Agenda item

1.

Question from Councillor Andrew Wall to Cabinet Member Sustainability, Councillor Roger Whyborn 

The current garden waste collection service is popular in Battledown and many residents are very disappointed that the Liberal Democrats are scrapping it in January. If the uptake from residents in the Battledown Ward for the new paid for service matches the Council's projections, can the Cabinet member confirm how much income will be raised from the ward each year under the scheme in addition to the Council tax paid?

Response from Cabinet Member Sustainability

At this stage, the council cannot estimate the amount of income raised in each ward under the new scheme. However of the 52,872 households in the Borough some 41,000 receive the garden waste service. Based on take up in other authorities, we are projecting that 20,000 households will sign up to the new service.. It is estimated that the council will generate additional income of £720,000 in 2011/12 from the scheme and new charge. This will offset the additional costs of acquiring new vehicles, bins the operation of the new scheme and help towards maintaining the refuse and recycling service at an affordable, competitive and sustainable cost given the current pressure of council finances and thereby protecting other valued services from significant cuts.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Wall asked how many households in the Battledown Ward currently make use of the garden waste collection service.

The Cabinet Member Sustainability advised that he did not have that information to hand but would ask officers to confirm the figures to Councillor Wall.

2.

Question from Councillor Andrew Wall to Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development, Councillor John Webster

A recent press release from the Council about the scrapping of the garden waste collection service contained the following text:

"It is being withdrawn because it sees those who do not need or cannot receive the service subsidising the cost for those who do."

Can the Cabinet member confirm how this principle is going to be applied to other Council services?

Response from Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development

The majority of council services are available to all residents and they have a choice as to whether they use them. However, some people do not have gardens or the need for the green waste service. 

Given the scale of this service and the fact that it is discretionary, it is not unreasonable to make a charge for it.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Wall did not consider his question had been answered so asked again whether the council was adopting a new principle.

In response the Cabinet Member advised that it was not a new principle. He gave the example of residents using the council’s swimming pool for which they paid, but which is also funded from council revenue.

3.

Question from Councillor Andrew Wall to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan 

Previous Liberal Democrat administrations have been very active is writing to Government ministers to voice concerns about the effects of Government policy on the Council and the residents of Cheltenham. Has the Leader or any member of the Cabinet written to Danny Alexander, the Liberal Democrat Chief Secretary to the Treasury, regarding the Council's current financial state?

Response from the Leader of the Council

This council has responded to consultation on the proposed method of calculating future support grants but along with all other councils, is still awaiting the financial settlement for 2011/12 and beyond. If we feel we have been unfairly treated when we receive this we will lobby the relevant secretary of state.           

4.

Question from Councillor Penny Hall to the Cabinet Member Built Environment, Councillor John Rawson

At the Council meeting of 28th June 2010 during the discussions on the Financial  Outcome Report  I raised concerns with the Cabinet Member for the Built Environment on the £17,000 underspend on routine maintainance of the Municipal Offices and was informed that "given the accommodation review  that was underway it was sensible to restrict maintainance to the minimum requirements necessary for health and safety"

Can the Cabinet Member tell me

(i)                 It is 6 months later is this restriction still in place, if not when did it stop?

(ii)               Has this lead to a backlog of routine maintainance waiting to be done and if so have estimates been done of how long it will take to clear.

(iii)             I have heard of one accident in the Municipal Officers to a member of the public recently.  How many accidents have taken place within the building over the last 6 months to;

- Members of the public

- Officers and Council employees

(iv)              Has a full investigation on each been done?

Response from Cabinet Member Built Environment

(i)         Yes - all non-essential maintenance is still on hold pending the Accommodation Review.  This includes routine works such as decoration of offices, replacement carpets and upgrading infrastructure.  However it does not include any work necessary to protect the health and safety of the public or staff, which is being done as normal.

(ii)        Some works have been deferred, but this has not led to an insurmountable backlog.  Routine maintenance works are usually programmed on a rolling basis.

(iii)       There have been just three incidents recorded this year relating to visitors to the Municipal Offices and an additional one in the car park to the front of the building which is owned by GCC.  In one case a customer fainted in the Tourist Information Office.  In another a customer tripped on the steps up to the main entrance.  The accident in the car park was another case of a customer tripping and falling. 

The fourth case, which is probably the case referred to by Cllr Hall, involved a visitor suffering a minor graze to the head when a piece of timber fell on him.  The piece of wood in question was the head door stop of the entrance to the Council Chamber which broke off as a result of an impact.  This is an unusual occurrence and property services staff have checked all the other doors for safety.

