abcd - Arun District Council elections · 18 May 2012 CABINET MEETING ... abcd Page 1 of 59 Arun...

Arun District Council Civic Centre Maltravers Road Littlehampton West Sussex BN17 5LF

Tel: (01903) 737500 Fax: (01903) 730442 DX: 57406 Littlehampton

Minicom: 01903 732765 e-mail: [email protected]

Committee Manager : Carrie O’Connor (Ext 37614) 18 May 2012

CABINET MEETING A meeting of the Cabinet will be held in Committee Room 1 at the Arun Civic Centre, Maltravers Road, Littlehampton, on Monday 28 May 2012 at 5.00 p.m. and you are requested to attend. Members : Councillors Mrs Brown (Chairman), Wensley (Vice-Chairman), Bower,

Dendle, Dingemans, Elkins and Wotherspoon.

A G E N D A 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members and Officers are reminded to make any declarations of personal and/or

prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this Agenda. You should declare your interest by stating :

a) the item you have the interest in b) whether it is a personal interest and the nature of the interest c) whether it is also a prejudicial interest d) if it is a prejudicial interest, whether you will be exercising your right to speak under Question Time

You then need to re-declare your interest and the nature of the interest at the commencement of the item or when the interest becomes apparent.

3. QUESTION TIME a) Questions from the public (for a period of up to 15 minutes). b) Questions from Members with prejudicial interests (for a period of up to 15

minutes).

abcd

of 59

Arun District Council CABINET-28/05/2012

4. MINUTES To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 April 2012

(previously circulated). ITEMS FOR DECISION 5 START TIMES The Cabinet is requested to consider the start times for meetings for the remainder

of 2012/13. 6 *CCTV IN THE ARUN DISTRICT Arun District Council resolved that it should withdraw funding from the provision and

management of CCTV in December 2009 as part of its 2009-12 savings strategy. This decision has not been implemented and, following a further review of the implications, this report recommends that Arun commit to a new 3 year contract with Sussex Police for CCTV from April 2012.

7 *CONCESSIONARY TRAVEL ADDITIONAL CAPACITY CLAIMS This report informs the Cabinet about the additional capacity claims which have

been made by Stagecoach for 2007/08, 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11. 8 OUTTURN OF CORPORATE PLAN 2011/12 This report sets out performance against the Council's Corporate Plan for 2011/12. 9 *NEW HOMES BONUS - PROPOSALS FOR EXPENDITURE 2012/13 The Council has been requested by the Joint Downland Arun Area Committee to

allocate a proportion of any monies received as part of the Government's New Homes Bonus Scheme to the Parishes that have accommodated the development for which the NHB is awarded. The recommendation is that the Council should allocate a proportion of the NHB for 2012/13 to the three Joint Arun Area Committees as it did for 2011/12. In this way all three of the JAACs can decide how the money is spent.

10 JOINT ARUN AREA COMMITTEES The Cabinet is requested to receive and note the Minutes of the meetings of the

Joint Arun Area Committees as follows:- Joint Downland Area Committee - 9 January 2012 Joint Western Arun Area Committee - 22 February 2012 Joint Eastern Arun Area Committee - 6 March 2012 11 *SAFER ARUN PARTNERSHIP - 23 APRIL 2012 To receive and note the Minutes of the meeting of the Safer Arun Partnership held

on 23 April 2012.

of 59


12 REGENERATION, LESIURE & TOURISM WORKING GROUP - 16 MAY 2012 To consider the recommendations put forward at the meeting of the Regeneration,

Leisure & Tourism working Group held on 16 May 2012 (will be circulated under separate cover).

13 SAFER ARUN & ENVIRONMENT WORKING GROUP - 23 MAY 2012 Any recommendations put forward by the meeting of the Safer Arun & Environment

Working Group held on 23 May 2012 will be circulated under separate cover. REPRESENTATION ON OUTSIDE BODIES There are no items to consider. 14 EXEMPT INFORMATION The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:- That under Section 100A(4) of the Local government Act 1972, the public and

accredited representatives of newspapers be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act by virtue of the paragraph specified against the item.

15 *AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE DECENT HOMES PROGRAMME 2012/13

(Exempt – Paragraph 3 – Information Relating to Business Affairs) To consider the attached report. Note : *Indicates report is attached for all Members of the Council only and the press

(excluding exempt items). Copies of reports can be obtained on request from the Committee Manager or accessed via the web site at www.arun.gov.uk).

Note : Members are reminded that if they have any detailed questions would they please

inform the Chairman and/or relevant Director in advance of the meeting. Cabinet Meeting Cabinet Meeting May 2012

of 59


AGENDA ITEM NO.

ARUN DISTRICT COUNCIL

REPORT TO AND DECISION OF CABINET ON 28TH MAY 2012

PART A : REPORT SUBJECT: CCTV in Arun District

REPORT AUTHOR: Kevin Basford DATE: 5th May 2012 EXTN: 37706

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Arun District Council resolved that it should withdraw funding from the provision and management of CCTV in December 2009 as part of its 2009-12 savings strategy. This decision has not been implemented because of ongoing discussions over concerns in removing/turning off CCTV cameras and, following a further review of the implications, this report recommends that Arun commit to a new 3 year contract with Sussex Police for CCTV from April 2012

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. That Arun remain in the Sussex CCTV Partnership.

2. Subject to Recommendation 1, that Arun DC enter into a re-negotiated 3 year contract from April 2012 with Sussex Police to provide CCTV management and monitoring services; and

3. Subject to Recommendation 2, that the revenue cost to Arun for 2012/13, as set out in Section 2 of the report, be met from the Community Safety or Clean and Safe Reserve Funds; and

4. Subject to Recommendation 2, that the “one off” capital cost for 2012/13, as set out in Section 2 of the report, be met from the Community Safety or Clean and Safe Reserve Funds; and

5. Subject to Recommendation 2, that the revenue cost to Arun for 2013/14 and 2014/15 be built into the Council’s forward budget plans.

1. BACKGROUND

1.1. Since 1998 Arun has been part of the Sussex CCTV Partnership for the provision, management and monitoring of CCTV cameras within the District.

1.2. Arun owns and is responsible for the costs of 19 cameras which are split, 12 in Bognor Regis, 6 in Littlehampton and 1 in Rustington. Locations are shown in the table at Appendix 1

1.3. Sussex Police procure and manage contracts for the support, management and monitoring of the CCTV cameras for the whole of Sussex and this has ensured over the years that all partners have secured the most economic and efficient service arrangements.

ITEM 6

of 59


1.4. The Full Council agreed savings strategy for 2009-12 (December 2009) included for withdrawal of funding for CCTV, equating to net cost of £30,000 per year at that time, from 2011/12. The associated risks, principally that withdrawal of funding may see the cameras switched off and decommissioned, were accepted at that time.

1.5. The annual costs comprise 2 elements:

a) maintenance and servicing contract (specialist contractor)

b) transmission link and connection ( BT – “power supply and cables”)

1.6. Sussex Police fund the whole cost of the monitoring centre, staffing and operator costs for CCTV Sussex wide.

1.7. Since the installation of the cameras there has been annual funding support from Bognor Regis Town Council (£2000) and Littlehampton Town Council (£2,600) although the annual sums committed have not increased over the years

1.8. As the date for withdrawal of funding approached discussions were held with Sussex Police regarding the future of the cameras. On the basis that the cameras were Arun owned and their own future financial challenges, Sussex Police confirmed no ongoing funding from any other source would be found. The position was confirmed that they would cease monitoring the cameras and seek decommissioning costs.

1.9. Sussex Police urged Arun to seriously reconsider the decision to withdraw from CCTV given the high profile public realm (town and seafront) locations of the cameras and the contribution they made to crime reduction and detection and public perceptions of safety. This view was echoed strongly by the Arun District Commander and in light of Community Safety being one of the Council’s stated top priorities.

