Agenda and minutes

No apologies were received.

Name	Item	Interest
Councillor Tong	Environmental Improvements Programme 2023-24	Personal: Used to be a sub-contractor for Mayfield (School), one of his parents currently works there.   Some of the EIP grants were submitted by the Green Party.
Councillor Glasberg	Community Grants 2024-25	Personal: Had received refreshments from It Takes a City.   The link to It Takes a City was through an active member of the local Green Party.
Councillor Tong	Community Grants 2024-25	Personal: Had received refreshments from Abbey People and It Takes a City.   The link to It Takes a City was through an active member of the local Green Party.
Councillor Nestor	Storeys Field Centre	Personal: Was a Trustee of Storey's Field Centre.

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2023 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

There were no public questions.

 

A public question was received after the registration deadline and would be answered by officers after committee. This related to items 6 Community Grants (former Mill Road Library) and 8 Draft Cultural Strategy.

The decision was noted.

 

The Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         Noted Councillor Glasberg’s request to join up WC2 – 2024 (P33 on agenda) with a project on the opposite side of the meadow. Councillor Glasberg was invited to get in touch after committee.

    ii.         How Ward Councillors would be involved in grant allocations in future (since area committees were paused) would depend on outcomes/decisions from the Governance Review Group. There was no intention to centralise the giving out of these grants. The Executive Councillor had signed off Environmental Improvements Programme projects after they had been discussed at area committees in late December 2023.

Matter for Decision

This was the annual report for the Community Grants fund for voluntary, community, and not for profit organisations. It provided an overview of the process, eligibility criteria and budget.

 

The report also provided an update on the work of the Grants Team carried out to date in 2023-24.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Communities

Approved the Community Grants to voluntary and community organisations for 2024-25, as set out in Appendix 1 and 2 of the Officer’s report, subject to the budget approval in February 2024 and any further satisfactory information required of applicant organisations.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Community Funding and Voluntary Sector Manager.

 

The Community Funding and Voluntary Sector Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         Agenda P42: Funding for United with Ukraine Community Grants Scheme had been doubled by Central Government, not the City Council.

    ii.         The approach introduced in 2022 would continue in future where a simpler application process was offered when lower level funding amounts were sought. As Area Committees had paused, a blended approach could be offered to communities of interest, geography and identity so they could navigate a simpler process but potentially with a slightly higher funding ceiling to align more with the Area Committee grants. More than one funding window in a year could be considered. Proposals would be set out in June 2024.

   iii.         Where groups are awarded funding that is £20,000 or more, they submit six monthly monitoring reports to demonstrate funding was being well spent. Applicants where the award has a value less than £20,000 submit annual reports. Officers were working on some guidelines to help applicants produce good quality monitoring information.

  iv.         Feedback was sought on the application process from small groups. The Community Funding and Voluntary Sector Manager was reviewing responses currently. For the 2024-25 round a question was included on the area committee grant form as well as the small group grant form. Feedback could also be sought through partners such as CCVS.

    v.         The small events budget was in place before 2020. Spending was paused in lockdown as no events were held, and then resumed. It originally focussed on volunteering events but now covers a wider range of activities.

  vi.         Would consider in future if it would be practicable to provide Ward Councillors with details on why grants were recommended for a nil award. A report would not be brought back to Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

Matter for Decision

In 2023/24 the S106 funding round for community and sports facilities sought proposals from community groups, sports clubs and schools (as well as council services) between £5,000 and £30,000 for improving equipment and/or storage at sports venues or community buildings with meeting space in Cambridge. The first phase of applications (for projects deliverable by the end of April 2024) took place summer 2023, with over £125,000 of S106 funds allocated to nine projects at last October’s Committee. The second phase continued until 31/10/2023, seeking eligible project proposals that could be completed by October 2024.

 

The Officer’s report recommended allocating over £420,000 of S106 funds to 22 proposals relating to the community facilities and outdoor/indoor sports contribution types. Consideration of applications from the first phase for improving swimming pool infrastructure were deferred until now, so the report also seeks approval for investing over £73,500 in a new approach to delivering swimming pool disinfection at Parkside Pools.

