Meeting documents

PRESENT:  Councillor Mrs Morgan-Owen (Deputy Leader); Councillors Ashenden, James, Liverseidge, Mrs Paternoster, Rowlands, Sir Beville Stanier and Stewart.  

Councillors Mrs Baxter, Mrs Brandis, Cole, Griffin, Mrs Lambert, Metherell and Sherwell attended also.

APOLOGIES: Councillors Cartwright and Mrs Polhill.

RESOLVED -

That subject to the addition of Councillor Ashenden to the attendance list, the Minutes of 14th August, 2001 were approved as a correct record.

Car Parking had been identified as a service for review in 2000/2001.  Preliminary findings of the review had been reported to the Council earlier this year when it had been decided that the Officers should pursue formal discussions with external providers and seek a formal partnership arrangement with Buckinghamshire County Council (BCC) for the delivery of on and off street parking.

Members were informed that the review had now been completed and they received a copy of the Improvement Plan and procurement timetable.  A number of options had been considered and it had been felt that the most appropriate was that which involved the appointment of an external provider and a partnership with BCC covering both on and off street parking.  The use of an external provider might enable the Council to secure capital funding to continue with its ongoing improvement programme and to help fund the actions contained in the Improvement Plan.  The Aylesbury Land Use/Transportation Strategy Panel had appointed a joint Member/Officer working group to develop a Special Parking Area and to address partnership issues.

RESOLVED -

A fundamental review of all aspects of income generation and collection had been started over two years ago.  This involved all aspects of charging, payments, billing and recovery.

The Cabinet received a report outlining the work undertaken over the last few years and setting out details of the work still considered necessary.  It was proposed to progress the review to Stage 2 which would cover payments, debt collection and recovery (other than housing rents which were being covered as part of the Housing Best Value Review).  A fundamental part of the Stage 2 review would be a redesign of the process from beginning to end and to ensure that systems, skills and knowledge were in the right areas in order to make the whole process work more efficiently and effectively.

RESOLVED -

The Cabinet received a report summarising the work undertaken so far in relation to the Best Value review of revenues and benefits services.  The report contained details of the review process.  Nationally collected data had been used to compare the Council's performance with local authorities within the same audit group.  An analysis of recorded customer complaints had also been undertaken.

The report submitted showed that a year on year performance improvement had generally been realised together with a reduction in unit costs.  It had been recognised that there was still scope for further improvements in some areas and the Council was still on track to achieve the targets set.  From the evidence gathered, the Council was within the lower quartile for costs and was cheaper than its external competitors.  Therefore it was not clear what additional value would be secured from proceeding to Stage 2 of the review, which might deflect resources from the delivery of the improvements planned.  Early inspection of this review would test this contention.

RESOLVED -

That the outcome of the Stage 1 Review be noted and that the Review should not proceed to Stage 2.

Members received a report by the Director of Corporate Resources reviewing the first six months of operation of the Customer Services Centre and related services.  The report incorporated operational statistics for the period covered.  Of particular note was the fact that the workload for all sections of the Customer Services Division had increased beyond that estimated when the staffing levels had been agreed in July, 1999.  There was also a significant health and safety issue in respect of the Winslow Area Office.  The estimated cost of refurbishing the office was £50,000.

A major issue related to the current shortfall in the revenue budget which was estimated to be £80,000 for 2001/2002 and £150,000 for 2002/2003.  The reasons for the shortfall were detailed in the report submitted.

Members considered that before addressing this latter issue in particular, formal analysis was required, including of the number of customers whose queries were addressed by the Customer Service staff without resource to colleagues from other departments and of the average time taken with individual customers.

RESOLVED -

The Cabinet received a report and presentation on the requirements for e-government.  The report contained a status report, an explanation of e-government, a summary of the work that needed to be undertaken immediately, that proposed up to December, 2001 and that proposed up to April, 2002.

RESOLVED -

That the requirements for e-government be noted and the proposals for developing e-government plans and working with other authorities be approved.

In October, 2000, Donaldsons Chartered Surveyors had been engaged to carry out a feasibility study for the above sites.  They had used Colin Buchanan and Partners to appraise the traffic and highway requirements.  Donaldsons' report had been published in draft in April this year and after consideration by a Panel comprising Councillors Mrs Paternoster, Stewart, Baldwin, Mrs Lambert and Chapple, an Executive Summary had been received in May, 2001.

The report of the Director of Planning, Property and Construction Services outlined Donaldsons' conclusions in respect of both sites.  The report also identified a number of key decisions that needed to be taken by the Council to ensure that the sites were re-developed to the full benefit of the community.  Once broad parameters had been set for the type of development sought, expressions of interest could be obtained from the commercial sector.  Three or four could then be selected for detailed schemes to be submitted to the Council to include the phasing proposed.  The most appropriate one would be chosen according to a set of pre-determined criteria.  To facilitate this approach some form of broad development brief or concept statement to guide design matters would be necessary.

RESOLVED -

Members received a report by the Director of Planning, Property and Construction Services regarding proposed changes to the Council's adopted supplementary planning guidance (SPG) on developer contributions towards implementation of the ALUT Strategy.

RESOLVED -

That Recommendations 1, 4 and 5 set out in Paragraph 2 of the report be accepted.

RESOLVED -

Members considered a report by the Director of Corporate Resources regarding possible improvements to the Committee Room at Exchange Street to improve versatility and acoustics.

RESOLVED -

That the report be deferred to enable Officers to investigate further possibilities and constraints of accommodating Council and Development Control Committee meetings at both the Exchange Street Offices and other venues, to enable the Walton Street Chamber to be withdrawn from use, as soon as possible.

RESOLVED -

That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the Paragraphs indicated in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act:-

Staffing matter.  (Paragraph 1).

Consideration was given to the detailed report of the Director of Planning, Property and Construction Services which set out the circumstances in relation to the original appointment of a particular member of staff and the options available for the future.

RESOLVED -

That in view of the reduction in workload, and the financial savings achievable, the contract of employment of the postholder in question be not renewed.