Board 190608

STATEMENT OF DECISIONS MADE AT A MEETING OF THE BOARD

HELD ON 19^TH JUNE 2008

PRESENT:

Councillor John Hammond (Leader of the Council – in the Chair)

Councillor Rachel Bailey (Portfolio Holder for Safer Communities)

Councillor David Brickhill (Portfolio Holder for Economic Development)

Councillor Graham Fenton (Portfolio Holder for Finance)

Councillor Bill McGinnis (Portfolio Holder for Leisure)

Councillor John Hatfield (Portfolio Holder for Human Resources)

Councillor Margaret Hollins (Portfolio Holder for Planning)

Councillor Margaret Simon (Portfolio Holder for Customers)

Councillor Jacquie Weatherill (Portfolio Holder for the Local Environment)

Councillor Ray Westwood (Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods)

NON-BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:

Councillors D J Cannon and M Grant

OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE:

Jennifer Cross (Executive Director, Treasury and Corporate Support)

Carol Jones (Democratic Services Officer)

Su Turner (Strategic Manager, Community)

Paul Urwin (Planning / Policy)

Rachel Welch (Strategic Manager, Organisation)

NOTE: The following Decisions should be read in conjunction with the corresponding reports which accompanied the Board Agenda issued on 10^th June 2008 and additional report issued on 16^th June 2008. The agenda and reports are available on the Council’s Internet Website.

http://www.crewe-nantwich.gov.uk/your_council/council_and_committees/committee_agenda-minutes_08-09.aspx

1. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors David Brickhill and Margaret Simon each declared a personal interest in agenda item Nos. 5 (Cheshire Local Area Agreement – 2008-2011), 10 (Cheshire County Council – Registrar’s Office) and additional item 15 (Partial Review of Regional Spatial Strategy Options for the North-West) on the basis of their County Council membership.

No other Member made any declaration of interest in any item of business on the agenda.

2. BOARD DECISIONS – 17^TH APRIL 2008

The Board received the Statement of Decisions made at a meeting held on 17^th April 2008. Click here to view

3. RECONSIDERATION OF DECISIONS

No decisions had been referred back to the Board for reconsideration.

4. CONSIDERATION OF SCRUTINY COMMITTEE COMMENTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS

The Scrutiny Committees had been invited to comment on Board reports. There were no comments or recommendations on this occasion.

5. CHESHIRE LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT

The Board considered the report of Councillor Ray Westwood, Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods.

The report up-dated the Board on the Cheshire Local Area Agreement (LAA) 2008-2011.

Work had been undertaken on the development of a short-term (nine-month) Local Agreement for Cheshire and a draft list of indicators had been presented to the Board in March 2008. This had been carried out in the light of the Government’s Implementation Guidance for Local Authorities affected by LGR.

A single LAA had been negotiated with the County Council covering the existing geographical area for one-year. With effect from April 2009, each of the new unitaries (Cheshire East and Cheshire West & Chester) would have a separate two-year LAA. It was noted that the document presented was severable, and the Board was invited to approve it, on the understanding that it be separated for Cheshire East from 1^st April 2009.

The Strategic Manager clarified a number of issues in respect of the improvement targets and reported amendments to some of the figures.

DECISION:

That the Cheshire Local Area Agreement 2008-2011, as amended at the meeting, be agreed, on the understanding that it be separated for Cheshire East from 1^st April 2009.

Alternative Options:

None considered.

Reasons for the Decision:

(a) The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 places a statutory requirement on the Local Authority to develop a Local Area Agreement and also places duties on named partners to co-operate with the authority. Crewe & Nantwich Borough Council is a member of the Communities of Cheshire Partnership and the Cheshire Governance Board and has been involved in all stages of the development of the Agreement.

(b) The Government’s Implementation Guidance for Local Authorites affected by LGR states that for split County unitaries –

o A single LAA is negotiated with the County covering the existing geographical area for one year.

o From 2009-2010 each new unitary will have a separate two-year LAA.

(c) The LAA will assist public services to become more responsive to community needs and develop sustainable communities.

