Decisions

Matter for Decision

The Officer’s report gave an annual update on the Council’s Single Equality Scheme, which covered the period from 2021 to 2024 and set five objectives to promote equality, diversity, and inclusion. The report provided an update on the delivery of key actions during 2023/24 set against the objectives. It also set out the activities that were new for 2024/25 and details of how larger ongoing projects would progress in 2024/25.

 

Additionally, the report included a recommendation to extend the end date for the current Single Equality Scheme for a further year, to March 2025.

 

Decision of Leader

      i.          Noted the progress in actions promoting equality, diversity, and inclusion during 2023/24.

     ii.          Approved new actions proposed for delivery during 2024/25.

   iii.          Agreed to extend the end date of the existing Single Equality Scheme from March 2024 to March 2025.

 

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 Equality & Anti-Poverty Officer.

 

The Equality & Anti-Poverty Officer said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          Equality Impact Assessments were undertaken on parks and open spaces. Offered to liaise with Councillor Hauk after committee regarding concerns that vegetation over growing paths and open spaces could be an obstruction.

     ii.          The Equality in Employment Report going to Equalities Panel 2 July set out statistics on BME members in the City Council workforce. The Equality & Anti-Poverty Officer suggested interested parties could attend to ask for further details there. Circa 20% of the city population were BME so the City Council aimed to recruit 20% of its work force from the same community in future to reflect this.

   iii.          Training had been commissioned for school staff to engage young people on their needs. Officers would engage with schools and the community/voluntary sector who engage with schools.

   iv.          Equality Impact Assessments were undertaken by departments/services. They sought advice from the Equality & Anti-Poverty Officer as required. She would liaise with City Services to ask if they had undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment on Voi Scooters and the process for approval of location sites; also if Local Councillors had been consulted.

 

The Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing agreed with concerns that Voi Scooters could sometime block the pavement when parked. People could contact Voi to request removal of scooters. Responsibility for the Equality Impact Assessment may rest with the Combined Authority as they provided the scooters.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Leader.

 

Matter for Decision

The Council helped to mitigate the impact of housing development on local facilities and amenities using S106 contributions from developers. The Executive Councillor oversaw the use of S106 funds secured under the contribution types relating to informal open spaces, play provision for children and teenagers and public realm improvements.

 

The March 2024 S106 report to this Committee highlighted the need to develop a future programme of S106-funded projects in consultation with local councillors. The aim was to make effective and timely use of remaining generic S106 funds alongside newer specific contributions related to particular locations. The intention had been to present the proposed programme (particularly in relation to the Council’s outdoor play areas) in June. However, as this meeting now coincides with the General Election run-up period, it would be more appropriate to report this to the Committee in September instead.

 

In the meantime, this June 2024 report focused on those generic S106 contributions across the informal open spaces, play provision and public realm contribution types that need to be spent or contractually committed to relevant projects within the next year or so. It also considered, in the case of play provision, how the use of relevant specific S106 contributions could support the use of these time-limited S106 funds. Allocating these S106 funds to projects now would provide more time for project planning, consultation and procurement.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services

      i.          Agreed to allocate at least £55,000 of generic informal open spaces S106 funds to supplement the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority’s grant for a strategic biodiversity improvement project at Logan’s Meadow Local Nature Reserve (East Chesterton ward), subject to business case approval (see section 4 of the Officer’s report);

     ii.          Agreed to allocate £13,054 of play provision S106 funding for improvements to Lichfield Road play area in Coleridge ward (based on £3,987 of generic contributions and £9,067 of specific contributions), subject to local consultation and business case approval (see section 5 of the Officer’s report);

   iii.          Agreed to allocate £37,941 of play provision S106 funding for improvements to King George V Recreation Ground in Trumpington ward (based on £21,671 of generic contributions and £16,270 of specific contributions), subject to local consultation and business case approval (see section 5 of the Officer’s report); and

   iv.          Agreed to allocate £69,018 of public realm S106 funds from a development in Harvest Way (Abbey ward) towards public realm improvements in the vicinity of that development, subject to business case approval (see Section 6 of 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 Technical & Specialist Services Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          The intention was to make all new play provision inclusive for all users. Different items of equipment would be provided for people with different/particular needs. Details were listed in the Equalities Impact Assessment in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.

