Agenda and minutes

Councillor Mannion declared a personal interest in Minute No. 150 (Eastwood and Springwell Gardens Community Participatory Budget Pilot) on the grounds that his wife was a volunteer with GROW, one of the invited bids.

There were no questions from members of the public or the press.

Consideration was given to a report presented by Julie Slatter, Head of Policy and Performance, which set out the current position in relation to proposals for the budget setting process for 2009/10 and the development of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy.  A number of efficiency policy options have now been identified which highlighted potential areas for efficiencies. These were to be considered as part of agreeing the revenue budget for 2009/10 and updating the Medium Term Financial Strategy.

Reference was made to the outturn position and the current net revenue cash limited budget for Chief Executive’s Directorate for 2008/09.  A summary was provided on the projected revenue outturn position for the Chief Executive’s Directorate (as at the end of November 2008).

Budget pressures for 2008/09 included:-

·              Job Evaluation.

·              Legal Services and the cost of Locums.

·              Northgate System Upgrade.

·              Rotherham Newspaper.

·              Transport Fleet.

The Directorate intended to manage these pressures through tight vacancy management and savings on non staff budgets.

As part of the budget process a target saving requirement for the Chief Executive’s Directorate was identified at £163k.  The report set out in detail the policy option savings proposed for the Directorate over a three year period and the current saving proposals.

The Scrutiny Panel noted the budget pressures in the report and sought and received further information on the recruitment advertising model and the review into working schedules for the transport fleet to keep non-contractual overtime to a minimum.

Reference was made to the impact on proposed actions, specifically those relating to the reduction in the Quality of Life Survey budget and the reduction in the Elections budget and it was noted that these were both one-off efficiency savings for 2009/10 only.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the report be received.

(2)  That the current potential efficiencies for the Chief Executive’s Department, proposed for setting the 2009/10 revenue budget and updating of the Medium Term Financial Strategy, be noted.

Carole Smith, Strategic Property Manager, Asset Management, and Paul Walsh, Programme Manager, Neighbourhood Investment Service, gave a presentation on Community Assets and Community Asset Management Update.

The presentation drew specific attention to:-

·              The Background Leading to the Review of Community Assets.

·              The Quirk Review – Remit.

·              The Quirk Review – Local Authority Recommendations.

·              Rotherham’s Approach.

·              Community Planning.

·              Asset Reviews Initiated.

·              Depot Review.

·              Maltby Community Buildings Review – Work in Progress.

·              Community Buildings Review of Occupancy – Work in Progress.

·              Key Issues.

·              Next Steps.

A discussion and a question and answer session ensued and the following issues were raised and subsequently clarified:-

-                 Community planning process and when it breaks down like at Hellaby where residents wanted to retain their community building.

-                 Specific use of community buildings within a sheltered housing complex.

-                 Reasons and concerns behind the review of community buildings and appropriate disposal if buildings were considered surplus to requirements.

-                 Procedure for the sale of land and buildings and the allocation of the proceeds of sale.

-                 Refurbishment of buildings and the enhancement of afteruse.

-                 Community consultation and the extension of network for the working group to involve harder to reach groups of people.

-                 Involvement of the community and voluntary sector in the review.

-                 Funding for refurbishments to commercial properties.

-                 Purpose of the review and opportunities to consolidate some community users into one building in order to promote better functionality.

-                 Input in the community asset review by Ward and Parish Councillors.

-                 Reporting structure for the review through the Regeneration and Asset Board.

-                 Responsibility for the safety of buildings declared surplus to requirements prior to their disposal.

-                 Production of Asset Management Plans to support Community Plans and the link with the Regeneration and Asset Board.

Resolved:-  (1)  That Carole Smith and Paul Walsh be thanked for their informative presentation.

(2)  That this Scrutiny Panel be updated in six months time on the progress of the Community Asset Audit/Community Asset Management Plan.

Consideration was given to a report presented by Gail Wilcock, Community Cohesion Officer, which detailed the review on performance and progress for Quarter three (October – December, 2008).

Particular reference was made in the report to:-

·              Progress since the Community Cohesion Officer had been appointed.

·              Community tension monitoring.

·              Partnership Group (A.C.T.) and the numbers of agencies involved.

·              Benefits of partnership working.

·              Council’s draft policy on Hate Crime.

·              Hate crime and community tension database and the benefits this provides.

·              Potential for increased reporting and recording.

·              Main challenges facing the Cohesion Service.

·              Recruitment to independent advisory groups.

·              Sharing of information about incidents.

·              Proposals for Community Tension Monitoring Reports.

·              Key activities for the future.

·              Statistics for Racial incidents for October, November and December.

·              Total Racial Incidents to Date.

·              Funding for the Community Cohesion Service.

·              Risks to public wellbeing and community harmony.

·              Continuation of the service and benefits.

A discussion and a question and answer session ensued and the following issues were raised and subsequently clarified:-

-                 Awareness raising about the Community Cohesion Service.

-                 Community tensions in political arenas.

-                 Hot spot tension areas in the Rotherham borough.

-                 Information sharing and work on race and equality in schools with a less diverse culture.

-                 Tackling racism through sport.

-                 Hate as a basic human emotion.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the review and progress made since the introduction of the revised service be noted.

