CITY BOARD 26 November 2001

(6pm – 9.15pm)

PRESENT: Councillor Howarth (Chair), Councillors Bagnall, Bradnack, Durrant, Harrison, Knowles, Nimmo-Smith, Reed, C.Rosenstiel, Slatter, Smart, and Stuart.

FOR ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL

01/A/72 REVENUE BUDGETS 2001/02 (REVISED), 2002/03 (ESTIMATES) AND CAPITAL BIDS

See also 01/a/82 which reports in more detail decisions taken on City Board Budgets and the General Fund overview.

The Board noted that the Council Tax base is a key element in determining the actual level of Council Tax to be set for 2002/03. The base reflects the number of properties in the City expressed as an equivalent number of Band D properties using the relative weightings for each band. This also needs to take account of single occupiers and exempt properties, as well as including a deduction for assumed non-collection.

For the current financial year a collection rate of 98% had been agreed. The Board noted that the recommendation of the Director of Finance was that this should be continued into 2002/03; although there are some underlying pressures on recovery. Any sums which are received above that level will effectively be paid back to Council Tax payers in future years through the Collection Fund.

The provisional figure for the Tax base is 35,943. The final Tax base is based on figures as at 1 December; and will be updated as necessary so that a formal recommendation of the appropriate figure can be made to Council on 6 December.

The Board also considered a number of Capital Bids for immediate inclusion in the Capital Plan:

1) Environment Committee’s bid for £750,000 for the installation of pay on foot systems at the car parks, £300,000 to be funded from Repair & Renewal funds and £450,000 from reserves subject to a satisfactory capital appraisal.

2) The Board’s bid to use £140,000 of earmarked Repair and Renewals Fund for the FMS software upgrade project.

3) City Services’ / DSMB’s bid for £1,067,500, for the replacement of life expired vehicles and equipment funded from earmarked Repair & Renewal Fund.

4) The Property & Administration Committee’s bids for:-

£39,500 of Repairs & Renewals funds for a replacement server for the Revenues section.

£42,000 for the refurbishment of the ground floor of Hobson House to relocate the Parks & Recreation Team. The capital plan already includes £100,000 for office relocation and this project will be funded from that budget.

The Board approved the Project Appraisals appended to the report of the Director of Finance for the FMS upgrade and City Services’ bid for life expired vehicles and equipment.

Council is recommended (by 7 votes to 0)

1) To approve a Council Tax Base of 35,943 (subject to confirmation by the Director of Finance as the figure on 1 December) based on a 98% collection rate.

2) Approve the use of £50,000 from Reserves (in 2001/02) for a one-off bid toward the costs associated with flooding in the city around 21 October 2001.

3) To include in the Capital Plan:

· Environment Committee’s bid for £750,000 for the installation of pay on foot systems at the car parks, £300,000 to be funded from Repair & Renewal funds and £450,000 from reserves subject to a satisfactory capital appraisal. (Replacing the figure currently in the Capital Plan which relates to the Grafton Centre only).

· The Board’s bid to use £140,000 of earmarked Repair and Renewals Fund for the FMS software upgrade project.

· City Services’ / DSMB’s bid for £1,067,500, for the replacement of life expired vehicles and equipment funded from earmarked Repair & Renewal Fund.

· The Property & Administration Committee’s bids for:

£39,500 of Repairs & Renewals funds for a replacement server for the Revenues section.

£42,000 for the refurbishment of the ground floor of Hobson House to relocate the Parks & Recreation Team. The capital plan already includes £100,000 for office relocation and this project will be funded from that budget.

CITY BOARD 26 November 2001

(6pm – 9.15pm)

PRESENT: Councillor Howarth (Chair), Councillors Bagnall, Bradnack, Durrant, Harrison, Knowles, Nimmo-Smith, Reed, C.Rosenstiel, Slatter, Smart and Stuart.

FOR INFORMATION OF THE COUNCIL

01/a/73 MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 September were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

01/a/74 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

There were no apologies.

01/a/75 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

The following Code of Conduct (non-pecuniary) interests were declared:

01/a/80 Councillor Reed as an employee of the TUC and member of T&GWU.

01/a/87 Councillor Howarth as a work colleague of an individual undertaking consultancy work for the Council.

01/a/76 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

See under 01/a/83.

01/a/77 UPGRADE OF THE COUNCIL’S FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

The Board noted a report outlining the need for the Council to upgrade the existing Financial Management System (FMS) to ensure support services are able to continue to provide a relevant, reliable, efficient and flexible service in response to the changing requirements of front line services. A project appraisal was appended to the report.

Resolved

To approve the addition to the Council’s Capital Plan, of a project to upgrade the Council’s Financial Management System, including the replacement of the current FMS server, the work to be funded from Repair & Renewals Funds set aside for this purpose.

01/a/78 NATIONAL LAND AND PROPERTY GAZETTEER

The Board noted a report reviewing the position the Council had reached with the implementation of the Local Land and Property Gazetteer, its relationship with other national and local projects and assessing its resourcing and how this might move forward.

Resolved

a) To approve a bid for £25,000 as part of the current budget round for the creation of a new post to act as Custodian for the Local Land and Property Gazetteer.

b) To approve the allocation of £13,000 from the Technology Investment Fund for the upgrade of the Gazetteer Software Tools.

c) To approve a revenue bid of £1,200 for Gazetteer tools software maintenance and licensing.

01/a/79 CORPORATE MARKETING

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0)

To agree the creation of a corporate marketing post subject to the additional funding required being realised from the restructure of the new Arts and Entertainments section.

01/a/80 TRADE UNION FACILITY AGREEMENT

The Board noted the report of the Head of Personnel, the written submissions of GMB and Unison and the notes of the Joint Staff Employer Forum which had considered the matter at its meeting on 15 November.

The Chair proposed an amendment to the first recommendation of the Joint Staff Employer Forum:

“To agree for 2002/03 funding should continue on the basis of one full-time post for GMB and one half-time post for Unison, and that the unions be encouraged to open negotiations with officers about the adoption of a convenorship system, on the basis of either 1 or 1.5 full time equivalents.”

Councillors Bagnall and Reed were concerned that maintaining only part-time funding for Unison would affect job evaluation and Best Value Reviews in 2002/03.

The Chair referred to the table of analysis by activity and took the view that members should look at the overall workload, which indicated more time spent on job evaluation but less on trade union administration. He stated that the Liberal Democrat Group maintained that one and a half posts was the maximum that should be funded. In addition it was not considered acceptable to move annually between the two unions the full-time and half-time positions and that was one factor behind the view that the convenor proposal should be pursued.

The amendment was carried by 8 votes to 0.

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0)

a) To agree for 2002/03 funding should continue on the basis of one full-time post for GMB and one half-time post for Unison, and that the unions be encouraged to open negotiations with officers about the adoption of a convenorship system, on the basis of either 1 or 1.5 full time equivalents.

b) To explore with Unison the proposal to train and develop stewards to an accredited competency.

01/a/81 BUDGET CONSULTATION

The Board received a report detailing the results of the first stage consultation on the public’s priority areas for spending in 2002/03 and their views on the level of Council Tax to be levied.

In response to a question from Councillor Bagnall, the Chair stated that the second stage consultation would primarily be used to assist members in making decisions on the Priority Policy Fund and PDP Exit Fund which were both oversubscribed.

The Chair proposed that the two lists of questions which had been sent to members in advance of the meeting be treated as an amendment to recommendation 2.3 as detailed in the report. List 1 covered waste and transport issues (the two priority areas from stage 1); List 2 other areas raised.

The amendment was carried by 7 votes to 0.

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0)

a) To use the results of the first phase consultation to inform decisions on the Council’s budget.

b) To agree to proceed with a second phase of consultation on more specific spending issues.

c) To agree to consult on the basis of the list of questions as referred to above.

01/a/82 REVENUE BUDGETS 2001/02 (REVISED), 2002/03 (ESTIMATES) AND CAPITAL BIDS

See also 01/A/72.

In updating the report, the Director of Finance advised the Board that the Housing & Health Committee at its meeting on 21 November had agreed to amend its General Fund budget estimates which meant it would be able to meet its Cash Limit. The Board also noted that the Housing Revenue Account report was appended for information; recommendations a)-c) were not applicable as Housing & Health Committee had delegated authority to determine that budget, d) referred to Capital Plan items subsumed in the main budget report.

The Chair highlighted recommendations 2.2 (d) and (e). The current instruction from Board to committees to spend at or below cash limit remained. Any amendments following the Government settlement would be delegated to the Director of Finance in consultation with the Chair and Spokes.

The Chair advised members that in addition to the reference to Support Services in the report (paragraph12.17), the Liberal Democrat Group was not inclined to accept bids other than from the Reception & Telephone Service at this stage. This would have an effect on the other services and officers had been requested to report back in detail next cycle.

