Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Monthly calendar > Election results by party > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ [access the building via Peashill entrance]. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: No apologies were received. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2023 were approved as a
correct record and signed by the Chair. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Questions Minutes: 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To Note Record of Urgent Decision Taken by the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Environmental Improvements Programme 2023-24 PDF 415 KB Minutes: 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Grants 2024-25 PDF 428 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: 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 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
S106 Funding Round - Phase 2 Sports and Community Facilities PDF 804 KB Minutes: 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
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:
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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Creativity and Culture for All: Cambridge City Council’s Cultural Strategy (2024-2029) PDF 241 KB To follow Additional documents:
Minutes: 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 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents:
Minutes: 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
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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Review of Use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act PDF 400 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ombudsman Determination 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. Minutes: 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. |