6. YOUTH PROVISION – CAPITAL FUNDING

The Board considered the report of Councillor Ray Westwood, Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods.

In 2006/2007, Council approved capital funding (£200,000) for the development of a Cyber Café and youth facility at Nova Court, Crewe. The scheme at Nova Court, Crewe did not come to fruition, and the report of the Portfolio Holder made recommendations for the reallocation of the £200,000 capital funding on youth facilities.

DECISION:

(A) That the reallocation of capital funding for the projects within the St John’s and Grosvenor Wards, as described in the report be approved, in principle; and

(B) That a further report be submitted to the August Board meeting with detailed proposals for the projects.

Alternative Option:

Allocation of the funding to alternative projects.

Reasons for the Decision:

(a) The projects are located within the regeneration areas in Crewe and will promote higher levels of engagement with the community and suitable diversionary activities which will assist in the reduction of crime and disorder.

(b) The intended outcomes contribute towards the Council’s Corporate Objectives.

7. CREWE AND NANTWICH HOMELESSNESS STRATEGY – 2008-2009

The Board considered the report of Councillor Margaret Hollins, Portfolio Holder for Planning.

The current Homelessness Strategy would expire on 31^st July 2008 and there was a statutory requirement for a further strategy to be adopted in its place to take effect from 1^st August 2008. The report included a copy of the draft revised Homelessness Strategy for Board approval.

DECISION:

That the Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council Homelessness Strategy 2008-2009 be approved and adopted with effect from 1^st August 2008.

Alternative Options:

None considered.

Reasons for the Decision:

(a) Failure to adopt the Homelessness Strategy will represent a failure to comply with the Homelessness Act 2002, which requires every local authority to develop a homelessness strategy.

(b) The first Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council Homelessness Strategy 2003-2008 expires on 31^st July 2008 and requires replacement from 1^st August 2008.

(c) The Strategy will aim to prevent homelessness and ensure that the Housing Options Service works with households to ensure that homelessness is prevented, or that other appropriate and sustainable accommodation is provided.

(d) The adoption of the Strategy will continue to aid the reduction of crime and disorder by reducing the number of “rough sleepers” in the borough.

8. SURVEY RESULTS: QUALITY-OF-LIFE AND GENERAL USER-SATISFACTION

The Board considered the report of Councillor Margaret Simon, Portfolio Holder for Customers.

The report outlined the key findings and priorities for the Quality-of-Life Survey 2007/2008 and General User Satisfaction Survey 2006/2007.

DECISION:

(A) That the findings of the Quality-of-Life survey be noted and considered in future priority setting;

(B) That the findings of both surveys be made available for public interest through the Council’s website;

(C) That the Consultation Manager communicate the findings to other departments, Councillors and staff, as appropriate; and

(D) That the Consultation Manager communicate the findings to the Citizens’ Panel through the use of the consultation newsletter.

Alternative Options:

Alternative means of communicating the results to members of the public, staff and Councillors could have been suggested.

Reasons for the Decision:

(a) The consultation results will assist in informing future priority setting and the preparation of strategies and will assist in improving the delivery of services to local people.

(b) It is important that members of the public involved in consultation are informed of the results and are able to see improvements in service. If not, they will become disenchanted with the consultation process and the authority will lose credibility.

9. BVPIs AND LPIs OUT-TURN PERFORMANCE FOR 2007/2008

The Board received for information, the report of Councillor John Hatfield, Portfolio Holder for Human Resources. The report summarised the performance activity on the key basket of performance indicators during the financial year 2007/2008.

DECISION:

That, in view of the declining performance on BVPI.12 (Sickness Absence), the Organisation Scrutiny Committee be asked to undertake a review to try to establish the reasons for the decline.

Alternative Options:

None considered.

Reasons for the Decision

(a) Performance on this indicator had reduced from 8.25 days (in 2006/2007) to 10.63 days for the same period in 2007/2008, placing the authority in the third quartile.

(b) The Organisation Scrutiny Committee is the appropriate Committee to review this item.

10. CHESHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL – REGISTRAR’S OFFICE, CREWE

The Board considered the report of Councillor David Brickhill, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development.