1.10. Outline views were also sought from Bognor Regis Town Council and Littlehampton Town Council who also expressed significant concern should CCTV cease.

1.11. In order that further discussions could take place and a review of the forward position, one off funding from the Community Safety portfolio was allocated to keep the cameras operating for 2011/12.

1.12. Looking at each camera location with Sussex Police and the CCTV contribution to crime detection and community safety it has been reasonably concluded that all are well placed and therefore needed.

1.13. Cabinet will be aware that the recent survey of business in Bognor Regis placed safety and security as a high priority with reference to the contribution that CCTV makes to this.

1.14. Discussions with Bognor Regis Town Council and Littlehampton Town Council have seen them express a clear view that CCTV should be maintained and that both are willing to remain funding partners. On the basis of the number of cameras and current funding proportions both Councils were approached for an increase in support. Bognor Regis Town Council ultimately agreed to increase their contribution, supporting 12 cameras, to £4000 (increase of £2000). Littlehampton Town Council, based on their current higher funding proportion of £2,600 towards 6 cameras, felt that agreement to maintaining this funding level

ITEM 6

of 59


was reasonable.

1.15. Separate discussions with Rustington Parish Council have resulted in them agreeing to become a funding partner for the first time in order to keep the valued CCTV camera in place. This has been agreed at a level of £600 per year, equating to a 50:50 partnership for the 1 camera.

1.16. The annual revenue costs for CCTV for 2012/13 are now projected to be £21,500 i.e. around £1,150 per camera. This sum has reduced from that in 2009 following a very successful re-procurement of the maintenance and servicing contract by Sussex Police. This has seen the forward (3 year) cost for Arun for this part of the contract almost halve to £5,800 by 2014/15. Negotiations with BT for the transmission link element have not been as successful with the outcome being BT agreeing to hold the current charges until at least March 2014. However, against a background of the current rates, charged for last 3 years, representing a 10% discount against normal business line charges and alongside a recently announced 5% increase in BT line rental charges nationally, this is thought by the CCTV Partnership to be the best deal available.

1.17. Drawing together all the discussions and negotiations the revenue position for 2012/13 and forward can be summarised as:

2011/12 2012/13

Predicted CCTV cost for all cameras: £21,500 £21,500 Littlehampton TC contribution: £ 2,600 £ 2,600

Rustington PC contribution: £ 0 £ 600

BR Town Council: £ 2,000 £ 4,000

NET REVENUE COST TO ADC: £16,900 £14,300

1.18. The discussions with Sussex Police also revealed a claim had been received from BT for transmission costs in respect of a camera in Littlehampton that had never been charged for since installation (Pier Road). The claim from BT was for over £11,000 though when challenged the full evidence to support it did not seem available. However, the camera has clearly been in place and operating and so a negotiated reduction to £5000 has been arrived at and settlement is needed to ensure that the transmission link is not terminated.

1.19. A complete condition and functionality review of all CCTV has been undertaken which has seen around 10% of cameras overall needing replacement or major overhaul. This has proved true in Arun with 2 cameras, one in Littlehampton (Pier Road) and 1 in Bognor Regis ( Seafront, Gloucester Rd) needing replacement as the quality of the majority of the images, especially during dusk and at night, are not good enough to be used as evidence to support arrest or clear recording of incidents. Members must remember that many of these cameras are now around 14 years old and have functioned very well in majority very exposed locations. The capital replacement cost for the 2 cameras is £5,400 and is necessary if these camera locations are to be supported.

1.20. Capital expenditure for 2012/13 at £10,400 needs to be allocated to both

ITEM 6

of 59


regularise or bring liabilities up to date and ensure the CCTV network is fit for the future.

1.21. Taking all known and contract predictable costs into account there is a funding need of £24,700 part capital, part revenue) for 2012/13 and £14,300 (revenue) for each of the years 2013/14 and 2014/15.

1.22. An exploration of existing community safety budget resources for 2012/13 has not identified any source for savings to fund projected costs nor resource shift. Members are aware that the majority of expenditure is either direct staff costs or Anti-social Behaviour Team funding which is already being underwritten by Arun from ring-fenced reserves for 2012/13 following the cuts in former area based grants received.

1.23. Discussion with the Cabinet Members for Community Safety and Environment has identified availability of sufficient remaining balances (after accounting for expenditure on the ASB Team) in a combination of the ring-fenced Community Safety Reserve and Clean and Safe Reserve to cover the expenditure outlined for 2012/13 at £24,700 (revenue and capital)

1.24. No budget sources have been able to be identified for 2013/14 or 2014/15 and so Cabinet will need to consider including in the forward budget plans for 2013/14 and beyond.

2. PROPOSALS

2.1. Cabinet need to determine whether Arun DC should remain in the Sussex CCTV Partnership and commit to CCTV for a period until at least March 31st 2015.

2.2. Should Cabinet decide to remain in the Sussex CCTV partnership then it is proposed that Arun enter into a new 3 year contract with Sussex Police for the provision and management of CCTV.

2.3. Subject to 2.3, it is proposed that funding of £24,700 be committed for 2012/13 from a combination of the ring–fenced Community Safety and Clean and Safe Reserves.

2.4. It is proposed that Cabinet include in the forward budget plans for 2013/14 and 2014/15 annual funding of £14,300.

3. OPTIONS

3.1. To agree to maintain CCTV services for 3 years from April 2012 with committed funding (Recommended Option)

3.2. Not to maintain CCTV services for 3 years from April 2012 and recognise that this will see CCTV service in Arun cease to be provided.

4. CONSULTATION:

Has consultation been undertaken with: YES NO

Relevant Town/Parish Council üüüü

Relevant District Ward Councillors üüüü

ITEM 6

of 59


Other groups/persons (please specify)

Sussex Police view they will not fund CCTV in Arun if Arun withdraws.

üüüü

5. ARE THERE ANY IMPLICATIONS IN RELATION TO THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL POLICIES: (Explain in more detail at 6 below)

YES NO

Financial üüüü

Legal üüüü

Human Rights/Equality Impact Assessment üüüü

Community Safety including Section 17 of Crime & Disorder Act üüüü

Sustainability üüüü

Asset Management/Property/Land üüüü

Technology üüüü

Other (please explain) üüüü

6. IMPLICATIONS:

There will be a revenue implication for ADC in the years 2013/14 and 2014/15 which will need to be built into the Council’s forward budget plans.

7. REASON FOR THE DECISION:

To recognise the contribution made by CCTV cameras in the detection of crime and public perceptions of safety.

8. BACKGROUND PAPERS:

No background papers Equality Impact Assessment

ITEM 6

of 59


Cabinet Report: CCTV in Arun : APPENDIX 1

BOGNOR REGIS

4201 Linden Road / Canada Grove

4202 London Road / Station Road

4203 Queensway / Crescent Road

4204 Station Road / Lyon Street

4205 High Street / London Road

4206 West Street / High Street

4207 The Esplanade / The Steyne

4208 The Pier

4209 The Esplanade opp Regis Centre

4210 The Esplanade / Gloucester Road

4211 Butlins RA

4212 Sea Road / Bognor Road Felpham

LITTLEHAMPTON

4601 Franciscan Way

4602 High Street (west end)

4603 High Street (east end)

4604 Pier Road

4605 Arcade Road

4606 Riverside

RUSTINGTON

4651 Woodlands Avenue

ITEM 6

of 59


ARUN DISTRICT COUNCIL – INITIAL EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1. What is the name of the service / policy?

CCTV in Arun District

2. Briefly describe the aims of the service / policy

To continue current provision of CCTV within the Arun District. Achieved through ADC’s continued financial support and participation in the Sussex CCTV Partnership for the prevention and reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour.

3. Are the aims consistent with the Council’s Equalities Policy? On what basis?

Yes. CCTV is a universal service that benefits all residents and visitors to Arun.