     ii.          Officers recommended allocating funding to projects scheduled to be delivered soonest to make the most effective use of funds. Short timescales for delivery meant that consultation with residents/councillors must be appropriate/proportionate for delivery time.

   iii.          Officers were keen to engage local councillors on how best to use funding (as much as possible). Updates on scheme delivery were published on City Council webpages.

   iv.          Officers were aware of, and reviewing, various play provision accessibility issues such as surface of play areas and joints between materials.

 

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

In 2023/24, officers presented a range of projects submitted through two previous S106 funding rounds for investment in local community and sports facilities. These rounds had identified 30 projects with allocations of over £500,000 of S106 contributions that were approved by the (then) Executive Councillors for improving equipment and/or storage at a range of sports venues or community facilities across Cambridge.

 

Many of these projects had now been completed or are in the process of being delivered. This latest follow-up round (also being referred to as the ‘third phase’) drew on on-going dialogue with community groups and sports clubs, schools and other partner organisations. It picked up some sports projects that were not quite ready or developed enough for submission before now. The report also recommends S106 funding for strategic sports projects and investment in the light of further assessments of City Council facilities and new community and sports facilities coming on board this coming year.

 

The Officer’s report recommended allocating £360,000 of S106 funds to fourteen proposals relating to the community facilities, outdoor/indoor sports and swimming pool facilities contribution types. This was mostly about making timely use of those remaining generic S106 contributions that need to be contractually committed or spent, particularly within the next year. Officers envisaged that the projects proposed in this report could be delivered within six months, albeit that the implementation start dates may need to be phased.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Safety, Homelessness and Wellbeing

      i.          Noted that £73,276 of outdoor sports S106 funds and £28,935 of community facilities S106 funds had been deallocated from projects to which they were previously assigned and were now available for allocating to relevant new projects (see paragraph 3.7 of the Officer’s report); and

     ii.          Allocated generic S106 funding from the relevant S106 contribution types, subject to business case approval and community use agreements (as appropriate), to the following project proposals (see Section 4 of the Officer’s report and the Appendix):

 

	Project proposals	Amount	S106 type
A	Grant to Chesterton Indoor Bowls Club: Indoor sports equipment	£7,000	Indoor Sports
B	Grant to Cambridge Gymnastics Academy for new gym training equipment	£20,000	Indoor Sports
C	Abbey Leisure Complex: sports changing room upgrades	£20,000	Indoor Sports
D	Grant to Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre: new gym equipment	£35,000	Indoor Sports
E	Grant to CamSkate for indoor skate equipment at RailPen sites at Newmarket Road Retail Park	£45,000	Indoor Sports
F	Pickleball markings at tennis courts in South, East & West/Central areas	£10,000	Outdoor Sports
G	Nightingale Recreation Ground: upgrade tennis courts	£65,000	Outdoor Sports
H	Nightingale Recreation Ground: playing pitch improvements	£30,000	Outdoor Sports
I	Abbey Astroturf pitch: new benches and team shelters around the new 3G pitch	£20,000	Outdoor Sports
J	Coldham’s Common: new Gaelic football posts	£3,000	Outdoor Sports
K	Additional tables and chairs at four Bowls Clubs within Cambridge	£10,000	Outdoor Sports
L	Jesus Green skate park: flood lighting and CCTV coverage	£20,000	Outdoor Sports
M	New community meeting room at Abbey Leisure Complex (related to a joint project funding with NHS England for mental health space)	£50,000	Community Facilities
N	Kings Hedges Learner Pool: light & sound equipment for pool users	£25,000	Swimming Pool

 

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, Sport & Recreation Manager.