On 6^th July 2007, the Borough Council made a Compulsory Purchase Order in respect of the area required by the Modus scheme for the Crewe Town Centre re-development. The Order was subject to a number of objections which were heard at a Public Inquiry held in March 2008. One of those objections had been made by Cheshire County Council which had concerns about the relocation of the Registrar’s Office after the demolition of Delamere House. In an attempt to overcome that objection, the Borough Council’s Chief Executive had entered into an exchange of correspondence with the Chief Executive of Cheshire County Council.

In the event of the Compulsory Purchase Order being confirmed, Delamere House would be demolished and the Registrar’s Office would need to be relocated. The Board was asked to endorse the approach adopted by the Chief Executive to achieve continuity of the registrar’s service.

DECISION:

That the Board endorse the contents of the letter of 3^rd March 2008 sent by the Chief Executive (Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council) to the Chief Executive (Cheshire County Council).

Alternative Option:

To decline to endorse the Chief Executive’s approach.

Reasons for the Decision:

(a) Endorsing the Chief Executive’s approach ensures that the two Councils work together to provide for the continuity of the Registrar’s function.

(b) Failure to endorse the Chief Executive’s action could result in not providing the County Council without the reassurance it sought.

11. CORPORATE EQUALITY PLAN – 2008-2011

The Board considered the report of Councillor Margaret Simon, Portfolio Holder for Customers.

The Comprehensive Equality and Diversity Policy had been adopted by Council on 10^th October 2007. The Corporate Equality Plan was the mechanism by which the aims of the Policy could be delivered.

DECISION:

That the Corporate Equality Plan 2008-2011 be approved.

Alternative Options:

To amend or reject the Corporate Equality Plan.

Reason for the Decision:

Under the Equality Standard for Local Government, the Council is required to cover the six areas listed in the report and failure to approve the Plan means that the Council would not meet its statutory requirements.

12. JOINT REPORT OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS (DIRECT SERVICES) AND (TREASURY AND CORPORATE SUPPORT) (FOR INFORMATION)

In accordance with Contract Regulations, the Executive Directors, Direct Services and Treasury and Corporate Support, reported on tenders which had recently been invited and received.

13. PARTIAL REVIEW OF THE REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY OPTIONS FOR THE NORTH-WEST

This item had not originally been included on the published agenda; the Chair of the Board accepted it as an urgent item.

The Board considered the report of Councillor Margaret Hollins, Portfolio Holder for Planning.

At the launch of the consultation on the Partial Review of the Regional Spatial Strategy Options for the North-West, indications were that it would take place from June to September 2008. The North-West Regional Association changed the timetable in March 2008, but did not convey this information to all those involved. The consultation period had been revised and would conclude on 30^th June 2008.

The Board was asked to delegate authority to the Strategic Manager (Planning and Development) in consultation with the Portfolio Holder, to respond to the consultation.

DECISION:

(A) That authority be granted to the Strategic Manager (Planning and Development) in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, to respond to the consultation on the Partial Review of the Regional Spatial Strategy Options for the North-West by 30^th June 2008 on behalf of the Council; and

(B) That the North-West Regional Assembly be informed of the Board’s disappointment at the reduction in the consultation period which would not allow all stakeholders sufficient time to give due consideration to the issues and options.

Alternative Options:

None considered.

Reason for the Decision:

There is a requirement to respond to the consultation by the 30^th June 2008.

14. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

RESOLVED: That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item pursuant to Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Act.

(Note: At this point in the proceedings, Jennifer Cross, Su Turner and Paul Urwin withdrew from the meeting.)

15. SENIOR MANAGER SALARIES – MARKET TESTING (PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2)

The Board considered the report of Councillor John Hatfield, Portfolio Holder for Human Resources.

As part of the single-status job evaluation exercise, the Council agreed to review the salary levels of the Senior Managers (Hay) evaluated group on an annual basis. This market-testing exercise was to identify and respond appropriately to shifts in sector pay levels and market trends. A review had been carried out in April 2008 and the Board was asked to approve the proposed changes.

DECISION:

That the recommended salary levels for the Senior Manager group identified in the report, be approved, with effect from 1^st April 2008.