4. Is there any evidence to suggest that this service / policy could have an adverse impact on some groups of people? Use the table to tick: (a) where you think the service / policy could have a positive impact on any of the groups or contribute to promoting equality, equal opportunities or improving relationships within the target groups. (b) where you think the service / policy could have a negative impact on any of the equality target groups i.e. it could disadvantage them

Insufficient data

Positive Impact

Negative Impact

Reason e.g. access /

take-up

Gender

x

Race

x

Disability

x

Age x

APPENDIX 1 to ITEM 6

of 59


Belief

x

Sexuality

x

5. If, in your judgement, the proposed service / policy does have an adverse impact, can that impact be justified? How do you intend to deal with that impact / or lessen that impact?

Not applicable: CCTV makes a positive impact on all target groups as it does not discriminate on any particular group and serves to reduce crime, prevent crime and reduce the fear of crime.

Name of manager undertaking the assessment: Georgina Holland Service Area: Environmental Amenities & Community Safety Date completed: 11th May 2012 Requirement for a formal Equalities Impact Assessment: NO If YES, what is your timetable for completing this? Not applicable

Who else will you need to be working with to do this work e.g. partners, contractors etc? Not applicable

APPENDIX 1 to ITEM 6

of 59


AGENDA ITEM NO.


REPORT TO AND DECISION OF CABINET ON 28TH MAY 2012

PART A : REPORT SUBJECT: Concessionary Travel Additional Capacity Claims

REPORT AUTHOR: Kevin Basford DATE: 12th March 2012 EXTN: 37449

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This reports informs the Cabinet about the additional capacity claims which have been made by Stagecoach for 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 and 2010/11.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That Cabinet approves payment of the proposed settlement of the additional capacity claims as advised by our consultants MCL from the reserves specifically set aside for this purpose, subject to confirmation from the claimant that this is in full and final settlement of all reimbursement claims.

2. That Cabinet agrees to enter a process of non-binding mediation in the event that the

proposed settlement is not accepted, and delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Housing and the Chief Executive in consultation with the Head of Finance to agree a final settlement.

1. BACKGROUND:

1.1 Stagecoach have submitted claims for reimbursement in respect of additional capacity costs in addition to the standard reimbursement they received under the terms of the published reimbursement arrangements.

1.2 The claim is founded on the principle that if the concessionary travel scheme did not

exist, the operator would reduce his service levels on certain services to reflect the reduced number of passenger journeys that he would carry.

1.3 The resulting Stagecoach claim has been reviewed and assessed by the

consortiums consultants, MCL Limited and their report is attached as Appendix A together with an addendum to the report shown as Appendix B. They concluded that there is a valid claim in principle, but recommended a reduced payment in full and final settlement.

1.4 Should all parties accept the offer made, then Arun District Councils liability will be

£551,690, plus and as yet unconfirmed final consultants costs for the resolution of this issue, and for the winding up of scheme.

ITEM 7

of 59


1.5 Arun District Council can pay this claim by using £505,000 out of the Concessionary Reserve and the remaining £46,690 from savings identified within existing budgets.

1.6 If the offer is rejected, the consortium contract outlines a process of dispute resolution. This would include an initial countywide officer meeting with Stagecoach to resolve, followed if necessary by a process of non-binding mediation. The latter would have additional cost implications for all parties.

1.7 All the other Local Authorities within West Sussex Consortium have agreed to the

Consultants recommendation. Stagecoach have indicated their willingness to settle for the amounts detailed – see MCA report / note.

1.8 The consultants have advised that Stagecoach would be well within their rights to

claim Interest if there are any undue delays in dealing with their claim

2. PROPOSAL(S):

It is proposed that approval be given to allow our consultants to put forward an offer to discharge the outstanding claims in full and final settlement and in the event that agreement is not reached delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Housing and the Chief Executive in consultation with the Head of Finance to agree a final settlement.

3. OPTIONS:

3.1 That Cabinet approves

a. payment of the proposed settlement of the concessionary fares and agrees to enter a process of non-binding mediation in the event that the proposed settlement is not accepted; and

b. delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Housing and the Chief Executive in consultation with the Head of Finance to agree a final settlement.

3.2 The Cabinet does not approve payment of the proposed settlement.

4. CONSULTATION:


Relevant Town/Parish Council ��

Relevant District Ward Councillors ��


Consultation with principal accountant confirms sufficient funds identified from previously earmarked reserve and other budgets to fund recommended settlement offer

(e-mail from Richard Lathey refers)

��

5. ARE THERE ANY IMPLICATIONS IN RELATION TO THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL POLICIES:

YES NO

ITEM 7

of 59


(Explain in more detail at 6 below)

Financial ��

Legal ��

Human Rights/Equality Impact Assessment ��

Community Safety including Section 17 of Crime & Disorder Act ��

Sustainability ��

Asset Management/Property/Land ��

Technology ��

Other (please explain) ��

6. IMPLICATIONS:

It is a statutory requirement to reimburse Bus Companies for Concessionary Travel in line with the published legislation and concessionary travel schemes. The consortium consultant MCA, and whose past advice has been accurate and sound, is clear that this represents the best option to settle for the West Sussex Council’s.

Not agreeing the settlement opens up the Council to risk of Stagecoach pursuing claim via alternative statutory or legal procedures and, based upon local Council’s past experience, high risk of a higher settlement being imposed along with costs.


To seek Cabinet approval for the payment of the additional capacity claims as advised by the Councils consultant MCL and subject to the payment being accepted as full and final settlement by Stagecoach.


None

ITEM 7

of 59


AGENDA ITEM NO.


REPORT TO AND DECISION OF CABINET ON 28th May 2012

PART A : REPORT

SUBJECT: Outturn of Corporate Plan 2011/12

REPORT AUTHOR: Paul Askew DATE: May10th 2012 EXTN: 37515

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report sets out performance against the Council’s Corporate Plan for 2011/12.

RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Cabinet reviews the council’s overall performance for 2011 / 12 against the activities and targets set out in the Corporate Plan and identifies any action that needs to be taken to ensure the Council is achieving satisfactory levels of performance in priority areas.

2. Cabinet is asked to agree to remove one Indicator - . “To Revalue Council Assets – 100% review over 5 Years” from the Corporate Plan and for it to be measured and reported as part of the Service Delivery Plan.

1. BACKGROUND: 1.1 The Council adopted its current Corporate Plan in January 2011. This relatively new

Plan sets out how the Council’s priorities will be delivered up to the introduction of “Your Council” in 2013. The aim of the Plan is that the Performance indicators are relevant to our residents and directly link in with the council’s priorities.

1.2 The new plan was adopted following the government’s decision to abolish the Comprehensive Area Assessment, the National Indicator set and the Place Survey. The Government has actively encouraged Councils to produce their own performance indicators which relate to the priorities of each Council.

ITEM 8

of 59


1.3 A progress report against indicators in the Corporate Plan for 2011/12 - is attached at Appendix 1.

1.4 As this is the first full year of the new Corporate Plan with in essence a number of new indicators it is difficult to make, in some cases, comparisons against previous years. The commentary provided by Heads of Service reflects performance against previous years where the Indicator did not broadly change from what it was in the previous Plan.

2. PROPOSAL(S):

To consider the Council’s performance against the Council’s Corporate Plan in 2011/12 and propose any further action that is required.

To remove the Indicator “To Revalue Council Assets – 100% review over 5 Years” from the Corporate Plan and for it to be measured and reported on at Service Delivery Plan level. This indicator was originally put in the Corporate Plan following the qualification of the Council’s Accounts. Now that the valuations have been completed and our Accounts were not qualified in 2011 and it is anticipated that they will not be qualified in 2012 the indicator can be measured at Service Delivery Plan level. This means that the individual Cabinet Member will still be advised of the outcome of the indicator

3. OPTIONS:

a. To consider performance against the Council’s Corporate Plan 2010/11 as set out in the attached report.

b. No other options were considered as this is an agreed part of the Council’s Corporate Business System.