(2)  That the need to support the future funding of the Community Cohesion Service beyond 31st March, 2009 be noted.

(3)  That an update on the service be submitted to the themed Scrutiny Panel meeting in March, 2009.

Consideration was given to a report presented by Chris Edwards, Deputy Neighbourhood Manager, which detailed how the Eastwood and Springwell Gardens Neighbourhood Management Pathfinder (NMP) Community Cohesion Sub Group delivered a Community Participatory Budget Pilot (Dragons Den) event on 18th October, 2008.

The Pilot was funded by the Safer Rotherham Partnership which had invited bids for projects supporting one or more of seven priorities which included Community Cohesion and Resilience. 

The event was formally opened by Councillor Ali and saw presentations by Chinese, Indian and Pakistani led organisations active across the borough, Rotherham United and by community and voluntary groups, including a mixed cultural group of young people, from Eastwood and SpringwellGardens.  Proposals included sports activities, celebrations and health and education.

There were twelve applications to the Pilot (total value £28,543) which were reviewed by the Community Cohesion Sub-Group.  Three were found to be ineligible and another to duplicate work already funded by the NMP.  The remaining eight (total value £17,387) were invited to make four minute presentations, which the community would then have the chance to ask questions before scoring them on a scale of 1 to 5.

Whilst the total value of projects was now within the approved sum (£20,000) the Safer Rotherham Partnership had asked for a saving to be made so an element of competition remained.

Fifty-six people signed the attendance sheet and twenty-eight registered to vote.  People could vote if they:-

·              Had an Eastwood and Springwell Gardens address and post code.

·              Were 14+ -  those under 21 were asked to bring proof of age.

·              Were prepared to stay and hear all of the presentations and vote on all of the proposals.

There was immediate added value arising from the networking that took place between diverse groups and individuals present with commitments made to work together.  The event itself made a clear contribution to community cohesion in Eastwood and SpringwellGardens and Rotherham.

Further information was provided on the membership of the Community Cohesion Sub-Group and feedback provided on the success of the event, which had also led to a burst of activity within the Eastwood and SpringwellGardens area.

Questions raised about the funding of the projects and the amount left over were answered and an explanation given on the level of activity and impact of the projects in the areas.

The general feeling of the Scrutiny Panel was that communities felt involved with events such as this and they should be encouraged as this Dragons’ Den event was clearly a success.

Resolved:-  That Chris Edwards be thanked for his informative report.

(2)  That the contents of this report and the positive outcome of the Pilot be noted.

(3)  That this Scrutiny Panel request that the appropriate Cabinet Member present a report to them before the end of the municipal year detailing the management plan for undertaking participatory budgeting across the borough.

Consideration was given to a report presented by Chris Edwards, Deputy Neighbourhood Manager, and Bob Holt, Neighbourhood Governance Development Worker, which gave an update on the progress made to date.

An interim evaluation report had been prepared to support the effective learning from this pilot project with an Executive Summary attached as an appendix to this report.  The evaluation had been carried out early in the life of the forum, but already some key messages were emerging.  There would also be a further evaluation of the project in March, 2009, which would contain final recommendations for partners and key lessons for the future of Eastwood and Springwell United.

The Neighbourhood Management Pathfinder had played an important role in supporting the development of Eastwood and Springwell United.  Consideration was currently being given about how this support continued once the Neighbourhood Management Pathfinder closed in March,, 2009.

The Executive Summary highlighted:-

·              The broad based and inclusive neighbourhood forum in Eastwood and SpringwellGardens.

·              The plans, based on open meetings four times a year supported by a planning group and potential working groups around particular topics.

·              Support from the Neighbourhood Management Pathfinder (NMP).

·              The forum, now called Eastwood and Springwell United (ESU).

·              A brief survey of residents views using questions based on national.

·              Engagement with the community.

·              Planned capacity building activities including training, networking and visits to other areas.

·              Cohesion through Eastwood and Springwell United bringing people together across community and geographical boundaries.

·              Developing a mechanism for all the voices of this neighbourhood to be heard.

·              Sustainability of the forum.

·              Transferring the outcomes of the consultation and research.

·              Final recommendations following the evaluation of the Pilot Project.

It was noted that work was taking place with GROW in trying to address some issues that had arisen primarily around facilities at the new Rotherham Leisure Complex relating to all women sessions, same sex changing facilities, all frosted glass around the pool area and all male lifeguards.

Further information was provided on the developments of the forum, communication and relationship building in the community, engagement and the creation of voice opportunities,

A question and answer session ensued and the following issues were raised and clarified:-

-                 If there were any plans to extend this kind of pilot into other areas of Rotherham.

-                 Evaluation of the project and its sustainability.

Resolved:-  That Bob Holt and Chris Edwards be thanked for their informative report.

(2)  That the contents of this report and the executive summary of the interim evaluation be noted.

Resolved:-  That the minutes of the meeting of the Democratic Renewal Scrutiny Panel held on 4^th December, 2008 be approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Member for Communities and Involvement held on 15^th December, 2008.

Resolved:-  That the contents of the minutes be noted.

Consideration was given to the minutes of a meeting of the Members’ Training and Development Panel held on 18^th December, 2008.

Resolved:-  That the contents of the minutes be noted.