In response to a question from Councillor Stuart regarding the charges for TOPS activities (under the Community Development & Leisure budget), the Chair stated that officers would be asked to look at this proposal again before final budgets next cycle.

Resolved (by 7 votes to 0)

City Board services

a) To approve the revised budget for 2001/02.

b) To agree savings proposals and revenue bids, as set out in Appendix C of the report, in the light of the requirements of the cash limit and the available funding sources.

c) To approve the revised cash limit as shown in Appendix D of the report.

d) To approve the budget for 2002/03 [paragraph 5 and Appendix A of the report refers].

e) To agree at this stage all PPF bids should be put forward for consideration in the January cycle.

General Fund overview

a) To approve the additional use of £55,000 from Reserves for the following one-off bids in 2001/2002:

a. Litter Bins £10,000

b. (by 7 votes to 5) Urban expansion survey, additional £20,000

c. Railway Station area study £25,000 (Total cost £50,000, seeking external part funding)

b) To approve the additional use of £29,000 from Reserves for the following bids for 2002/03 ongoing:

Local Land and Property Gazeteer Custodian £25,000; and

Sponsorship of Business Excellence Award £4,000.

c) To approve the overall position of the 2001/02 revised budget.

d) To confirm that the original instruction (from July 2001) that all committees should budget to spend at or below their cash limit still stands.

e) To approve the delegation of any necessary revisions to the current committee cash limits and instructions required, following the announcement of the Government settlement to the Director of Finance in consultation with the Chair and Spokes of City Board.

f) To approve the overall base budget for 2002/03.

g) To request the Director of Finance on 15 January 2002 to estimate the level of the Council Tax Collection Fund based on the position as at 31 March 2002.

It is currently estimated that the Poll Tax Collection Fund will have a surplus of £100,000 at 31 March 2002 and that the Council Tax Collection Fund will be in a breakeven position, giving an overall surplus of £100,000 to be taken into account in setting the City’s council tax for 2002/03.

01/a/83 MOBILE TELEPHONE MASTS SEMINAR - 31 OCTOBER: PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS

In addition to the report, the Board had received written submissions from the Federation of the Electronics Industry (FEI), One to One, Cambridge Residents Against Masts (CRAM) and Powerwatch. In addition were the results of a survey undertaken by Electromagnetic Surveys Ltd. at Kingsway on 15 November.

Under the public speaking procedure, the Board heard from Ms A Ralinovski, Chair of CRAM; Mr G Cooper, from Smith Woolley Telecom on behalf of Hutchinson 3G Telecom; and Mr B Herbert of Gough Way Residents’ Association.

Mr Cooper referred to the preparatory work undertaken by his client which had no current coverage in the Cambridge area and how in locating sites telecom companies would follow in strict order (i) shared facilities on masts or rooftops; (ii) a new base but on an existing structure; and (iii) a green field site but ensuring any impact was minimised. He also referred to the new Code of Practice for the industry (expected from DTLR next spring) which could have an impact on any work done by the local authority in advance.

Ms Ralinovski commended the Council’s approach to the seminar and the recommendations of the Panel. In particular, she highlighted the need to educate citizens about the issues; that Government should be lobbied to treat phone masts as a matter of health and safety and not just planning; and the comments from Powerwatch that the Council consider supplementary planning guidance requiring base stations to operate at the lowest possible level of RF power output. Ms Ralinovski requested that any drafting work on the action plan be subject to the widest possible consultation.

Mr Herbert asked how the Council would measure the health risks of future applications and guarantee that the lowest power outputs were being maintained. Councillor Slatter, speaking as a member of the Panel, stated that the aspiration had been that at some point in the future a legal framework could exist for monitoring and enforcement similar to that of an Environmental Health Officer.

Dealing with the report, members were advised that it had been sent in draft to the Panel for comment and, in final version, to all participants and those that completed evaluation forms on the day.

The Chair referred to the survey at Kingsway flats which indicated that the telecom industry could work within the 3V/m standard.

Members noted that further work was required with the telecom industry, partners and interested parties to produce an Action Plan for consideration at City Board on 16 April 2002. It was agreed that the officers should investigate with the Local Government Association how local authorities shared information on this subject and to be mindful of the expected revised Code of Practice from DTLR next spring.

Resolved –

a) To thank the Panel for its work and agree, in principle, the recommendations of the Panel as set out in Section 5 of the report.

b) To instruct officers to consult with Council tenants, the County Council, other public organisations, universities and mobile phone companies, to produce a detailed and costed draft action plan showing how the recommendations of the Panel can be delivered together with any resource implications for the Council.

c) That the draft action plan be reported, for comment, to service committees in March 2002 and to City Board on 16 April 2002 for approval.

d) That, subject to legal constraints, the Panel’s recommendations 5.10 and 5.11 be adopted in the interim period and reviewed when the draft action plan is presented in April 2002. Where legal constraints prevent changes, Chair and Spokes of City Board to be consulted.

01/a/84 CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP POLICY

The Board noted a report which proposed a Council-wide policy guide for officers seeking sponsorship.

In response to suggestions from Councillor Reed, the Board agreed that any decision required relating to “…a sponsor who promotes or is involved in tobacco, pornography, weaponry, chat lines, escort agencies, gambling or similar activities” (extracted from para 2.3.3) should be taken at Director level irrespective of level of sponsorship. The Director of Central Services also undertook to ensure that no gift fell into a gap between the sponsorship policy and the gift and hospitality register (para 5 refers).

The Board agreed to Councillor Stuart’s suggestion that para. 6.1 ‘Evaluating the sponsor’ should be amended to state that all sponsors are sent a standard form.

Resolved

That the Policy attached to the report be agreed, subject to the amendments above.

01/a/85 BEST VALUE – AN UPDATE AND REVISION TO THE REVIEW PROGRAMME

Resolved -

To agree the change to the 2002/03 review programme and the revisions to the corporate processes for Best Value.

01/a/86 CORPORATE CONSULTATION PROGRAMME – COUNTY WIDE PROCUREMENT

Resolved -

a) That officers negotiate with the contractors listed below with a view to agreeing an extension to the three existing corporate consultation contracts, up to a maximum of 1 year.

Citizens’ Survey contract (MRUK Ltd.)

Best Value Framework Contract (BMG Ltd.)

Citizens’ Panel Contract (BMG Ltd.)

b) That officers negotiate with officers from the County Council and other Cambridgeshire District Councils with a view to drawing up proposals for a joint consultation procurement contract. Such proposals to be agreed by City Board (or the relevant portfolio holder) in the new year prior to a joint tender being accepted.

c) That, if negotiations with officers from the County Council and other Cambridgeshire District Councils do not produce proposals which are beneficial to this Council, members instruct officers to proceed with tendering 2 new consultation contracts as set out in the report to City Board on 9 July 2001.

01/a/87 IMPLEMENTING THE CAMBRIDGE SUB-REGIONAL STRATEGY

The Board noted a report detailing the work undertaken with councils in the sub-region and other key players on implementing the Cambridge sub-regional strategy. The purpose of the work was to develop a joint approach to the implementation of the very large scale changes which will be set out in the Structure Plan.

The report identified key areas where concerted local effort and support from government will be needed:-

a) Accelerating the planning process

b) A strategic sub-regional approach to section 106 agreements

c) Establishing a stakeholder partnership

d) Finding the funding

e) Delivering a step change in the provision of affordable housing.

Councillor Bagnall stated that, with her knowledge as a member of the East of England Regional Assembly, it would be helpful if the strategy partners considered how its work could be profiled into the work being done by the Assembly itself.

In response to a query from Councillor Bagnall, the Director of Environment and Planning stated that a report to Environment Committee would be submitted in January or March on the future strategy regarding affordable housing, key workers and housing planning policy in general.

Resolved –

To endorse further work by the Council along the lines set out in the report. Any formal commitment by the Council to implement the proposals (in the report) will be subject to reports to the Environment Committee and/or City Board.

01/a/88 RECRUITMENT FOR THE INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL ON MEMBERS’ ALLOWANCES

The Board noted that although not explicit in the report, any co-option would require a formal application being received and assessed by the Council in line with the open recruitment.

Resolved -

To agree that the Council should make contingencies to co-opt individuals by formal approach if open recruitment proves unsuccessful, with the detail to be decided by the PER and Local Government Act Sub-Committee as before.

01/a/89 CITY-UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE FORUM: CHANGE TO MEMBERSHIP

The Board noted that that Councillor Harrison had replaced Councillor Lakin as the Liberal Democrat representative on the City-University of Cambridge Forum.

The meeting ended at 9.15pm

Chair