CONSULTATION: N/A


Relevant Town/Parish Council X

Relevant District Ward Councillors X

Other groups/persons (please specify) X


YES NO

Financial X

Legal X

Human Rights/Equality X

Community Safety including Section 17 of Crime & Disorder Act X

Sustainability X

Asset Management/Property/Land X

Technology X

ITEM 8

of 59


Other (please explain) X

6. IMPLICATIONS:

Where key activities and targets are not being met, the Council will need to consider whether the areas are adequately resourced, and if necessary to consider resource switching to ensure achievement.


To review progress against the Council’s Corporate Plan and to take any necessary action to acknowledge performance and / or address any areas that require attention.


Corporate Plan 2009/13 Service Delivery Plan monitoring reports for period 1 April – 31 March 2012

ITEM 8

of 59


Corporate Action Plan 2011/12

Outturn 2010/11 2011/12 Bad 2.50% 0%

Good

Outturn per 1000 population Number of Violent Crimes2010/11 2011/12 Bad 2010/11 2011/12

0.35 0.39 53 59

Good

To keep Council Tax rises for future financial years at or below 2.5% per annum and that our average Band D Council Tax £ per head is below average within our District and CIPFA group

To reduce the number of most serious violent crime

Comments: No Council Tax rise for 2011/12 and average Band D Council Tax £ per head is below average within our District CIPFA group.

Comments: Baseline. Apr 2011-Mar 2012 = 59 59/150,561 x 1000 = 0.39 per 1000 population. There is no target. For context purposes, serious violent crime has slightly increased this year compared to the last i.e. there have been 6 more violent crimes (53 in 2010/11 increasing to 59 in 2011/12).This equates to an increase of 0.04 per 1000 population. Therefore, the risk and likelihood of being a victim of serious violent crime continues to be low in Arun.

Violent Crime

50

52

54

56

58

60

2010/11 2011/12

1

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn per 1000 population Outturn per Crime2010/11 2011/12 Bad 2010/11 2011/12

7.8 6.77 1,161 1,020

Good

To reduce overall crime

To reduce the number of incidents of public place violent crime

To reduce criminal damage

Comments: Baseline. Apr 2011-Mar 2012 = 1,020 crimes 1,020/150,561 x 1000 = 6.77 crimes per 1000 population. There is no target. It is important to note that these are incidents which are classified as violent crime AND have been recorded as occurring in a public place. Also, this indicator captures a wide range of violent offence types (for more information please speak to Community Safety). The performance of this indicator continues to improve compared to last year showing a decrease of 12% (1,161 crimes in 2010/11 down to 1,020 crime in 2011/12). Therefore the risk and likelihood of being a victim of public place violent crime continues to remain low in Arun

Reduction in public place violent crime

900

950

1,000

1,050

1,100

1,150

1,200

2010/11 2011/12

No.

of C

rimes

Comments: Apr 2010-Mar 2011 = 1,875 Apr 2011-Mar 2012 = 1,753 Down 122 (-7%). Criminal damage continues to show a downward trend, with a decrease of 7% compared to last year. This performance is in part, reflective of the sustained effective partnership working with local neighbourhood policing teams and the Arun Anti-Social Behaviour Team in taking early and effective interventions with people in our communities.

Comments: Apr 2010-Mar 2011 = 8,793 Apr 2011-Mar 2012 = 9,496 Up 703 (8%). This is a police target. Crime in Arun has increased by 8% during 2011/12 compared to last year. The increase in overall crime is largely driven by significant volume increases in acquisitive crime namely: vehicle interference and thefts, burglary (other than dwelling and dwelling), shoplifting and bike thefts. A combination of factors are driving up crime including: opportunistic crime particularly where members of the public have left their home or property unsecure and most notably the continued economic downturn (e.g. higher unemployment). Tactical partnership responses to these issues are being delivered through the Safer Arun Partnership Joint Action Group and strategic partners are focusing on the medium and long term causal factors in an attempt to stem further increases e.g. holistic family intervention.

2

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn

2010/11 2011/123.17% 3%

To reduce all injury violence

To reduce the percentage of reoffenders following anti-social behaviour intervention

Comments: Apr 2010-Mar 2011 = 2,104 Apr 2011-Mar 2012 = 2,056 Down 48 (2%). This indicator captures data pertaining to Violence Against the Person where injury has occurred. There has been a 2% reduction compared to last year (2,104 crimes in 2010 / 11 and 2,056 crimes in 2011/12).

Comments: Cumulative figure April 2011 to March 2012 = 3% re-offenders following anti-social behaviour intervention. Target for the year is 5% or below. 19 Breaches/633 Individuals x 100 = 3% re-offending rate. Performance represents a total of 1,330 "interventions" delivered this year to stop Anti-Social Behaviour, applied to 633 individuals over the performance year across the District delivered by the Arun Anti-social behaviour Team (which includes an Early Intervention Anti-Social Behaviour Caseworker). Of these totals, 3% required further enforcement from the Team at Acceptable Behaviour Contract level to stop their nuisance behaviour, equivalent to 19 individuals, exceeding the initial target of less than a 5% re-offending rate by 2%. Thisrepresents continued success as it demonstrates the effectiveness of the team in stopping anti-social behaviour at the first opportunity.

3

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/1237.70% 37.30% 37.08%

Outturn

2010/11 2011/12 Bad 5% 4.8%

Good

To maintain the current performance on street and environment cleanliness

To maintain the current performance on the percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting

Comments: 2011/12 Target was set at 39.5%. The overall rate is made up of dry recycling 27.07% and composting rate of 10.01%. The composting shows an increase of 0.95% over the previous year this reflects a greater uptake in the Green Waste Club. The overall dry recycling figure has decreased by 1.16% in comparison with the previous year. This is partly a result of increased contamination. We are working in partnership on a countywide initiative to help improve these rates. The decrease also reflects the withdrawal of waste education.

Comments: Two surveys undertaken for 11/12. This is the combined result as provided by the LEQS Pro system. An excellent performance against new LEQS criteria which are tougher than old NI 195 and against which 5% target was set. The performance is significantly better than the national average which is 11%.

Household Waste sent for Re-use (Target 39.5%)

36.70%36.80%36.90%37.00%37.10%37.20%37.30%37.40%37.50%37.60%37.70%37.80%

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

4

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12Days 14.1 10.2 14.3

Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/1215 20 19

To reduce the time taken to process Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit new claims and change events

To bring empty homes back into use

Time Taken to Process Claims

02468

10121416

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

Comments: Target 2011/12 is 12 days. The measure is the average time for the whole year which means peaks in workload can adversely affect the overall result. The performance in the summer of 2011 was adversely affected by staffing issues and increasing workload (caseload has increased by 500 over the year). The effect of this was mitigated by the use of specialist agency staff, judicious use of overtime and increasing amount of work done at first point of contact in the Civic Centre public areas. Staffing levels are now closer to normal amd the appropriate figure for April 2012 was 4.4 days with new claims being processed in 10.6 days and changes to claims within 3.6 days. When looking at 2012/13 onwards we will be setting targets on a quarterly basis to better reflect the performance against this indicator.

Comments: Overachievement against target of 10. Properties returned to use contributes to new homes target and of financial benefit to the Council through Government grant funding. Empty Homes Assistant contributed to achievement and enabled effective preparation for empty homes targeting in 2012/13.

Target - 10 Empty Homes returned to use over the year

0

5

10

15

20

25

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

5

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12£25,887 £164,735 £117,185

Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12Days 203 180 195

To reduce the average number of days taken to re-house people in the greatest housing need

To reduce the cost of emergency B&B accommodation

Amount spent on B&B accommodation - Annual target £30,000

£0£20,000£40,000£60,000£80,000

£100,000£120,000£140,000£160,000£180,000

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

Comments: Target 2011/12 is £30,000. Bed and breakfast expenditure is over target for this quarter due to increased demand and reductions in available temporary accommodation. It is anticipated that the new leased scheme approved by Cabinet will help to address this overspend. Officers continue to work hard to prevent homelessness. Bed and breakfast expenditure reduced in the last quarter, but is over target for the year. This is due to increased demand and reductions in available temporary accommodation. Officers continue to work hard to prevent homelessness, but long term sickness of a member of staff in the prevention team is hampering progress.

