Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Matter for Decision:
The
Officer’s report set out the overall base revenue and capital budget position
for the Environmental & Waste Services Portfolio. The report compared the
proposed 2011/12 Revised Budget to the budget as at September 2011 and detailed
the budget proposals for 2012/13 and 2013/14.
Decision of Executive Councillor for Environmental &
Waste Services:
Review of
Charges:
(i)
Approved the proposed charges for Environmental &
Waste services and facilities, as shown in Appendix B of the Officer’s report.
Revenue
Budgets:
(ii)
Approved, (with typographical amendments listed
below), the current year funding requests and savings, (shown in Appendix A of
the Officer’s report) and the resulting revised revenue budgets for 2011/12
(shown in Table 1) for submission to the Executive.
(iii)
Agreed proposals for revenue savings and unavoidable
bids, as set out in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.
(iv)
Agreed proposals for bids from external or existing
funding, as set out in Appendix D of the Officer’s report.
(v)
Agree proposals for Priority Policy Fund (PPF) bids,
as set out in Appendix E of the Officer’s report.
(vi)
Approved the budget proposals for 2012/13 as shown in
Table 2, for submission to the Executive.
Capital:
(vii)
To seek approval from the Executive to carry forward
resources from 2011/12, as detailed in Appendix G of the Officer’s report, to
fund re-phased capital spending.
(viii)
Approved capital bids, as identified in Appendix H of
the Officer’s report, for submission to the Executive for inclusion in the
Capital & Revenue Projects Plan or addition to the Hold List, as indicated.
(ix)
Confirmed that there are no items covered by this
portfolio to add to the Council’s Hold List, for submission to the Executive.
(x)
Approved the current Capital & Revenue Projects
Plan, as detailed in Appendix J of the Officer’s report, to be updated for any
amendments detailed in (vii), (viii) and (ix) above.
(xi)
Approved the following project appraisals as detailed
in Appendix K of the Officer’s report: Vehicle replacements 2012/13.
Reason for the Decision:
Service Plans and draft Budgets were key elements of
the Councils budgetary and policy framework.
Any
alternative options considered and rejected:
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations:
The committee
received a report from the Accountant (Services)
regarding the Environmental & Waste Services Portfolio -
Budget 2012/13.
As part of his introduction, the Officer stated that
the savings detailed in table 2 (Overall Budget Proposals) were incorrect and
should read as follows in order to agree with the relevant appendices:
Service Reviews - 2012/13:
(£180,000)
Service Reviews - 2012/14:
(£218,000)
Other - 2012/13: (£50,500)
Other - 2013/14: (£103,000)
Although the individual lines were incorrect the
totals remained unchanged.
The committee made
the following comments in response to the report:
Councillors sought
clarification concerning:
(i)
The public
convenience capital programme.
(ii)
The condition of Barnwell Toilets.
(iii)
Concerns relating to the
increase in collection charges.
(iv)
The litter bin
replacement programme.
(v)
The Recycling Champions Scheme.
(vi)
Typographical errors on P51 of the Officer’s report.
(vii)
Whether the Council or
Police received stray dog collection fees.
(viii)
Whether the Council’s
focused on recycling or reducing waste.
(ix)
If moths were covered by
pest control criteria.
(x)
If the Council had sought funds made available by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government for the purpose of implementing a weekly black bin collection in
Cambridge.
In response to
Member’s questions the Executive Councillor for Environmental & Waste
Services, Director of Environment, Head
of Refuse and Environment plus Waste
Strategy Manager confirmed the
following:
(i)
The capital
allocation included repair costs.
(ii)
The Director of Environment
undertook to ask the Project Delivery & Environment Manager to provide
Councillor Wright with information regarding Barnwell Toilets.
(iii)
Collection charges had not
risen for the last 8 years, so the City Council had increased its bulk waste collection
charges in line with other authorities.
(iv)
The intention was to review
litter bin provision to ascertain what bins were needed and where. Dual purpose
bins would be provided for recycling and rubbish.
The Executive Councillor
for Environmental & Waste Services would undertake
joined up activity with the Executive Councillor for Arts, Sports & Public
Places.
(v)
The Director of Environment
undertook to ask the Waste Strategy Manager to provide
Councillor Owers with information regarding the Recycling Champions Scheme, awareness
raising campaigns and how efforts were being focussed in areas of highest need.
The effectiveness of awareness raising campaigns such as door knocking
was variable, but valuable as a community engagement tool because it allowed the
Council to build up neighbourhood trend profiles.
(vi)
Officer report page 51 reference RB 3837 - This was included in the
table as a £37,000 saving but in the detail below as £47,000. This was a
typographical error as the figure should read £37,000 in both.
Capital plan appendix on page 63 of the
Officer’s report - The £150,000 in 2012/13 for the Public Conveniences budget
was queried. In last year's budget cycle a capital bid was approved for the
refurbishment of Silver Street conveniences at a total of £500,000 phased as
£350,000 in 2011/12 and £150,000 in 2012/13.
(vii)
The Director of Environment
undertook to ascertain which organisation received stray dog collection fees.
Responsibility for the out of hours collection service transferred from the
Police to City Council circa 2009. A contractor undertook work on behalf of the
Council.
(viii)
The current focus was on
recycling rather than reduction, the focus would be reduction in future.
Various campaigns, such as Recycling Champions, would help to facilitate this.
(ix)
The commercial review of
pest control would determine if moths were covered under the criteria.
(x)
The Council was maintaining
a watching brief, but had not
sought funds made available by the Secretary of State
for Communities and Local Government for the purpose of implementing a weekly
black bin collection in Cambridge.
The committee
resolved by 5 votes to 0 to adopt the recommendation, subject to amendments to
typographical errors in the Officer’s report.
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of interest declared
by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)
Not applicable.