 

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

      i.          Officers evaluated the community benefit of projects. If funding went to ‘closed clubs’  then community access agreements would be put in places so facilities were available to all.

     ii.          Jesus Green Association and local councillors were consulted on the CCTV and lighting installed at Jesus Green.

   iii.          Undertook to update Councillor Swift about Donkey Common skate ramps after the meeting.

 

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

The Officer’s report provided an annual report on the work of the key strategic partnerships that the Council was involved in; and covers the recent decisions on the Cambridge & Peterborough Combined Authority.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Health and Community Safety

      i.          Agreed to work more closely with the Health and Wellbeing Board and Integrated Care Partnership and its sub-system (as detailed in paragraphs 3.42 – 3.46 of the Officer’s report) to ensure that the City Council’s role in prevention and wellbeing working in partnership with other public agencies could address the health needs and concerns of Cambridge residents.

     ii.          Agreed to continue to work with partners within the framework of the Cambridge Community Safety Partnership (as detailed in paragraphs 3.47 – 3.53 of the Officer’s report), identifying local priorities and taking action that would make a positive difference to the safety of communities in the city.

 

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 Assistant Chief Executive.

 

In response to the report Councillors asked for details about partnerships covered by sections of the report to be discussed by Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee 1 July. The Assistant Chief Executive and Leader of the Council undertook to respond to questions at Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee 1 July.

 

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

The Community Grants scheme priorities were reviewed periodically to ensure they remained relevant and align with the Councils Corporate Plan and wider objectives. Similarly, the grant procedures were reviewed annually as part of a continuous improvement process, considering feedback from applicants and the experience of the Grants Team.

 

In addition to this, a full community grants review was started in 2022 with the introduction of a ‘light touch’ small grants application process for awards of up to £2,000. There was also agreement to begin the broader work required which would be developed alongside the ‘Our Cambridge Transformation Programme’. This included exploring the introduction of longer-term funding arrangements for organisations delivering ongoing essential services and infrastructure support to the voluntary sector; considering the challenges presented by the Area Committee grants process; and the potential to move to a digital grants platform.

 

The Community Grants Review was not driven by the need to make financial savings, but instead recognised the issues that were facing the voluntary and community sector (VCS). It reflected Officer’s understanding of the challenges the sector faced in responding to inequalities and prolonged financial hardship and how the Council could better work alongside VCS partners to deliver positive change for our communities.

 

Discussions were currently underway within Cambridgeshire about the potential to agree a set of shared principles across all public sector partners which would foster collaboration. Although these conversations were in the early stages, the community grants review provided an opportunity to embed these principles now.

 

There were three strands to the proposed new approach to community funding set out in section 4 of the Officer’s report. Running alongside this Officers were exploring with statutory partners whether funding schemes could align more closely together, both in terms of grant making and grant monitoring.

 

Decision of Leader

      i.          Approved the introduction of a twice-yearly Small Community Grants scheme replacing the previous Small Community Grants scheme and Area Committee Grants scheme, for applications with a value of £5,000 or less.

     ii.          Approved the continuation of the annual Main Community Grants scheme, for applications with a value over £5,000.

   iii.          Approved the introduction of multi-year funding agreements for specific provision within the City.

 

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.          There were sufficient staff resources in place to process the bi-annual grant cycle assessments.

     ii.          Moving to a digital grants platform would free up staff resources that could be reallocated to administration as required.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

i.To agree to implement a digital grants platform.
ii.To delegate responsibility to the Chief Operating Officer and Director of Communities to oversee the procurement of a digital grant’s platform and the smooth transition with its implementation.

Matter for Decision

Grant funding to community groups was a core component of the council’s approach to community wealth building, with funding of approximately £2m available annually to support the community and voluntary sector.

 

The Council Grants Team managed most of these grants and had a reputation for providing an exemplary service to community groups across the city.

 

The current grant management approach relied heavily on manual data entry systems, and there were fragmented grant streams available across the council, with different systems and processes for applicants to navigate to be able to access funding.

 

There were some risks and constraints with the current management approach for the council and applicants, and a comprehensive options appraisal had been completed to assess alternative approaches the council could consider.

 

Having assessed the strengths, weaknesses, and risks for a range of options detailed at Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report, the appraisal recommended that the council considered implementing a digital grant management platform. This would help to minimise risk, maximise efficiency and improve the applicant experience.

 

The appraisal further recommends completing an end-to-end systems audit and considered managing all community and voluntary grant funding streams included in the matrix at Appendix 2 of the Officer’s report, via a digital grant’s platform, which would effectively become the new Grants Gateway.

 

Decision of Leader

      i.          Agreed to implement a digital grant platform.

     ii.          Agreed to delegate responsibility to the Director of Communities to oversee the procurement of a digital grant’s platform and a smooth transition to implementation.

 

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.          Measurements on the impact of grants had to be proportionate to the amount of funding awarded such as fewer measures for smaller grants. There was no one size fits all approach. Officers could look at different types of measures such as pictures not just written records.

     ii.          The expected timeframe was to undertake procurement in the autumn then make a decision in spring 2025 on the successful digital platform candidate.

   iii.          Two meetings had been held, one with the Digital Lead, and one with the Procurement Officer regarding the procurement process. They agreed the timescales were reasonable and offered advice on how to undertake the procurement.

   iv.          Grant Officers would offer support to grant applicants online and in person to help them with the application process and ensure funding goes to appropriate recipients.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Leader  approved the recommendations.

 

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

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Leader.

 

Item deferred to 18 July 2024 Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee.

Item deferred to 18 July 2024 Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee.

Approve entering into a Development Agreement with Wrenbridge.

Approve the surrender of existing leases and grant of a new 150-year lease to Wrenbridge in respect of Plots 9, 10-11 & 12

Approve Wrenbridge, in conjunction with the Council, to master plan the wider Mercers Row area to include Plots 6-8 and 13-16.

To delegate authority to the Interim Property Lead for the final approval of the proposed development agreement and lease terms.

The Committee unanimously voted and agreed to exclude the public after considering that the public interest was outweighed by paragraph 3 of Part 1 of schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 to enable committee debate of the officer report.

 

The Scrutiny Committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Leader approved the recommendations.

 

 

Matter for Decision

 

      i.         The Council’s Corporate Plan, Our Cambridge transformation programme and the Target Operating Model outline an ambitious agenda for the Council for the next three years. Our People and Culture strategy sets out how we will align our workforce to achieve these ambitions over the same period.

    ii.         The Council’s last People Strategy was for the period 2007– 2011. Since the last strategy was developed, our communities, workforce and Council have undergone considerable change. Our communities want services delivered in different ways, and the expectations that employees have of their employers has changed.

   iii.         This People and Culture Strategy builds on the work and achievements we have made in all aspects of people management to date and takes forward learnings gained to outline the people and workforce priorities and considerations for the next three years.

  iv.         Once approved and launched, employee workshop sessions will be held to develop the action plan – “the People Plan” that will accompany the people and culture strategy. This will include new actions and projects as well as aligning people implications of existing programmes, initiatives and activities. The people plan will have clear accountability and will be regularly reviewed by a People Strategy Governance Board.

Decision of the Leader of the Council

 

      i.         To recommend, following scrutiny and debate at Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee, to agree to the People and Culture strategy being launched across the Council commencing with employee engagement to shape the People Plan.

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 Head of People.

The Head of People said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

i.      If points in strategy regarding carers was not explicit enough, would certainly improve that.

ii.    Had noted the point of having Senior Champions for each team. Would explore this further.

iii.   Currently exploring and investigating how to set up meaningful staff networks for those who wish to be involved.

iv.  Regarding diversity and applications, that was a big focus for the Council. Working with external organisations and internal networks. Working with vulnerable groups within the community to see what could be done to get more people into employment, not only with the Council but in general.

v.    There was a large amount of data in report going to Equalities Panel in regarding disabilities. Though report states that 7% of workforce had reported a disability, were aware that it was much higher. Many employees did not wish to declare their disability.

vi.  In September an all staff survey focusing on well-being would be launched to get data to help feed into the action plan going forward.

vii. Trade Unions had seen the strategy in the report. Would make that more explicit.

The Scrutiny Committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Leader 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

To note the achievements and progress of the key strategic partnerships that the City Council is engaged with.

 

To note the most recent decisions of the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority.

Matter for Decision

 

This report provides an annual report on the work of the key strategic partnerships that the Council is involved in; and covers the recent decisions on the Cambridge & Peterborough Combined Authority

 

Decision of the Leader of the Council

 

      i.         Note the achievements and progress of the key strategic growth and economy-related partnerships that the City Council is engaged with, as detailed in paragraphs 3.3 – 3.41.

    ii.         Note the recent decisions of the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Board at Appendix A & B, and invite the City Council’s representative to provide an update.

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 Assistant Chief Executive.

 

The Assistant Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

i.      The Council’s representative in the Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) Anna Smith was available at every meeting of Strategy & Resources and was able to answer any queries as related to the CPCA.

ii.    The Leader stated that he agreed that the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) should be coming to this Committee for scrutiny as the CPCA does.

iii.   A unitary authority would not affect the Council’s current relationships with partnerships, perhaps apart from the GCP.

iv.  The Leader stated that he would look at partnerships and see if there was a possibility for greater scrutiny and bring back to Committee.

v.    Councillor Anna Smith stated she was available to answer any questions in regards to the CPCA and was happy to have conversations regarding CPCA business with Members.

The Scrutiny Committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Leader 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

 

      i.         This report presents the Digital, Data and Technology (DDaT) Strategy 2024-2029 for approval, which sets out the Council's vision and framework for effectively managing digital, data and technology over the next five years. For clarity, this is an internal (not public facing) technical strategy and does not relate to the 3C ICT Service Review.

    ii.         Customers are placed at the heart of this Strategy. A key component of the Strategy is the digital customer journey which focusses on improving both user experience and accessibility for our customers, where those who can engage digitally, choose to do so because it is more convenient and preferable to other alternatives.

   iii.         The Strategy aims to achieve the following outcomes: more agile response to community needs; improved digital accessibility; increased operational efficiency, better decision-making capabilities, an adaptable and resilient IT estate, and provide staff with improved digital and data skills.

  iv.         The Strategy is structured into four strands: digital customer journey, data and information management, technology and innovation, and digital and data skills development. Each strand has specific missions and actions to deliver the desired target state of the Council.

Decision of the Leader of the Council

 

Approve the 5-year Digital, Data and Technology (DDaT) Strategy.

 

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 Digital Lead Manager.

 

The Strategic Digital Lead said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

i.      3C ICT, Strategy and Data were not a part of the service offer. That service agreement was currently being reviewed.

ii.    3C ICT review likely coming to this Committee in September.

iii.   Working on improving digital exclusion had internal support. Could improve signposting what the Council was already doing.

iv.  Part of the strategy was more bespoke training for staff.

v.    The Technical Design Authority (TDA) would be made up of Strategic Digital Lead, counterparts from 3C ICT. Were currently looking for a Solutions Architect to join the team. Depending on the outcome of the service review, may have representatives from South Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire Councils as well.

vi.  As part of digital function that was being looked at internally, were looking at how to create a business intelligence function. Would like to look at Councils data assets and make that available to staff and the public.

vii. In response to a comment by the Chair about concentrating on the summary in the report in order for Members to more easily take in the information, Officer stated that she would take that feedback on board going forward.

The Scrutiny Committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Leader 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

Approval to publish the report to the City Council website.

Matter for Decision

 

This report invites the Leader of the Council to approve the text of the Annual Report in advance of its formatting, design and publication on the council’s website and the Key Performance Indicators. It also invites the Leader to note the Annual Complaints and Customer Feedback Report

 

Decision of the Leader of the Council

 

i.               Approve the Annual Report against the Corporate Plan and associated KPI table.

ii.             Note the Annual Complaints and Customer Feedback 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 received a report from the Customer Services Operation Manager.

 

The Customer Services Operation Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

i.       Stable management teams were now in place to focus on complaints, most notably in cultural services. This had been a year of transition for that team.

ii.       Complaints were monitored, highlighted and escalated.

iii.      The percentage of complaints dealt with within target had decreased this year.

iv.      The Leader of the Council stated that he welcomed KPI’s (Key Performance Indicators) as it allowed the Committee to scrutinise The Executive’s performance. Stated that if Members felt KPI’s needed to change, this Committee would be the place to raise any concerns.

v.      There were approximately 20,000 housing repairs with 184 complaints which is approximately 0.92%.

vi.      The Homelink service had 2696 applications with 16 complaints for 0.59% ratio.

vii.     The Housing Advice service had 2297 application with 23 complaints for 1% ratio.

viii.    The Leader of the Council stated that response times from complaints had increased and would be investigated.

ix.      The Leader of the Council stated that there were 230,000 contacts to Customer Services and there were only 24 complaints.

 

The Scrutiny Committee approved the recommendations by a vote of 6-0-2.

 

The Leader 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: Approval of funding towards fitting out of the community kitchen and rooms and starting up the Cherry Hinton Hub (Planning Ref: 19/1713/FUL)

 

FOR PUBLICATION

 

Why the Decision had to be made (and any alternative options): The Cherry Hinton Hub scheme is nearing practical completion. The specification of works and bill of quantities for fitting out the community kitchen and rooms were not included in the construction contract, and no provision was made to support the start-up costs of the hub operator, the Cherry Hinton Community Benefit Society Limited.

 

The Council requested the Benefit Society to raise £50k towards the above costs. However, these costs are forecast to exceed £100k.

 

To date, the Benefit Society has raised £43k. Of this sum, Thalia has approved a £30k grant specifically towards the community kitchen fit out costs of £50k, subject to confirmation of a lease from the Council. The balance of £13k has been raised by the community. 

 

A council grant of £50k is required as follows:

a) £20k towards the £50k cost of fitting out the community kitchen,

b) £20k to fund the cost of furnishing and equipping the community rooms, and

c) £10k towards the community hub start-up costs.

 

A cash flow forecast provided by the Benefit Society identifies that funding is required to cover start-up costs before any room hire income is generated. This is to purchase café stock and meet building service charges. Local community donations received to date of £13k will contribute to these initial start-up costs, pending break even.

 

Thalia require confirmation of match funding by 30^th June 2024 to approve a grant funding application, and this is why an out of cycle decision is required before any future scrutiny committees or as part of the council’s next standard budget setting process.

 

Practical completion of the building and handover is due to take place on 24th June, and so this decision will allow access to the building for commencement of fitting out works, required for the earliest possible opening of the hub. A Council grant decision will enable the Community Benefit Society to demonstrate funds required for Thalia and to let contracts to fit out the kitchen, furnish and equip the community rooms and acquire equipment and stock required for starting up the new community hub.

 

The Executive Councillor’s decision: Approval of £50,000 funding for Cherry Hinton Community Benefit Society.

 

Reason for the decision: As detailed in the Officers supporting briefing report.

 

Scrutiny Consideration: As special urgency the Chair of Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee has to agree the use of special urgency. This has now been confirmed by the Chair.

 

Conflict of interest: None

 

Comments: Part 4C section 6.1 of the Councils Constitution, permits decisions to be taken which are outside of the budget framework if the decision is:

1.    a matter of urgency (this is correct)

2.    it is not practical to convene a quorate meeting of the Council, (this is correct); and

3.    the Chair of the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee agrees the matter is of urgency (the Chair to agree).

 

The decision will be reported back to S&R Committee on 30^th September 2024 and Full Council on 10^th October 2024.