No. Of Days to re-house those in housing need - Target is 250 days

160

170

180

190

200

210

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

No.

of D

ays

Comments: The large amount of new builds allocated to transfers has created voids which has assisted with move on from hostel and for those homeless making their own arrangements. Vacancies in sheltered scheme that were due to be redeveloped but have been brought back into service have helped to accommodate older or vulnerable homeless applicants. It is anticipated that performance next quarter will improve. There are a number of lettings which have taken place since 30th September as a result of new build properties becoming available

6

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn 2009/10 2010/11 2011/1299% 97.20% 90%

Outturn 2010/11 2011/12196 266

To increase the percentage of people where homelessness is prevented after they contact the Council seeking assistance with a potentially homelessness situation

To deliver the number of affordable homes as set out in our housing strategy

Comments: Target 11/12 is 92%. Approaches Jan- Mar = 430 homeless decisions Jan-Mar = 54 Quarter 4 preventions 87% Year totals : approaches = 1436 homeless decisions = 142 total prevention April11 -March 12 = 90%. During the last quarter January 2012 to March 2012 we received 430 homeless approaches. 376 (87%) cases were dealt with via prevention interventions with only 54 cases handled as formal homelessness cases. For the financial year 2012 / 2013 in total we received 1436 homeless approaches. 1294 (90% were dealt with prevention interventions with 142 cases (10%) dealt with via homelessness. Both within the southeast and nationally other agencies are reporting a rise in homelessness.

Comments: 02-04-2012 - The annual target for affordable housing completions is 200, although the full 5-year strategy target of 1,000 by 2015 is more relevant. A positive achievement in difficult economic times.

Prevention of Homelessness

84%86%88%90%92%94%96%98%

100%

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

Affordable Homes

050

100150200250300

2010/11 2011/12

7

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



To deliver key milestones in the action plan for the regeneration of Littlehampton

To deliver key milestones in the action plan for the regeneration of Bognor Regis

Sept 30th 2011: Progress in the following projects: - Enterprise Zone bid was unsuccessful, however discussions with partners have outlined a way forward for delivery. - St Modwen - ongoing discussions - Concessions Review underway as part of attempt to improve seafront - Hotham Park Restaurant - internal working group fumed and procurement route scoped out. Free car parking due to be introduced in December.

March 31st 2012: Major projects such as St Modwens have significantly moved forward over the year, with a clear plan for the next year, and enterprise@BognorRegis is seeking funding to remove infrastructure barriers to opening new employment sites in the north of the town. In partnership with Bognor Regis Town Council, a programme of initiatives to improve the town centre has been put in hand, and the partnership of councils was successful in securing £100k of Sainsbury's S106 funding for public realm work. The first £250k tranche of this S106 funding has been through a transparent bidding competition and been allocated. The national advertising campaign for the design, build and operation of the new restaurant in Hotham Park is underway.

Sept 30th 2011: St Martin's - Consultants have reported results of market testing leisure users which has given encouraging results. Cycling - the promenade project has been delayed but WSCC assure it will be completed at the end of this year. Littlehampton Hospital - A decision is promised December. Littlehampton Market- since moving to the High Street the market has grown and anecdotal evidence suggests footfall in the town centre has increased on Friday mornings. We will look to see how the market on the High Street performs over future months and work with Littlehampton Town Council to consider other markets that may be feasible. Retail Vibrancy - Vacancy rates remain at around 7%, around half of the national average. Morrison's Planning Application - submitted an application for a new A1 food store and Enterprise Hub on the original Body Shop site. The application is under consideration. Littlehampton continues to progress as the desire for A3 illustrates in the St Martin's Leisure occupiers report. It will be important that key outputs for forthcoming years are in the teams work programme

March 31st 2012: St. Martin's - Market testing has proved very positive. The Leisure Strategy has considered this area and these will be incorporated into the possible options for the site. It looks likely that the site will be 'out to market' in summer 2012. Waterfront Strategy - the Cycling on the Promenade project has now been implemented and welcomed by many. The Long Bench was the winner of 2 Civic Trust Awards and the sale of engraved slats continues to be popular.Littlehampton Hospital - In spite of massive community support for the Give Us Our Hospital Campaign NHS Sussex has announced that a new hospital will not be built in Littlehampton.

8

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn in Visitor Numbers2010/11 2011/1298264 169715

Outturn Percentage

2011/12

Web 59%Phone 29%Recep 12%

To increase the number of unique visitors to the Sussex By the Sea Website

To increase the percentage of our customers that use our website and to decrease the percentage of those contacting by phone or calling into our offices

Comments: The figures for the 2011/12 financial year are: Unique Visits: 169,715 Total Visits: 199,098 Page views: 751,013

Comments: New Indicator for 2011/12. Baseline, no target. From 1st April 2011 to 31st March 2012 there has been total contacts of 651550 with 383737 (59%) by Click, 190,228 (29%) calls and 77,585 (12%) Reception visits.

Customer Access

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%

2011/12

WebPhoneRecep

Unique Visitors to Sussex By the Sea Website

020000400006000080000

100000120000140000160000180000

2010/11 2011/12

9

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



To deliver projects through the Arun Wellbeing Team under the agreed Sustainable Communities Strategy priorities

To assist in the delivery of the key milestones in the Environment Agency's Flood and Coastal erosion risk management plan

To Implement a Local Plan by 2013

To assist with key partners in the delivery of the Countywide Children and Young People's Plan

To lobby Central Government for improvements to the A27 particularly in relation to the building of the Arundel By-Pass

Comments: The Arun Children and Young People Group continues to meet regularly to ensure that consideration of the impact of the council's services on children and young people continues to be given high priority. Refresher training for staff on safeguarding is planned and there is regular liaison with county youth service colleagues to ensure that we influence, where possible, services for children and young people who live in Arun.

Comments: Five projects continued to run in last quarter of 2011/12. Commissioning new projects in April.

Comments: Action Plan from SMP2 not yet finalised. The transfer of tasks from the SMP2 Action Plan to the new Environment Agency national template is 60% complete. Many of the actions are dependant upon the outcome of the Arun to Pagham Strategy. An assessment of these actions will be undertaken when the Arun Pagham Strategy has been completed. Environment Agency Flood Defence Finance Committee to consider in July 2012 public consultation on revised strategy which is anticipated to be late Summer.

Comments: The production of the Local Development Framework - now known as the Local Plan is on target in accordance with the Local Development Scheme (the Local Plan timetable) agreed by Full Council in January 2012. The Regional Spatial Strategy is anticipated to be withdrawn in March. The Council will be able to undertake public consultation on a draft plan after that date. Revised timetable still anticipates adoption in 2012.

Comments: At a meeting held on 9 February with representatives from West Sussex County Council, Horsham District Council and Arun District Council, a proposal was made to jointly fund work to help progress the economic business case for the Arundel Bypass by employing specialist consultants for a short period of time to review current information and to strengthen the economic argument in favour of the provision of the bypass. Arun has also been requested to take on the role of lead authority to manage the fund. West Sussex County Council and Horsham District Council have agreed to contribute £10,000 and £5,000 respectively to set up the fund to help progress the Arundel Bypass. The initial work will be to commission an economic impact assessment that will help to confirm the benefits that the Bypass could have on economic growth in the wider area. This process was agreed by Cabinet at their meeting on the 12th March. The Council continues to lobby for an Arundel Bypass through other options as they arise. For example the joint letter sent by the Leaders of the West Sussex authorities to the Secretary of State for transport to press for improvements to the A27.

10

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn Arun 2010/11

Arun 2011/12

West Sussex 2011/12

England 2011/12

44.4% 50.6% 58.60% 58.40%

Outturn 2010/11 2011/1210.90%

Outturn 2011/12Completed

Outturn 2010/11 2011/12£69,000 Ongoing

To increase the percentage of students achieving 5 or more GCSE passes at grades A*-C including Maths and English

To reduce C02 emissions from civic centre operations

To deliver an action plan relating to the Comprehensive Spending Review to achieve savings by 2012/13

To carry out a Systems Thinking delivery programme and to show efficiencies made in staff hours and cash

Comments: This data is for 2011 GCSE results, and shows a strong increase from 44.4% in 2010. Particular improvements are noted for Angmering (42% to 59%), The Littlehampton Academy (34% to 42%) and The Regis School (30% to 39%). The District is heading in the right direction. Lots of work still to do.

% of Students achieving 5 or more GCSE passes at grades A-C

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%

Arun 2010/11 Arun 2011/12 West Sussex2011/12

England 2011/12

Comments: Reduction in energy consumption in CC from 507tonnes CO2 in 2010/11 to 453tonnes CO2 in 2011/12 main factors are Powerperfector installed May 2011 and PV's installed end of Feb 2012.

Comments: The Council has initiated a review of its priorities which will determine where savings have to be made to ensure that the Council's financial strategy is met.

Comments: Major Reviews started carried out in 2011/12 will deliver substantial savings in 2012/13 likely to be in the region of £150,000 to £200,000.

11

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59



Outturn 2010/11 2011/12100% 100%

Outturn 2010/11 2011/12Salaries underspend = £758000

Salaries underspend = £535000

Outturn 2010/11 2011/1298.01% 98.19%

Outturn 2010/11 2011/12£0 £40,000

To make cost reductions as a result of implementing shared services

To Revalue Council Assets - 100% review over 5 years

To Continue our vacancy management policies when dealing with vacant posts

To increase the percentage of Council Tax that is collected

Comments: Valuation as of April 2011 completed by WH&E including impairment review. This indicator was included within the Corporate Plan last year because of the risk that if the council had not revalued the assets correctly the Accounts would have been qualified again. Now that the Accounts last year were not qualified and it is anticipated that there will be no qualification this year it is recommended that the indicator is removed from the Corporate Plan and reported at Service Delivery Plan level.

Comments: The measurement of this indicator needs to be changed to a more objective measure around actual savings as a result of controlling vacancies. This will be adjusted for next year. For 2011/12 the provisional salaries underspend is £535,000 subject to final adjustments when all year end figures have been confirmed. This is against a target of £400,000. Savings from this process will be reviewed at the end of the financial year. As at the 31st December 2011 headcount was 442 with a turnover of 18% - as at 31st March 2012 headcount was 441 with a turnover of 13.8%

Comments: Council Tax collection - this figure is above target and represents an excellent result considering the present economic climate. It is the fourth successive year in which collection of Council Tax has shown an improvement.

Comments: Ongoing process which is seeking opportunities to develop shared services. Such services include; shared housing fraud officer, procurement services and estates management. Services delivered by Arun on behalf of other Councils which generate income include; Arboricultural services, IT training, Engineering support and print services. Shared services currently being developed include; Community alarms service provision and Council IT network. In addition to savings, it should be recognised that such arrangements also increase resilience and flexibility for the delivery of Council services.

12

AP

PE

ND

IX 1 to IT

EM

8

of 59


AGENDA ITEM NO.


REPORT TO AND DECISION OF CABINET ON 31st May 2011

PART A : REPORT SUBJECT: New Homes Bonus – Proposals for expenditure in 2012-13

REPORT AUTHOR : Karl Roberts DATE: 18th April 2011 EXTN: 37760

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Council has been requested by the Joint Downland Arun Area Committee to allocate a proportion of any monies received as part of the Government’s New Home Bonus Scheme to the Parishes that have accommodated the development for which the NHB is awarded. The recommendation is that the Council should for 2012/13 allocate a proportion of the NHB to the three Joint Area Committees as it did for 2011/12. In this way all three the Joint Arun Area Committee’s (JAAC’s) can decide how the money is spent.

RECOMMENDATIONS :

It is recommended that :

1. £51,000 of the New Homes Bonus monies for 2012-13 be allocated to the following projects; i. The sum of £17,000 is allocated to each Joint Arun Area Committee for use in supporting locally identified needs by the JAAC’s .

1. BACKGROUND:

The CLG describes the aim of the New Homes Bonus (“NHB”) thus :

“The aim of the New Homes Bonus is to create a powerful, simple, transparent and permanent incentive which rewards local authorities that deliver sustainable housing development.”

Recent years have seen a steady decline in national house building which culminated in 2009 with only 118,000 completions: the lowest peacetime annual total since 1924.

The ‘top-down’ approach of managing housing provision favoured by the last government has been replaced by the Coalition government’s philosophy of locally-driven growth within a framework of powerful incentives.

The New Homes Bonus is part of a range of incentives set out in the government’s Local Growth White Paper.

This report gives a summary of how the allocation of New Homes Bonus (“NHB”) for Arun in 2012-13 should be allocated. Key features of the Scheme to note include:-

• NHB will provide incentivised funding which recognises and rewards a council for increasing its housing supply, through a formula related to the national average council tax, making a payment for each new home built and each long term empty property brought back into use, with an additional amount to be paid for each new affordable home created.

ITEM 9

of 59


• The bonus is to be paid annually for each of the 6 years after that home is built /brought back into use. £200 million has been set aside for 2011/12, and £250m for each of the following three years. The real problem with the scheme, however, is that after the first year it is not fully-funded by Central Government, with any shortfall coming from Formula Grant payable to district and county councils. By year six and beyond, around 80% of the money will need to come from the existing settlement. This means that the cash allocations in the CSR will

be reduced from 2012-13 in order to pay for the New Homes Bonus. The NHB will be paid as unringfenced grant. As a consequence of this it would appear sensible to consider the use of any awarded NHB on an annual basis once the District Council can be clear whether it is a net government grant beneficiary or a net loser.

• The level of payment by Government will be based on the average national band D council tax, with all other bands adjusted to a band D equivalent.

• Provision of additional publicly owned Gypsy & Traveller caravan sites will also be rewarded by Government.

• In two tier areas the bonus is split 80:20 in favour of lower tier councils (districts).

• Councils are encouraged to consider pooling some NHB to support Local Enterprise Partnerships.

The Council was awarded the sum of £508,908 in 2011/12 and £1,064,658 in 2012/13. Due to the method of data collection the additional reward for the delivery of Affordable Homes in 2011/12 will be paid in 2012/13.

2. PROPOSALS:

The impact of adjusting the Revenue Support Grant to aid the funding of the NHB nationally means that for Arun the net effect over the first two years (2010/11 – 2012/13) has been a net reduction of around £2.3M in Government grant to the Council, even allowing for the NHB. Overall, Arun’s Revenue Support Grant over four years will have been reduced by around 40%. No Parish has suffered loss of “grant” as they each determine their own precept each year based on the stated tax base for the Parish area. If the tax base for a Parish grows the Parish Council can either leave the precept the same so that the amount charged per dwelling reduces or they can leave the amount per dwelling the same or increase it so that the precept grows to cover any extra burdens they feel they have to deal with in the Parish as a result of new properties. That being said, last year the Council, in accordance with Government guidance, allocated 10% of the grant to the 3 Joint Area Committee’s, totally some £51,000. Notwithstanding the financial pressures placed upon Arun at the current time there is merit in considering allocating the same sum to the 3 Joint area Committee’s for 2012/13 to be used on projects where it supports locally identified and prioritised needs as determined and recommended by the Joint Area Committee’s. This sum has been placed in a contingency fund within the 2012/13 district council budget. Any decisions regarding 2013/14 can only be made when the Council’s allocation of NHB for that year is known along with any consequential changes to the level of Revenue Support Grant.

3. OPTIONS:

3.1) Agree the proposed allocation of NHB to JAAC’s

3.2) Instruct officers to prepare an alternative set of allocations.

3.3) Award no allocation of NHB

4. CONSULTATION:

ITEM 9

of 59



Relevant Town/Parish Council x

Relevant District Ward Councillors x



YES NO

Financial x

Legal x

Human Rights/Equality Impact Assessment x

Community Safety including Section 17 of Crime & Disorder Act x

Sustainability x

Asset Management/Property/Land x

Technology x

Other (please explain) Human Resources

x

6. IMPLICATIONS:

6.1) Financial :

Under the CLG proposals the NHB will be a major source of ongoing funding for the Council particularly as the amount of Revenue Support Grant has and is forecast to continue to fall dramatically.


7.1) To allocate a proportion (£51,000) of the New Homes Bonus allocation for 2012-13 to the 3 Joint Arun Area Committee’s.


None

ITEM 9

of 59


ITEM 9

of 59


ITEM 10

of 59


of 8

Safer Arun Partnership (SAP)

23rd April 2012 at 3.00 p.m. Present: Arun District Council

Councillor Len Brown Kevin Basford, Head of Environmental Amenities & Community Safety Georgina Holland, Community Safety Manager

Sarah Hemsley, Partnership Support Officer Surrey & Sussex Probation Service Kathryn Rolls, Senior Probation Officer Sussex Police Chief Inspector Jane Derrick

PCSO Andrea Oakley

West Sussex County Council Councillor Nigel Peters

Sue Furlong, Principal Community Safety Officer

West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service Stuart Beddoe, District Commander West Sussex Primary Care Trust David Bishop, Health Improvement Co-ordinator Co-opted Members

Hilary Spencer, Chair of Community Cohesion Group and Chief Executive of CVS-Arunwide

333. Apologies for Absence Apologies were received from Cllr Peter Evans of Sussex Police Authority, Jeff Spencer of HMP Ford, Cllr Whitehead of West Sussex County Council and Cllr Paul Wotherspoon of Arun District Council. 334. Minutes and actions arising of previous meeting on 9th January 2012 The Minutes of the meeting held on 9th January 2012 were approved by the Partnership as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Partners are requested to feedback on the progress of their actions prior to SAP meetings.

335. Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest made.

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

336. Safer Arun Strategic Partnership 2012-17 Georgina Holland presented the 2012-17 Safer Arun Partnership Plan with the proposed vision: To provide leadership and direction across Arun in encouraging and enabling joint action planning and delivery to decrease the causal drivers of crime and anti-social behaviour. It was suggested that addressing the drivers of crime and anti-social behaviour (ASB) is a critical step towards providing long-term and sustainable solutions for tackling crime. Ensuing discussions raised potential issues that addressing causal factors may require specialist skills and knowledge currently outside the remit of SAP. Therefore adopting the proposed strategic vision will require SAP to work collaboratively with other key local partnership and stakeholders in order to achieve success. Partners agreed that the Arun Local Strategic Partnership was an appropriate forum for SAP to encourage debate and create synergies with other local partnerships to achieve the strategic vision. Partners discussed the length of time the Partnership Plan and Vision should be in place. It was suggested that the problems identified in the current Strategic Intelligence Assessment occurring in certain areas were the same as those occurring 7 or 8 years ago and beyond. Therefore, in order to ‘break the cycle’ of ASB and crime in these areas would require SAP to take a long term commitment of upwards of 2 years before success could be realistically achieved. A 3-year plan would not necessarily add value if the issues have not been wholly addressed in that time. It was suggested that realistically, the vision should be 5 years onwards although resourcing a long-term commitment is ambitious given the current economic recession and local impact of public sector reforms, including potential difficulties within partner agencies of maintaining continuity of resource and / or key individuals. However, a 5 year plan would be more influential in encouraging the appropriate stakeholders to engage. The Partnership Plan would be reviewed and adapted during the 5 year period to reflect current and anticipated resources and needs using the Strategic Intelligence Assessment as the evidence basis. It was agreed that the plan needs to state why the timescale is 5 years and include associated risks.

Partners discussed the priorities agreed at the extra-ordinary SAP meeting held on 20th February 2012: Reducing Vulnerabilities; Antisocial Behaviour; Reducing Reoffending; and the overarching theme of building Trust and Confidence.

It was suggested that the headings were too broad and therefore ambiguous, for instance, the priority of Reducing Vulnerabilities for which police are the lead could equally be led by the NHS for vulnerabilities in health. It was agreed that to overcome any ambiguity, each lead develops a partnership definition and framework to take their priority forward.

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

ACTION: Each priority lead to develop a definition and framework for the partnership meeting to consider and agree.

At the meeting that took place in February there was a commitment from partners to adopt a targeted approach in specific LSOAs that were persistently suffered from high levels of crime and ASB (Lower Super Output Area – a sub ward area averaging about 1,500 people). It was agreed that partnership commitment to this problem solving and delivery model is a critical success factor. In the initial stages, this partnership approach would accurately scope, assess and pinpoint causal driving factors for crime within the identified LSOAs. This ‘community insight’ should inform and drive credible and realistic solutions to tackle the issues.

Some partners raised concern regarding the proposal that the Joint Action Group (JAG) should solely concentrate their partnership efforts on just two LSOAs across the District. In its current form, the JAG reacts to emerging crime and ASB issues irrespective of where they happen across Arun. It was therefore questioned whether targeting specific areas is an appropriate role for JAG . However, it was highlighted that there are synergies with a targeted area based approach and JAG’s purpose as the LSOA’s requiring targeted partnership effort usually generate the largest volumes for crime. Therefore, JAG would tackle these LSOA’s anyway as part of their primary function. Local Neighbourhood policing have targeted the majority of their resources to the LSOAs identified in the Strategic Intelligence Assessment as they are areas that have the most crimes, harm or risk. It was suggested that JAG could adopt a targeted area based approach within two LSOA’s whilst retaining its focus and ability to deal with sharp rises in crime and ASB across the District. It could achieve this by utilising focused and effective Task and Finish groups. Some partners voiced concerns that limited and further decreasing resources would undermine the ability of the partnership to successfully dedicate and target their resources into specific identified areas.

ACTION: Chair of JAG to discuss with JAG members the SAP strategic proposal that they adopt two pilot LSOA’s during 2012/13 and submit their response to SAP for further debate.

Partners agreed to the following three strategic priorities: Reducing Vulnerability, Antisocial Behaviour and Reducing Reoffending. SAP will review and further debate the strategic priority of targeted delivery.

A SAP Communications Plan is needed to successfully achieve the trust and confidence strategic priority. The associated plan will set out a framework to ensure that partners are effectively coalescing on key partnership communication themes and messages. It was stressed to partners that commitment and to the plan is an critical success factor

ACTION: Georgina Holland to develop and implement a SAP Communications Plan. ACTION: Georgina Holland to revise Partnership Plan and re-circulate virtually for SAP to authorise and endorse.

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

337. Safer Arun Partnership funding

The Partnership 2011/12 carry forward has been revised to £67,660 following a decision at the January 2012 meeting that prohibited further partnership expenditure (with the exception of an agreed amount allocated to JAG). The 2012/13 area based grant (ABG) allocation formulas have yet to be confirmed by WSSCSP. However, partners should prepare for a reduction of approximately 50% compared to last year (based on the 3 year funding formula published by the Home Office in 2010). Consequently, SAP can expect to receive an area based grant in the region of £39,000. Therefore, a potential sum of £106,660 could be available for the partnership in 2012/13.

Basic skills

In 2011/12, SAP allocated £5,000 to joint fund Basic Skills Provision for

offenders with Chichester CSP. Partners were informed that Chichester CSP agreed to allocate £5,000 for basic skills provision for 2012/13 however the £5,000 allocated from SAP to Basic Skills Tuition in 2011/12 has been frozen until a clearer, business case for Arun is presented. The Probation Trust expressed concerns if the project was not to be implemented in Arun.