In respect of all these accidents, medical aid was offered, though in the latter case it was declined.

No staff staff accidents or injuries within the Municipal Offices have been reported this year.

(v)                All incidents were investigated by the property team.

Can I add that the Accommodation Review is well under way and is expected to come forward to members in the early part of next year.  This is a necessary exercise because currently the Municipal Offices provide significantly more accommodation than the Council needs.  However, I hope it will not be too long before we are clearer about the future of our office accommodation and therefore its maintenance needs. 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Hall asked when the decision had been taken and whether the Cabinet Member still considered that it was a good idea given that he had referred to the upgrading of the infrastructure and the Municipal Offices were a valuable structure for the Council?

In response the Cabinet Member said he was not in a position to advise exactly when the decision had been taken. Officers had advised that the building provided more office space than the council current required and so there was a need for some strategic planning and consideration of all options for the building. He hoped to have a strategy in place by Spring 2011 when the accommodation strategy was due to be reported to Cabinet.  In the meantime it was sensible not to carry out any non-essential maintenance on the building. .

5.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Sustainability, Councillor Roger Whyborn

Can the cabinet member confirm how many households currently use the Green Bag garden waste recycling in the following wards

Charlton Kings

CharltonPark

Leckhampton

Response from Cabinet Member Sustainability

No ward-specific data has been produced. However the present scheme is open to 41,000  households across the whole town , regardless of whether residents choose to use it.

Councillor Smith asked for clarification as the Cabinet Member’s response to question 1 implied that ward specific data was available for Battledown ward?

In response the Cabinet Member confirmed that it was possible to produce ward specific date but there was a fair amount of work involved.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Smith asked given a 50% take-up rate, what would happen to the green waste if residents do not subscribe to the scheme,

In response the Cabinet Member said it was premature to state a 50% figure and the phones had already been busy with applicants for the scheme. There were other facilities available for residents to dispose of their garden waste at the Swindon Road depot. 

As a matter of personal explanation, Councillor Smith said that the 50% predicted take-up was the Cabinet Member’s own figure given in response to a previous question.

6.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Sustainability, Councillor Roger Whyborn

Following the public meeting in Leckhampton that called for the Leckhampton White Lands and surrounding green fields in CBC and TBC jurisdiction to be designated as a Country Park, can the cabinet member explain what he has done to address this matter?

Response from Cabinet Member Sustainability

No approach has been made on this subject to myself. However I understand that a council officer has attended a meeting and officers are responding informally to questions. However as my colleague Cllr Webster advises in his reply to Q 11, it may well be that a petition organised by Leckhampton Green Land Action Group (LegLag) to create a Country Park on the Leckhampton White land will be presented to the Council shortly.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Smith asked whether given that there may be plans for developing a thousand new houses on this white land, could the Cabinet Member takes some action now to prevent development of this land  rather than waiting for a petition or for officers to resolve the matter.

The Cabinet Member responded that he was fully supportive of the LegLag aims for this area and would do everything possible to assist them.

7.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Corporate Services, Councillor Colin Hay

Can the cabinet member explain to Council when a personal and prejudicial interest should be declared and what action a councillor should take having made such a declaration?

Response from Cabinet Member Corporate Services

What is a personal interest?

You have a personal interest in any business of your authority where it relates to or is likely to affect:

1) An interest that you must register.

2) An interest that is not on your register but where the well-being or financial position of you, members of your family, or people or bodies with whom you have a close association, is likely to be affected by the business of your authority more than it would affect the majority of:

• inhabitants of the ward or electoral divisions affected by the decision (in the case of authorities with wards or electoral divisions)
• inhabitants of the assembly constituency affected by the decision (in the case of the Greater London Authority)
• inhabitants of the authority’s area (in all other cases).

What should I do if I have a personal interest?

You must declare that you have a personal interest and the nature of the interest as soon as it becomes apparent to you in all formal meetings before the matter is discussed.

However, where an interest arises solely from membership of, position of control or management on:

• any other body to which you were appointed or nominated by the authority
• any other body exercising functions of a public nature, for example if you have been appointed as a school governor
• you will only need to declare your interest if and when you speak on a matter, provided that you do not have a prejudicial interest.

What is a prejudicial interest?

Your personal interest will also be a prejudicial interest if it meets all of the following conditions:

a) The matter does not fall within one of the exempt categories of decisions under paragraph 10(2) (c), for example setting the council tax.

b) The matter affects your interests financially or is about a licensing, planning or other regulatory matter that might affect your interests.

c) A member of the public, who knows the relevant facts, would reasonably think your personal interest so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgement of the public interest.

What should I do if I have a prejudicial interest?