 

The allocation of £40,000 Public Art S106 funds for a project at Nightingale Recreation Ground was also recommended.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Communities

Agreed to:

      i.          Allocate generic S106 funding from the relevant S106 contribution types, subject to business case approval and community use agreement (as appropriate) and possible part-funding by specific S106 contributions where relevant and available (see paragraph 4.5 of the Officer’s report), to the following project proposals:

 

	Project proposals	Amount	S106 type
a.	Chesterton Indoor Bowls Club: lighting upgrades	£14,847	Indoor sports
b.	Trumpington Village Hall: furniture provision	£8,565	Community facilities
c.	Netherhall Sports Centre: outdoor court improvements	£39,606	Outdoor sports
d.	Netherhall Sports Centre: fitness equipment provision	£10,285	Indoor sports
e.	Campkin Road Community Centre: equipment & furnishings	£30,000	Community facilities
f.	Squared Circle Boxing Club: storage and equipment	£5,242	Indoor sports
g.	St Matthew’s Piece: basketball improvements	£17,722	Outdoor sports
h.	Scotland Road Rec Ground: basketball improvements	£12,115	Outdoor sports
i.	Green End Road Rec Ground: basketball improvements	£14,184	Outdoor sports
j.	Cambridge Dive Club: diving facility improvements	£16,250	Indoor sports
k.	St Paul’s Primary School: football equipment and storage (also subject to conditions set out in paragraph 4.3)	£13,276	Outdoor sports
l.	Ross Street Community Centre: kitchen improvements	£28,000	Community facilities
m.	Ross Street Community Centre: audio-visual (AV) equipment & Storage	£10,000	Community facilities
n.	The Junction: AV & presentation equipment	£24,852	Community facilities
o.	Cambridge Canoe Club: additional storage	£40,000	Outdoor sports
p.	Christ The Redeemer Church: storage, furniture & equipment	£8,275	Community facilities
q.	Coldham’s Common: outdoor fit kit storage	£7,500	Outdoor sports
r.	Abbey Pool Fitness Studio: gym equipment provision	£22,687	Indoor sports
s.	St. Philip’s School: community meeting area & canopy (also subject to conditions set out in paragraph 4.3)	£25,000	Community facilities
t.	Cambridge United Foundation: AV equipment	£15,000	Community facilities
u.	King’s Hedges Learner Pool: pool-based fitness equipment	£20,000	Indoor sports
v.	Christ’s Pieces Tennis Courts: court improvements	£37,371	Outdoor sports

 

Note: At 18/01/24 Committee Members agreed to delay grant funding for Canoe Club until planning permission was received.

 

See Section 4 and Appendices A and B of the Officer’s report for more details.

 

     ii.          Allocate £73,666 of Swimming Pool S106 contributions towards a new approach to delivering swimming pool disinfection at Parkside Pools with ultraviolet disinfection and salt-based hyproliser for onsite chlorination generation, subject to a business case approval;

   iii.          Allocate generic S106 public art funding of up to £40,000 for a public art project at Nightingale Recreation Ground, Community Garden and Pavilion, subject to business case approval.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the (Officer).

 

The Sport & Recreation Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          Ultraviolet disinfection was commonly used in pools in the country. It was an effective system to kill pathogens and an environmentally friendly way to clean pools and reduce the amount of chlorine in them.  A salt-based hyproliser was another option to dechlorane pools.

     ii.          Parkside Pool was the main council pool but Officers could look at introducing ultraviolet disinfection and salt-based hyproliser at Abby Pool and Jesus Green too if the initiative worked at Parkside Pool.

 

Councillor Glasberg requested a change to the recommendation in the Officer’s report to remove (O) ‘Cambridge Canoe Club additional storage’. Grant funding could be delayed until planning permission was received for the Canoe Club extension.

 

The Committee unanimously approved this amended recommendation.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations as amended.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations as amended.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

To follow

Matter for Decision

The Cultural Strategy strategic principles were developed as a pre-cursor to a final Strategy. It set out a framework for proposals around the impact Culture has on key aspects of wider Council activity; commitment and role across the City’s cultural activity and development.

 

Between now and the final strategy, officers would focus on:

- Alignment with wider work in the City.

- Understanding how best to measure the impact of such a Strategy.

- Continued discussion on a shared focus for Cultural Development in the City.

- Internal action plan.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Communities

Agreed the strategic principles for Creativity and Culture for all: Cambridge City Council’s Cultural Strategy (2004 – 2029).

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Culture & Community Manager.

 

The Culture & Community Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          Officers consulted with the community, the City Council did not take a top down approach to culture. The final strategy was expected in March 2024. A broad principles document was being considered at this committee members. It was  a high level document. The more detailed final strategy would set out the Council’s accessible approach to culture so it could be enjoyed by all, including children and disabled people.

     ii.          A Youth Strategy was in development.

   iii.          Officers acknowledged in the Cultural Strategy they could do more to measure the success and impact of work they do.

   iv.          A matrix of success was planned. This would include community cohesion, digital inclusion, skills and learning, involvement of residents in their neighbourhoods and city centre (place making)  alongside economic benefits.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

Matter for Decision

Following a S106 agreement made on 11th Sep 2013, the University of Cambridge and Council established a trust to run Storey’s Field Community Centre.

