Agenda and minutes

(Head of Research and Democratic Services)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Panel noted that Councillor Mrs J Whitehouse would be substituting for Councillor Mrs P Brooks.

(Head of Research and Democratic Services). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

The Panel noted there were no declarations of interest.

To consider and agree the notes of the meeting of the Panel held on 5 July 2007.

The minutes of 5 July 2007 were noted and agreed as a correct record.

At the Panel’s initial meeting, Members agreed their proposed Terms of Reference, which have subsequently been endorsed by the main Overview and Scrutiny Committee on Tuesday 10^th July 2007.

The Terms of Reference are attached to this Agenda.  At each Panel Meeting Members will be required to review the Terms of Reference to ensure continuing relevance.

The Terms of Reference were noted and agreed.

With the meetings approval the order of the agenda was changed so that the evaluation of the Youth Initiatives Scheme was taken as the next item.

The Panel’s Terms of Reference include responsibility for evaluating the success of the Youth Initiatives Scheme (1 (iv) refers).  At the meeting on 5 July 2007, Members received details of the criteria on which the award of the grant to Town/Parish Councils had been determined and a breakdown of the projects completed so far (there are also a number of other schemes where works are ongoing or scheduled).  In summary these are as follows:

• Refurbishment of Recreation Area, Parklands, Coopersale.
• Provision of Youth Shelter, Chigwell Row.
• Installation of Sports System – Rear of School, Fyfield.
• Provision of Teen Shelters, Roding Valley and Willingale Road, Loughton.
• Games Area Resurfacing, Town Mead, Waltham Abbey.
• Renovation of Skateboard Area, Stonnards Hill, Epping.
• Provision of Teenage Youth Facilities, Epping Upland.
• Provision of Youth Shelter, Ninefields, Waltham Abbey.
• Refurbishment, Skateboard Area, St Peter’s Avenue, Shelley.
• Youth Facilities, Upper and Lower Sheering.

Chris Overend, Policy and Research Officer, and officer responsible for the Scheme, who will be in attendance at the meeting, has identified a number of aspects which might be used as a means of gauging the success of the scheme.  These are set out below and can be expanded on at the meeting.  Members of the Panel are asked to comment on these and put forward suggestion of their own:

• Use of the facilities over a period of time
• A survey of young people in the parishes/towns concerned to obtain their views about the facilities
• Obtain views of residents about the success or otherwise of the schemes
• Ask Parish/Town Councils for comments regarding the effect of the schemes
• Ask Parish/Town Councils about how accessible they found the funding process for the schemes.
• Compare figures for ‘anti-social’ activities for before and after the implementation of the schemes

In making an assessment, it might be useful to take account of the type and cost of the scheme concerned.  Are some schemes more successful?  Comments have been made and, in some instances, concerns expressed, regarding the youth shelters, which have been introduced at certain locations.  But are these comments valid or are they merely to do with the perceptions? What are the views of young people regarding youth shelters?   

The Policy and Research Officer introduced the item on the Youth Initiative Scheme explaining that it was initially set up to reduce anti-social behaviour. He emphasised that it was not an exact science and that it was the Panel’s task to recommend how they would like to monitor the Scheme. He had put forward a number of suggestions in the report as to how the monitoring could be carried out but there were other possibilities. They could for example consult Housing Services on the tenant’s issues raised or the Police on how they view the scheme. They may be able to compare situations and incidences in the area both pre and post scheme implementation

They would need to take into account the views of the young people concerned, the local residents and the local Parish or Town councillors. There would be difficulties in comparing figures for anti social behaviour between different areas; had they declined because of the scheme or for other reasons. Getting meaningful figures would not be easy but overall impressions may be able to be gained.

The officer had undertaken visits to most of the schemes and had drawn up a short report on what he witnessed. He observed that members might wish to visit the schemes themselves.

Councillor Mrs Haigh commented that the official figures say that there had been a decline in anti social behaviour but the general perception has been that there has been an increase. How could a successful scheme be defined? The Policy and Research Officer said they would need a range of indicators, such as who uses it and when and what time of day.

Councillor Pritchard commented that the Councillors could each visit the schemes in their own area and perhaps speak to the youths there on what they thought about it. The Policy and Research Officer said they needed to know the impact on the anti-social behaviour and if the youths were from that area or elsewhere. The Deputy Chief Executive observed that they needed a benchmark to work to, but in the absence of one they may have to rely on anecdotal evidence. It would be useful to know what the Town and Parish Councillors feel about the process, the funding and advice given. Did they get what they wanted? The facilities would have a shelf life, what are they doing to update them? It was also important to hear what the youths had to say. Julie Chandler, the Community and Cultural Services Manager, may be able to help via the Play Strategy. She said that they could include questions on this and also tie it in with the Youth Council’s work.