You must declare that you have a prejudicial interest and the nature of that interest as soon as that interest becomes apparent.

You should leave the room unless members of the public are allowed to make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter. If this is the case, you can also attend the meeting for that purpose.

You must leave the room immediately once you have finished speaking, or when the meeting decides that you have finished (if that is earlier).

If your authority does not provide members of the public with any right to speak, you would need to leave the meeting room after declaring the nature and extent of your interest. However, you can:

• Make written representations in your private capacity. These should be addressed to officers rather than members of the authority.
• Use a professional representative to make an application, for example a planning application, on your behalf.
• Arrange for another member of the authority to represent the views of your constituents.

8.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Housing and Safety, Councillor Klara Sudbury

Can the cabinet member confirm how many properties are owned by CBH and how many of those properties are currently vacant?

Response from Cabinet Member Housing and Safety

CBH do not directly own any properties as they are managers of CBC owned property. The total managed properties are 4606 tenanted plus 450 leaseholder properties.

There are a total of 43 void properties.

In general needs there are 31 voids including 6 approved for demolition , 6  awaiting action from CBC for disposal and 1 option appraisal void.

There are 7 voids within shared ownership awaiting sale.

There are 5 temporary furnished voids.

9.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Housing and Safety, Councillor Klara Sudbury

How many homeless people are there living in Cheltenham Borough?

Response from Cabinet Member Housing and Safety

Street homeless - 1 following rough sleepers count carried out between 12.30am and 4.00am on 30th November 2010.

Number of households accepted as homeless in the last quarter to end Sep - 6

Number of homeless households in temporary accommodation as at end Sep - 28

Number of homelessness preventions in the last quarter to end Sep - 96

In a supplementary question, Councillor Smith asked given the number of void properties awaiting action by the council, what was the borough council doing to encourage Cheltenham Borough Homes to bring empty properties into use to provide temporary accommodation to support the homeless.

In response the Cabinet Member reminded members that CBH was an arms length organisation and it was not her role as Cabinet Member Housing and Safety to tell them what they should be doing. She would be happy to take these comments back to them on an informal basis. 

10.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Housing and Safety, Councillor Klara Sudbury

How many CBH properties still require bathroom and/or kitchens to be replaced?

Response from Cabinet Member Housing and Safety

There are 38 properties where the kitchens and/or bathrooms fail decency, all of which were refusals by the tenant previously for a variety of reasons. These properties form part of the internal works programme contract for 2011 but are still subject to the tenants approving the works being conducted. Should any of these properties become void then works will be carried out then.

11.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development, Councillor John Webster

Can the cabinet member confirm that he has plans to include funding for a LeckhamptonCountry Park in his forthcoming budget.

Response from Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development

I am aware and have signed a petition organised by Leckhampton Green Land Action Group (LegLag) that wishes to create a Country Park on the Leckhampton White land. The Council will help and advise in this should the petition which is due to be presented to the forthcoming Council meeting be supported. Opportunities in the forthcoming Localism Bill may present themselves to achieve this and such work would fall under another portfolio.

However, as I’m sure the Member for Charlton Kings will appreciate, in the current financial situation when substantial cutbacks are inevitable it would not be appropriate or politically acceptable to allocate funding for the creation or management and maintenance of such a park, and neither does the petition ask for this.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Smith asked whether given the commitment of the Cabinet Member Sustainability to support LegLag, the Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development would like to reconsider his answer and give some consideration to supporting this voluntary community group.

The Cabinet Member replied that he did support the group but it was not possible to allocate any long-term funding for the Country Park. This aspiration would be more properly included in the Local Development Framework and Joint Core strategy if it was considered desirable to do so. 

12.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development, Councillor John Webster

Can the cabinet member explain what he is doing to justify the inclusion of ‘community development’ in his title?

Response from Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development

The Voluntary and Community sector is blossoming in Cheltenham and there are challenges as well as opportunities in the current turbulent period. Regular meetings and contacts with the Community Regeneration Partnerships, Cheltenham Voluntary and Community Action, Council Officers and the Stronger Communities Partnership are necessary to ensure opportunities proceed, and any important developments will be reported to Overview and Scrutiny by myself when it is appropriate. 

Much of the most successful work relating to Neighbourhood management is taking place through the Neighbourhood Coordination Groups which I am sure Cllr Smith attends in his own area, as I do in mine. It would be too time consuming to report on all of these but it would be appropriate, should he wish it, to review its progress at some future date through Soc and Com O&S.

13.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to Cabinet Member Sport and Culture, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Can the cabinet member confirm he is committed to supporting Cheltenham Festivals through the next 3 years of their business plan?