More details were requested around the cost effectiveness such as the level and frequency of basic skills provision, as the total £20,000 (which includes the ACLS match-funding) will benefit only 15 individuals (and it is also currently unclear as to how many will benefit from Arun versus Chichester). Partners requested Probation to provide further details regarding the outcomes and success measures including case studies to evidence previous successes in reducing reoffending. Emergency accommodation

SAP allocated £3,000 to the Probation Trust in 2011/12 for an Emergency Accommodation project for ex-offenders released from prison with no immediate accommodation. The Probation Trust provided an update on project and asked SAP to consider allowing the unspent funding to be carried into 2012/13.

Partners were informed that the Probation Trust had allocated a large proportion of the funding to two individual cases. The two ex-offenders that benefitted from the accommodation had a more than 70% chance of reoffending and since release, neither has reoffended. However, the original project proposal submitted and agreed by SAP was to provide short term, emergency accommodation. Therefore partners concluded that the two cases did not meet the original project criteria. Partners suggested that longer-term accommodation was a potentially separate project. It was suggested that ADC Housing and StonePillow could work with the Probation Trust to bridge the gap in the provision of accommodation.

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

Consequently, partners requested additional information quested from the Probation Trust to clarify and explain how the remaining funds would be spent against the original project criteria and provide evidence that emergency accommodation has an effect on reducing reoffending.

ACTION: Probation to submit written proposal to SAP for

continued carry forward of Basic Skills grant funding and carry forward of Emergency Accommodation

338. Update on Police and Crime Commissioner Preparations

Partners were informed that the first meeting of the Shadow Police and Crime Panel met on the 16th April 2012. Cllr Paul Wotherspoon will represent Arun. 339. Safer Schools Partnership Officer Project update

C/I Derrick thanked the partnership for funding the two Arun Safer Schools Partnership Officer (SSPO) posts in 2011/12. The police will be mainstreaming these posts and thus retaining their provision as they have been a notable success.

PCSO Oakley attended the meeting to update partners about the

activities the SSPO’s have undertaken. These included: reducing vulnerability ,offending and ASB; building trust and confidence; responding to crimes such as assaults and thefts; Child Protection and Social Service referrals; truancy sweeps; Keepout Programme; running parent forums around personal safety; assemblies with BTP; bullying and social issues; and collecting drugs intelligence. Partners agreed that this was fantastic work but expressed significant concern regarding the effectiveness of current safeguarding and child protection processes and procedures. Consequently, after further discussion, partners agreed that C/I Derrick, as the Chair of the SAP, writes to the County Director with responsibility for these services, outlining the Partnership’s concerns. ACTION: C/I Derrick to write to WSCC outlining SAP’s concerns regarding safeguarding and child protection response. 340. Probation update

The Probation Trust updated partners regarding the reoffending rates within Arun and across West Sussex. The data clearly showed that Arun has the highest reoffending rate compared to other Districts in West Sussex. Consequently, Probation will be investigating the reasons for this

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

occurring in Arun by drilling down to offender profiles and types of offences. Partners requested to see the product of this analysis.

The Probation Trust is currently analysing their organisational costings

to improve efficiency in preparation for competition within their marketplace. Probation agreed to share this information with partners at the July meeting. 341. Any other business

Partners were informed that Holly Margetts has joined NHS West Sussex as the Quality and Development Manager for Alcohol and Substance Misuse and will be the lead for the authority’s response to reducing alcohol related harm across County.

Hilary Spencer informed partners that funding has been secured for the

three posts within the Expanding Communities Team to continue for another year. Due to the nature of the funding secured, their work is restricted to giving advice and support to members of community. The team are based at Dove Lodge and also work from Littlehampton Civic Centre and Bognor Regis Town Hall.

Op Accent

C/I Jane Derrick advised partners that Arun has seen an 8% increase

in crime. This is predominately driven by significant increases in volume crime such as theft of / from cars, shoplifting etc (acquisitive crime). 75% of the offenders are white British and live within Arun. However, police have identified an emerging minority of Eastern Europeans which are contributing to the increases. Consequently, the police are keen to expand their understanding of these communities, particularly regarding their background and potential previous offences.

Part of the response to this is Operation Accent, set up and managed

by Sussex Police to target and investigate organised crime groups in Bognor Regis. This will aim to tackle a breadth of local related crime issues including human trafficking and street drinking. The local Neighbourhood Policing Team will be aiming to gather and collate knowledge of the local Eastern European community as part of the operation. C/I Derrick stressed that partnership working is vital to tackle these issues.

Op Accent will launch at Butlins on the 14th May 2012 in a multi agency

forum. Police will outline the key issues and the aims of the operation and seek to enlist partnership support. In the afternoon, voluntary groups such as Arun Angels will be invited along for awareness raising and to discuss how they can help.

C/I Derrick asked SAP to consider funding a full-time translator to work alongside the Op Accent team. Arun Police currently employ a Polish-speaking PCSO who is invaluable in building trust and confidence in the Eastern European community and in gaining intelligence. The translator would build on this, helping to reduce the vulnerability around communication and

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

increasing the understanding of this community. It was highlighted that an interpreter would need a Community Interpretation Qualification.

ACTION: C/I Derrick to submit a funding bid to SAP for consideration. ECINS

ECINS is a partnership Anti-social behaviour database that was originally commissioned and developed by the Home Office to help agencies share and manage partnership information to tackle and reduce nuisance within local communities. It is a cloud neighbourhood database owned and managed by a social interest company called Empowering Communities. The database has a variety of applications and uses including management of: offenders, repeat vulnerable ASB victims, houses of multiple occupation and vulnerable locations. Under offender management, the system can be tailored to tackle and manage multi agency actions for street drinkers, prolific and priority offenders as well as ASB perpetrators. Examples of the database functionality includes clear identification of the case partner lead and or single point of contact, ability to assign actions and monitor progress against these, enabling a clear and auditable footprint and the ability to quickly and easily upload information which partners can access via the internet securely. Users can be assigned different levels of access depending upon their needs and requirements. E-cins is fully compliant with the required Information Commissioner policies. The database is already in use in other parts of the country including Brighton with positive user feedback from a variety of partners including Police and Local Authorities.

E-cins requires an annual fee of £5,475 for each District and includes an unlimited number of users. Partners were asked to consider SAP piloting E-cins to improve the partnership’s response and effectiveness in tackling ASB. If the pilot was successful, individual partners could consider mainstreaming this provision as part of their future core offer to tackle and reduce community nuisance. ACTION: Georgina Holland to circulate a funding bid to SAP for consideration.

It was proposed that short time funding requests are circulated to partners for virtual agreement.

This was agreed Bognor Regis street drinking sub-group

Partners were asked to endorse the creation of a Bognor Regis Town Council street drinking sub group, which will be incorporated within the SAP structure. The groups will aim to increase political understanding and knowledge of the street drinking issue in Bognor. Consequently, the group will provide a feedback mechanism between Members and SAP and improve information sharing.

ITEM 11

of 59


of 8

Bognor Regis Town Council, Arun District Council, Police & West Sussex County Council were nominated as members of the group.

The partnership endorsed the set up of the Bognor Regis Town Council sub group. 342. Future Agenda Items i) Safer Arun Partnership

ii) WSSCSP

343. Taxi Marshal Evaluation

Report circulated with agenda.

(The meeting concluded at 5.00 p.m.)

Next meeting takes place on 2nd July 2012 at Committee Room 2, Arun Civic Centre from 3 – 5pm.

ITEM 11

of 59


abcd - Arun District Council elections · 18 May 2012 CABINET MEETING ... abcd Page 1 of 59 Arun...

Documents

Transcript of abcd - Arun District Council elections · 18 May 2012 CABINET MEETING ... abcd Page 1 of 59 Arun...