 

The centre opened to the public in February 2018, and the operating model was originally intended to be direct management by Storey’s Field Community Trust. Since June 2016 the Council has operated the centre under a contract for services with the Trust. It was always the Council’s intention this would be a medium-term arrangement, to support Trustees in the process of recruiting suitable staff, and establishing the centre programme.

 

At the request of Storey’s Field Community Trust, the council’s contract for services has been extended several times since 2016, to enable the Trust to undertake a review of the centre’s future direction, and to complete an open procurement process to appoint a new operator. The tender process was completed in July 2022, but was not successful.

 

With the centre team and programme now successfully established, Cambridge University and the Council consider that there is potential for efficiencies in operations and decision making, and the future strategic success of the centre, by revising the current governance model.

 

Options appraisal work has been completed by Cambridge University and the Council as part of developing a jointly agreed proposal for future governance, and this identified a preferred position for both organisations. This involved dissolving the Trust and removing the Council from the governance of the centre. Cambridge University, as the building owner, would then assume full responsibility for future investment and the strategy for overseeing management and operation of the centre within the Estates Division, and under the purview of the Property Board. This may be direct management or contracting this service out.

 

The Councils current contract for services would end 31st March 2024, and a further extension was required until 31st March 2025, to give sufficient time to complete the legal steps required to dissolve the Trust and to ensure a smooth transition to the new governance arrangements. Specifically, a new Community Use Agreement will be needed to replace the existing Trust documentation and set out the long-term commitment of Cambridge University to the delivery of community development activity at Storey’s Field Centre.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Communities

      i.          Agreed to extend the councils contract for management services with Storey’s Field Community Trust, until 31 March 2025, if required.

     ii.          Agreed to simplify existing governance arrangements by dissolving and winding-up Storeys Field Community Trust, working jointly to do so with Cambridge University. Cambridge University may need to retain the trust for tax purposes in which case they will assume complete responsibilities for any governance structure.

   iii.          Agreed to Cambridge University assuming responsibility for management, oversight and meeting any operational deficit for Storey’s Field Centre, following dissolution of Storey’s Field Community Trust.

   iv.          Delegated responsibility to the Director of Communities, in consultation with the Chair and Spokes of Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee, to approve an updated Community Use Agreement that reflects the revised governance arrangements.

    v.          Delegated responsibility to the Director of Communities to ensure a smooth transition and handover of management of the centre to Cambridge University.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Strategic Project Manager.

 

The Strategic Project Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          Revised terms of reference were expected from the University setting out details of community use requirements for the centre in perpetuity eg the amount of time the centre was available for community use hire.

     ii.          The City Council would monitor s106 community use terms. This would be an ongoing role.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

Matter for Decision

A Code of Practice introduced in April 2010 recommended that Councillors should review their authority’s use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and set its general surveillance policy at least once a year. The Executive Councillor for Communities and Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee last considered these matters on the 27 January 2022.

 

The City Council had not used surveillance or other investigatory powers regulated by RIPA since February 2010.

 

The Officer’s report set out the Council’s use of RIPA and the present surveillance policy.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Wealth Building and Community Safety

      i.          Reviewed the Council’s use of RIPA set out in paragraph 3.5 of the Officer’s report.

     ii.          Noted and endorsed the steps described in paragraph 3.7 and in Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report to ensure that surveillance was only authorised in accordance with RIPA.

   iii.          Approved the general surveillance policy in Appendix 1 to the Officer’s report.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The committee made no comments in response to the report from the Head of Legal Practice.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION: The report relates to an item during which the public is likely to be excluded from the meeting by virtue of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Matter for Decision

The Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee resolved to exclude members of the public from the meeting on the grounds that, if they were present, there would be disclosure to them of information defined as exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

The Committee received a report detailing a finding of fault by the Ombudsman, in respect of an anti-social behaviour related service, against this authority. The Officer’s report provided elected members with some brief detail on the case, why fault was found and outlined actions the council has taken to remedy the matter for the customer and identify areas for improvement in the future.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Wealth Building and Community Safety

      i.         Noted the Officer’s report.

    ii.         Approved the remedial actions outlined and measures established to reduce or eliminate the risk of repeat mistakes in future cases.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Community Safety Manager.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.