Response from Cabinet Member Sport and Culture

I can confirm that I am committed to working with Cheltenham Festivals for the benefit of the people of Cheltenham.

This commitment does not however imply that the Council will be able to provide the level of financial or in kind support assumed by Cheltenham Festivals in their business plan.

14.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

Can the leader explain to Council how often he expects his cabinet members to attend overview & scrutiny committee?

Response from the Leader of the Council

I would expect cabinet members to attend overview & scrutiny committee whenever requested to do so. 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Smith asked what action overview and scrutiny should take if a Cabinet Member did not attend a meeting he was asked to attend?

The Leader responded that he as Leader should be advised and he would take the appropriate action.

15.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

What is the financial value of the support given by CBC to Cheltenham Strategic partnership and its feeder partnerships?

Response from the Leader of the Council

The council currently provides an annual allocation of £15,000 to support the work of Cheltenham Strategic Partnership and £5,200 to the Low Carbon Partnership. There is also one-off funding of £15,000 to the Business and Economic Partnership in the current year. This will be reviewed for the 2011/12 budget.  

16.

Question from Councillor Duncan Smith to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

Can the leader confirm if he voted for the abolition of the Gloucestershire Conference and the creation of a commissioning partnership in its place?

Response from the Leader of the Council

I broadly support the proposed streamlining of the Gloucestershire Conference Structure. This includes the replacement of the Gloucestershire Strategic Partnership, the Community Strategy Executive Board and the Accountable Bodies Group with a single new Gloucestershire Leaders Board (GLB). The membership will be the leaders of the county council and the 6 district councils plus the chairs of the PCT and the Police Authority and two Chief Executives, Pete Bungard and Mike Dawson (nominated by districts).

I am concerned that there is no representation of the voluntary sector at this top level. Given the increasing dependence of the public sector on the voluntary sector to continue the provision of services to the community, it seems to me it will be essential to get the relevant input from the voluntary sector to make this work. Instead, a task and finish has been proposed to review how best the voluntary sector can be involved in Gloucestershire Conference,

While the issue was discussed and my reservations noted at the recent ABG meeting, no vote was in fact taken.         

17.

Question from Councillor Barbara Driver to Cabinet Member Housing and Safety, Councillor Klara Sudbury

During this freezing weather what have CBC done to help the homeless who have to sleep rough.   What plans do you have to work with others in trying to get help to these people and what help are you planning in the months to come as it looks this weather will continue throughout the winter.  How do CBC find out where these people are sleeping to get them the help.  Do we have any idea as to the numbers of people sleeping rough?

Response from Cabinet Member Housing and Safety

CBC worked with Cheltenham Housing Aid Centre on a rough sleepers count on 30^th November. I am very grateful to the volunteers from CBC, CCP and Cheltenham Housing Aid Centre who worked in groups of 3 to cover the whole of Cheltenham, with a particular focus on the known hotspots based on intelligence provided by the churches, police and advice agencies. The count identified 1 rough sleeper.

In view of the cold weather, the Borough Council has sent a message round to all agencies that are likely to be in contact with rough sleepers, via the Homelessness Forum, to send anyone believed to be rough sleeping to the Housing Options Team at Cheltenham First Stop in order for emergency housing to be made available for them for the duration of this very cold spell. To date, 1 rough sleeper has been identified and housed in emergency accommodation (i.e. a Bed & Breakfast).

Intelligence on the number of rough sleepers comes from a wide range of agencies within the Homelessness Forum. We will continue to arrange accommodation for any known rough sleeper who is known to a relevant agency and who seeks help for the duration of any sub-zero night time temperatures and proactively engage with them to identify more suitable accommodation, such as supported housing thereafter.

In a supplementary question Councillor Driver asked whether more people should be consulted when calculating the number of homeless people as she suggested the figure could be much higher if they consulted with the night-time pastors or the Salvation Army.

In response, the Cabinet Member indicated that the figure was derived from a count of the homeless on one specific evening and she was satisfied that it reflected the position on that day. However she took the comments on board.

18.

Question from Councillor Robin MacDonald to Cabinet Member Sustainability, Councillor Roger Whyborn

Following the decision to charge more for garden waste and separate kitchen waste there is a movement by Local Partnership to create Community Composting schemes.

What part, if any, will the Council play in encouraging these schemes which are a direct result of the Council's decision and what are the revenue consequences if these schemes went ahead?