The Assistant Head of Leisure Services commented that each local council must have had an expectation of what they expected as an outcome of the scheme as well as the scheme itself and they should be able to tell us if they had been achieved or there was still the potential for it to be achieved.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

As reported at the initial meeting of the Panel, the Final Report of the Leisure Task and Finish Panel 2006/07, (previously circulated), contains, background information regarding Waltham Abbey Sports Centre and the steps taken to date to determine future management arrangements, post the termination of the current Dual Use Agreement in September 2007.

Since the Task and Finish Panel Report was considered by the Cabinet in March 2007, further meetings and dialogue have taken place, with the Headteacher and Bursar of King Harold Secondary School.

The school seem to now have a better understanding of the implications of a third party Leisure Management Contractor, being appointed to undertake the day to day operation of the site and appear more open to this approach.  However, the school have also confirmed their desire that any direct contractual relationship is between the Council and any Contractor, the school being reluctant to enter into any contract management scenario.  The School would therefore prefer a new Dual Use Agreement with Epping Forest District Council.            

Officers within Leisure and Legal Services have been developing a proposed Dual-Use Agreement for consideration by the Task and Finish Panel and King Harold School’s Governing Body, on this basis.  The main document itself, is still in Draft.  However, attached is a breakdown of the main heads, of the proposed Agreement, which Officers will take Members through, highlighting the main practical and potential financial implications for the Council.

Also, attached is an indicative timetable outlining the various stages of discussion and permissions necessary, if the Panel are minded to recommend that the Council enter into a new Dual Use Agreement, to ensure ongoing Community Use of Waltham Abbey Sports Centre.  Members will also be asked to reaffirm their views on whether an External Management Partner be sought to undertake the operation of the Centre in future.

The Deputy Chief Executive filled in the background to this item. Officers have been in communication with the head teacher and the head of the school governors. They are now more aware of what private management of the centre would involve. A new contract will need to be drawn up between the School and the District Council. A draft agreement has been drawn up with the help of our legal services and a list of the contract principles was appended to the agenda for the panel’s information.

The Assistant Head of Leisure reminded the Panel that legally from September, everything goes back to the school. An extension would be agreed to cover the period between then and the time when a new agreement could be signed. It would be recommended that the agreement would last for a period of 20 years. She then took the Panel through the draft joint use agreement.

The Panel noted that:

a)      The District Council could appoint a contractor for any period that it saw fit to do so, it would probably be for a seven-year period.

b)      When the District Council signs with the School a third party contractor does not have to be agreed as the Council would undertake its responsibilities direct.

c)      That guidance for Children and Staff in educational setting came out in 2006 and this would have to be taken into account when looking at the interaction between the Council and school usage times.

d)      That the School would be looking at refurbishment of the school in six years time and this would need to be taken into account in the document to safeguard the Council.

e)      That the Governing Body could make changes to the facility without the prior consent of the Council; this clause will be changed to recommend that the Council’s permission is required.

f)        There can be enhancement but detail of a particular project would be put as a separate proposal to the Governing Body and would be treated as a separate project be agreed with the School.

g)      A time of year will need to be agreed for when a budget is agreed, also how the budgets are divided up will need to be decided.

h)      There is a need to agree what responsibilities each party would have and who funds what with regards to maintenance and the wording on this is being worked on by officers at the moment. There is also a DDA issue.

i)        The timetable dates are indicative but dependent on when the document is finalised and when agreement is achieved with the school.

As discussed at the Panel’s initial meeting, in order to assist particularly new Members of the Task and Finish Panel, Julie Chandler, Community and Cultural Services Manager, will present an overview of the current work of the Council’s Arts Service.  This should provide useful context in relation to the review of the feasibility of third party involvement, in the delivery of arts development work in the District.

The Community and Cultural Services Manager gave the Panel a short presentation on the overview of the current work of the Council’s Arts Service. A copy of her presentation is attached to these minutes.

After the presentation the Community and Cultural Services Manager was asked if any evaluation was done to identify if these projects helps to cut down on anti-social behaviour. She replied that it was difficult to identify, they do however focus on ‘hot spots’ with the Police and have noticed that anti-social behaviour had reduced slightly. Also project evaluations are completed on each scheme.

Councillor Mrs Haigh said she had noted that our arts section was highly regarded and had received praise from all over the country.

It was noted that the arts would be discussed more fully at the next meeting of the Panel.

To consider the Panel’s Work Programme attached.

The Panel noted the work programme for the coming meetings.

No other business was raised.

To note the dates of the next scheduled meetings:

• 18 September 2007 (to be held at the Waltham Abbey Sports Centre);
• 31 October 2007; and
• 27 November 2007.

The following were agreed:

18 September 2007 (to be held at the Waltham Abbey Sports Centre)

31 October 2007 and

27 November 2007.