Agenda item

(Safer, Greener & Transport Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-048-2015/16).

(1)        That, as attached to the report, the CCTV Strategy 2016-2022, including the associated Funding Plan, be approved;

(2)        That the CCTV General Fund Capital Budget of £40,000 per annum be re-profiled as below over the next 4 years, and that Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Capital be funded from the HRA, to meet the requirement of the CCTV Strategy’s Funding Plan:

                                                General Fund              HRA

                        2016/17           £74,000                       Nil

                        2017/18           £23,000                       £14,000

                        2018/19           £13,000                       Nil

                        2019/20           £50,000                       £24,000

(3)        That in order to meet the extended workload generated through the ongoing development of CCTV provision, a review be undertaken by Officers across all Directorates to identify any existing capacity to support the workload of the CCTV Officer and Assistant;

(4)      That, subject to decision 3 above being unsuccessful, a District Development Fund growth bid in the sum of £19,000 per annum be made for three years from 2016/17 – 2018/19 to cover the appointment of a Trainee CCTV Assistant post, on a fixed term basis;

(5)      That a Continuing Services Budget growth bid in the sum of £1,000 in 2016/17 be agreed, to cover the increased costs of CCTV repairs and that future, annual budget requirements as set out in the CCTV Strategy be included in future revenue budgets over the following four years; and

(6)       That opportunities for providing a CCTV service to other Local and District Councils be explored.

The Safer, Greener & Transport Portfolio Holder presented a report on the strategic direction for Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) provision within the District.

The Portfolio Holder reminded the Cabinet that it had considered a report at its meeting on 23 July 2015 concerning the issues associated with the ongoing expansion of CCTV operated by the Council across the District, including costs of maintenance, repair and replacement of equipment and agreed, in principle, to continue to provide and invest in CCTV for the future. A fully-costed CCTV Strategy for the District was now presented for approval, setting out details of all systems currently in operation by the Council and all proposed CCTV installations over the next five years.

The Portfolio Holder reported that the Strategy set out the Council’s current CCTV provision, detailing respective locations, numbers of cameras, condition and costs for maintenance, repair and replacements over the next seven years, along with recommendations for de-commissioning of equipment.  It also provided a CCTV Funding Plan setting out the capital and revenue budgets required each year over the next 5 years in order to plan for the scheduled replacements of existing CCTV systems and routine servicing and repairs, differentiating between the funding required by the HRA and the General Fund. Separate to the Funding Plan, an assessment would be made each year of those systems coming towards the end of their expected life to ensure that actual replacements/renewals were prioritised in the order of greatest need, and that renewals were only undertaken when required.

It was suggested that the Council’s CCTV cameras could be used for car park monitoring, traffic management in the District, and to provide free wi-fi to residents. The Portfolio Holder cautioned that certain uses were highly specialised, and the CCTV Operations Officer added that the Council was already remotely accessing the CCTV in car parks to monitor the cash payment machines. Traffic management would require the feeds from the cameras to be continuously monitored.

It was also suggested that the Police be charged a fee, in the same manner as Insurance Companies, when they required access to the feeds from the Council’s CCTV cameras. However, it was noted that the Council had a duty to provide the Police with any information in relation to the detection of crime. The CCTV Operations Officer informed the Cabinet that the Council could link up with Local Council cameras via a phone line, and assist in the control of their cameras. Officers also supported Local Councils to ensure that they met the twelve guiding principles of CCTV usage. It was felt that perhaps this could be raised at a future meeting of a Local Councils Liaison Committee meeting.

It was highlighted that some private companies had CCTV as well, and consideration should be given to the use of covert CCTV, to catch instances of fly tipping for example. The CCTV Operations Officer stated that cameras for covert use were large, needed to be hidden and generally only had a maximum of six weeks battery life. Such cameras cost £1,000 each, and also required regular maintenance.

There were concerns expressed that the cost of the maintenance contract had more than doubled when there had only been a 33% increase in the number of cameras. There were also concerns about the additional Trainee CCTV Officer post being requested, and it was suggested that if this post was necessary then Recommendation 3 of the report (review across all Directorates to identify any existing capacity to support the CCTV Operations Officer) was superfluous. The Portfolio Holder reminded the Cabinet that if there was an increase in the number of cameras then a request to increase the number of staff was reasonable and the additional CCTV work envisaged would require a new trainee post. However, Recommendation 3 was still relevant and the review would be undertaken before a new post was created.

The Leader of Council commented that the Council was facing a tough budget round, and that some of the requested growth bids across the Council would not be able to be agreed for inclusion in the budget for 2016/17. Therefore, it was appropriate to review the Council’s existing capacity whenever a new post was requested. The Portfolio Holder stated that possible links with Harlow and Epping Forest Colleges would be carefully considered for the trainee post, and that local ward members would be consulted before any cameras were removed.

Decision:

(1)        That, as attached to the report, the CCTV Strategy 2016-2022, including the associated Funding Plan, be approved;

(2)        That the CCTV General Fund Capital Budget of £40,000 per annum be re-profiled as below over the next 4 years, and that Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Capital be funded from the HRA, to meet the requirement of the CCTV Strategy’s Funding Plan:

                                                General Fund              HRA

                        2016/17           £74,000                       Nil

                        2017/18           £23,000                       £14,000

                        2018/19           £13,000                       Nil

                        2019/20           £50,000                       £24,000

(3)        That in order to meet the extended workload generated through the ongoing development of CCTV provision, a review be undertaken by Officers across all Directorates to identify any existing capacity to support the workload of the CCTV Officer and Assistant;

(4)      That, subject to decision 3 above being unsuccessful, a District Development Fund growth bid in the sum of £16,140 per annum be made for three years from 2016/17 – 2018/19 to cover the appointment of a Trainee CCTV Assistant post, on a fixed term basis;

(5)      That a Continuing Services Budget growth bid in the sum of £1,000 in 2016/17 be agreed, to cover the increased costs of CCTV repairs and that future, annual budget requirements as set out in the CCTV Strategy be included in future revenue budgets over the following four years; and

(6)       That opportunities for providing a CCTV service to other Local and District Councils be explored.

Reasons for Decision:

The level of CCTV coverage requested by Directorates for key locations in the District had increased significantly over the last few years, but the budget held by Community Safety had not increased in line with this. The regular maintenance work undertaken under contract had kept the costs of repair to a minimum over the last few years, but the budget was now unable to accommodate the levels of expenditure required for continued growth, ongoing maintenance, equipment repairs and replacement.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

To not increase the current CCTV budget and to phase out respective systems as they failed. However, this option was discounted at the Cabinet meeting in July 2015, since this would leave those areas of the District currently covered without CCTV coverage and therefore a lack of detection in the case of vandalism or crime.

To reduce the resources required for the Funding Plan, with systems renewed beyond their expected useable life. However, this was not recommended due to the reliance placed on ensuring that systems were maintained in good working order and the importance of all systems being fit for purpose.