Response from Cabinet Member Sustainability

The principle of Composting is supported by the Council, whether that be in home composters or Community Composting schemes; indeed the Council supports sales of home composters at subsidised prices. No approaches have been made to the Borough Council for local Community Composting schemes, and it is not possible to estimate the revenue effects of these schemes. However, the Gloucestershire Waste Partnership supports community composting schemes and small grants may be available to fund set up costs. The County Council, as the waste Disposal Authority, pay recycling credits to accredited schemes to assist with ongoing funding.

In a supplementary question, Councillor MacDonald whether the Cabinet Member’s response applied to all the various schemes that might arise from the decision?

In response the Cabinet Member advised that the council would support home composting in general terms however he advised that there were certain products that cannot be satisfactorily composted at home and officers could provide details. He confirmed that there was no charge for kitchen waste.

19.

Question from Councillor Jacky Fletcher to Cabinet Member Built Environment, Councillor John Rawson

Following the request from Shire Hall to Cheltenham Borough Council to lift the restrictions which prevent bicycle users from cycling down the High Street and Promenade, may I ask that when considering this request the Cabinet bears in mind not only the some 25,000 registered disabled people but those others who because they are deaf, partially sighted and slow in movement. I think we all have no problem with the cyclists who act responsibility but it is those you see daily weaving in and out of the pedestrians as if they take precedent and unfortunately they are the majority. If you go down this path I am afraid accidents will happen. I am the CBC representative on the Pensioners' Forum and earlier this year concern was raised about the increase in cyclists on pavements and that the elderly and infirm were afraid of being knocked over by inconsiderate behaviour.

Response from Cabinet Member Built Environment

I hope Cllr Fletcher and the Council will forgive me for answering this question at some length, as I believe councillors deserve an explanation of the present situation, which they will only have read about in the local press.

It is not the County Council that has asked the Borough Council to look at the issue of permitting cyclists to ride in the pedestrianised areas of the town centre.  What appears to have happened is that the Borough Council asked the County Council to look at this some years ago.  The Borough Council’s view over a number of years has been that it is illogical and impractical to permit cycling in the Strand and Cambray Place but to ban it in the other pedestrianised areas.  This view is shared by the police, who find the present arrangements very difficult to enforce.

For some years, the proposal to allow cycling in pedestrianied areas where it is currently banned remained on the back burner.  Then, in September 2009, it was discussed at a meeting of the Multi Agency Focus Group for Cycling.  This is a body on which the Borough Council is represented, along with the County Council, Gloucestershire Highways and the police.  The group decided on an initiative to reduce anti-social cycling while also relaxing cycling restrictions around the Promenade and other identified areas in the Town Centre and Lower High Street.  Gloucestershire Highways was tasked with launching a safety audit and consultation exercise in preparation for a trial scheme to be introduced.

A few weeks ago, Gloucestershire Highways wrote to a number of organisations in the town to inform them that they were ready to proceed with this scheme. 

The current position, as I understand it, is that Gloucestershire Highways have started work on their safety audit but that they will still need to carry out a consultation exercise before bringing in a traffic order to allow cycling in the pedestrianised areas for a trial period.

Speaking personally, I am sympathetic to the trial, and do not share Cllr Fletcher’s view that a majority of cyclists behave irresponsibly.  However, I do agree with her that the safety and wellbeing of pedestrians, especially older people and disabled people, need to be taken fully into account. 

I am also concerned that it is several years since the issue was last discussed by the Borough Council.  It is important that the Council should be involved in the consultation process, and therefore I have asked for the issue to be considered by the Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

I believe the Council will want to clarify a number of issues in respect of the new traffic order.

First of all, I believe we will need to be satisfied that a sensible assessment of risk is made before the new traffic order is introduced.  This should follow a careful study of pedestrian and cyclist behaviour in the Strand, where cycling is already permitted, and other pedestrianised areas.

Secondly, I believe we will need to be satisfied that the police can and will take action against anti-social and dangerous cyclists in the pedestrian area.  Because cycling is permitted, that should clearly not mean that bad behaviour by cyclists is acceptable.

Thirdly, I believe the Borough Council would want to be involved in monitoring any experimental scheme, along with the police and Gloucestershire Highways, to ensure that it is working as intended.

Finally, can I refer to what Cllr Fletcher says about the problem of cyclists riding on the pavements.  This is a separate issue from cycling in the pedestrianised areas, which are generally very wide and capacious.  However, it is an issue which I would be very happy to take up with the police.

In a supplementary question, Councillor Fletcher advised that she had attended a recent meeting of the CBC forum and asked for the Cabinet Member’s assurance that the safety of pedestrians and disabled people would be paramount in the Civic Pride principles of design.

He referred to his previous answer and stated that the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be invited to give their views on this matter.