Agenda and minutes

Where a Councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest the Councillor must declare the interest to the meeting and leave the room without participating in any discussion or making a statement on the item, except where a councillor is permitted to remain as a result of a grant of dispensation.

There were none.

To sign as a correct record the minutes of the 16 October 2024 Performance Monitoring Panel meeting (enclosed).

AGREED:

That the minutes of the 16 October 2024 Performance Monitoring Panel meeting be signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

An update on actions that arose at the 16 October 2024 Performance Monitoring Panel meeting and the tracking of outstanding actions (enclosed).

Consideration was given to the actions which arose at the 16 October 2024 Performance Monitoring Panel meeting and the tracking of outstanding actions.

• Members referred to action 15. 24/25 regarding the refund of planning fees, and queried when a response would be come forward.

• Members referred to action 26. 24/25 and stated that the member ICT survey had since been recirculated. Members were encouraged to complete the survey.

• The Assistant Director – Strategic Growth and Development referred to action 32. 24/25 and reported that contact had been made with a senior officer at the Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board and assurance had been given that responses to queries raised by the Performance Monitoring Panel would be provided in January 2025.

AGREED:

That the responses to actions be noted.

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

Consideration was given to the Key Decision Plan dated 11 December 2024.

• The Democratic Services Officer advised members that the decision regarding the ‘Fleet Vehicle for Housing Repairs’ had been rescheduled to before 31 January 2025’.

o   Members queried the criteria for this decision and asked whether electric/hybrid vehicles were being considered.

·       Members queried whether garage plots were still classed as such if a garage had been demolished. One such plot in Sutton Bridge had not been maintained or secured and action was needed.

o   The Strategic and Operational Property Manager responded that the council held a number of garage plots where the garage had been demolished.  The whole portfolio was being re-evaluated.

AGREED:

That the Key Decision Plan be noted.

To provide an update on how the Council is performing for the period 1 July 2024 to 30 September 2024 (report of the Assistant Director – Corporate enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Corporate which provided an update on how the Council is performing for the period 1 July 2024 to 30 September 2024.

The Assistant Director – Strategic Growth and Development introduced the report on behalf of the report author, the Business Intelligence and Change Manager who had sent apologies, and the following points were highlighted:

• 72% of the Council’s performance metrics presented on or above target;
• 11% were slightly below target;
• 11% were significantly under target;

Areas of strong performance included:

• