March 2013 to outline suggestions from the member steering group for a project or projects to support young people in Cambridge.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Community Development regarding the proposed city centre youth venue.

 

The committee thanked the officers involved in supporting the process and agreed that in the absence of identified support from young people the project was too risky. Support was expressed for the Urban Sports festival.

 

The Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health thanked the Councillors O’Reilly and Kerr for their involvement in the project group.

 

Officers were encouraged to liaise with the operators of the Saffron Walden skate. The Head of Community Development confirmed that this was already being progressed.

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed unanimously.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider a business plan for the Children and Young People’s Participation Service.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health:

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to

 

i.          Agree the draft ChYpPS Plan 2013 – 2016

 

ii.          Agree that officers arrange a formal review meeting with the

Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health, Scrutiny Chair and Spokes in October 2013 to review progress with the Plan.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Community Development regarding the business plan for the Children and Young Peoples Participation Service.

 

The committee made the following comments

 

i.        The committee noted that the income targets were challenging and asked officers to comment.  The Children and Young Peoples Service Manager agreed that the income targets were challenging but felt that they were achievable given the changes that had been implemented within the service to facilitate the new approach. She highlighted that an annual review had been built into the Business Plan to monitor progress.

 

ii.          Clarification was requested on the inclusion of a participation figure for the sessions. The Children and Young Peoples Service Manager advised that the figure included (15) was the optimal number for a universal session, but that for specialist sessions the group sizes would be smaller.

 

 

iii.      The work undertaken by the service was widely welcomed.

 

The Executive Councillor welcomed the work undertaken to date, but highlighted that the new approach would be focussed on maximising the use of resources, which may result in a reduced number of sessions to provide the capacity within the service to deliver the income targets. The Executive Councillor thanked the officers for the work on this project.

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed them by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider a project appraisal regarding the Corn Exchange PA system.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Arts, Sport and Public Places

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to;

 

Financial recommendations

 

i.          Approve the commencement of this scheme, which is already included in the Council’s Capital & Revenue Project Plan (SC522).

 

ii.       Note that the total cost of the project is £160,000 funded from Corn Exchange Equipment R&R budget and Capital Reserves.

 

iii.      Note that there are no ongoing revenue implications arising from the project.

 

Procurement recommendations

 

iv.          Approve the carrying out and completion of the procurement of sound equipment to the value of £160,000.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Arts and Recreation regarding the PA system for the Corn Exchange. The decision had not been selected for pre-scrutiny, but the clarification was requested on the reason for the proposed decision. The Head of Arts and Recreation and the Director of Customer and Community Services outlined for the reasons for the proposed decision.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

Matter for Decision: To consider a project appraisal regarding the City Centre Box Office Software

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Arts, Sport and Public Places

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to;

 

i.          Authorise the Head of Arts & Recreation to procure a new

ticketing/CRM system for the Cambridge Corn Exchange Box Office.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

Not Applicable

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A 

 

To follow 

Matter for Decision: To consider the Leisure Management arrangements for post October 2013.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Arts, Sport and Public Places

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to;

 

i.          Approve proceeding to the ‘Invitation To Tender’ (ITT) stage and release of contract specification documentation to the selected companies.

 

ii.          Approve the proposed principles underpinning the contract

specification highlighted in sections 4.5-4.7 of the committee report.

 

iii.      Note the timetable for the remainder of the procurement process outlined in section 4.8 of the committee report.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Arts and Recreation regarding the Leisure Management contract.

 

The committee made the following comments on the proposed decision.

 

i.        The improved performance at Parkside was welcomed, however clarification was requested on the nature of the problems experienced. The Recreation Services Manager explained that the problems had primarily related to the responsive of the contractors. It was also noted that a number of the problems had been addressed by the infrastructure improvements.

 

ii.          Clarification was requested on the latest position as to whether it would be possible to include a clause in the contract requiring the payment of the living wage as a minimum to all staff.

 

The Executive Councillor explained that he was very supportive of the suggestion but that the Council had to satisfy certain legal conditions in order to include it within the specification. The Head of Legal Services reminded the committee that there was a legal prohibition on taking “non-commercial considerations” into account other than in limited circumstances. The Head of Legal Services said that the Council was taking specialist legal advice on its powers with regard to the “living wage”. This followed the decision of the Executive Councillor for Customer Services and Resources in July 2012 to instruct officers to “Report further to the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee on measures to ensure that future council contracts pay at least the ‘living wage’.” (Minute 12/44/SR.)

 

Members were encouraged to highlight any good practice elsewhere.

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed them by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations

 

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A