 

Recommendation:

·      To approve £50,000 additional capital funding towards the costs of fitting out and equipping the community kitchen and rooms and supporting the start-up phases of the Cherry Hinton Community Hub.

 

Background:

·      The councils Community Centre Strategy identified a gap in access to community facilities for high need residents in Cherry Hinton. New community facilities planned for nearby growth sites at Marleigh, GB1/2 and Land North of Cherry Hinton will not provide access for the existing community to facilities within a 15 minute walk time

·      A new community facility for Cherry Hinton therefore remains a strategic priority for the council and a priority for residents who do not have currently have access to facilities

·      Residents have been working with the council since 2006 to bring forward a scheme to extend the existing library building to create a Community Hub

·      Following extensive consultation with residents, planning approval was granted for the Cherry Hinton Hub scheme in September 2020

·      Following design work and competitive supplier and contractor quotations, a contract was let for the required demolition and structural works, mechanical heating and ventilation, access control and interior finishes at a capital cost of £1,643,089

·      Having been set a requirement to raise £50k, the Cherry Hinton Community Benefit Society has identified a requirement for £90k + to fit out the community kitchen (£50k), furnish and equip the community rooms (£20k) and operating start-up costs (£20k +). Of this sum, the Benefit Society has secured a £43k, of which £30k is subject to a lease. To address the funding gap, the Benefit Society has requested a £50k grant from the Council to be paid in two tranches of £25k. The special conditions to be attached to the deed require prior to the Community Hub opening: submission of quotes received for the works; adoption of the policies for Health and Safety, Safeguarding (child and vulnerable adults), Equality and Diversity, Confidentiality / Data Protection (GDPR), Complaints and Environmental; submission of necessary insurance documents, a budget for the first year of operation, and proof of expenditure of the first payment prior to the release of the second grant payment. 

 

Why an out of cycle decision is required:

·      An out of cycle decision is now required because:

1.    The next opportunity for scrutiny at Strategy and Resources Committee (S&R) of the additional capital requirement would be S&R Committee on 30^th September 2024, but this would be too late to allow the hub to fitted out ready for opening in a timely manner.

2.    The next opportunity to include a capital request as part of the council’s financial cycle would be the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) in October 2024.

 

 

Matter for Decision: To approve Councillor Appointments to the Local Highways Improvement Panel for municipal year 2024/25

Why the Decision had to be made (and any alternative options):

 

The County Council have requested that two city councillor representatives are appointed to the Local Highways Improvement Panel for municipal year 2024/25. As these appointments were not made at the Council’s Annual Meeting, an out of cycle decision is required so that city councillor representatives can attend meetings and represent the Council at Panels. 

 

Local Highways Improvements (LHIs) is a countywide County Council led programme of work which considers suggestions from Councillors and communities for improvements to their local highways. The proposed programme of work will be taken to the Cambridge Joint Area Committee (CJAC) for comment prior to any bids being taken to the County Council’s Highways and Transport Committee for approval.

 

It is the intention for CJAC to approve City Councillor appointments to any future LHIP from October 2024. 

 

The City Council made provision within its budget to contribute up to £35,000 per annum for 2024-2028 towards Cambridgeshire County Council’s managed programme in order for the top prioritised schemes to proceed. Local community contributions are a fundamental principle of LHIs, and without this support from the City Council a programme would be unlikely to proceed in Cambridge. The involvement of City Councillors in the prioritisation process ensures that thorough representation and scrutiny takes place.

 

The Executive Councillor’s decision: The appointment of Councillor Baigent and Councillor Young to the Local Highways Improvement Panel for municipal year 2024/25

Reason for the decision: As above.

Scrutiny Consideration: The Chair and Spokesperson of Planning and Transport Scrutiny Committee were consulted prior to the action being authorised.

Report: None

Conflict of interest: [None].

Comments: The Chair of the Planning and Transport Committee, Councillor Nestor and the Liberal Democrats Opposition Spokes, Councillor Porrer both provided comment they supported the decision and noted that this would be undertaken by Cambridge Joint Area Committee in future years.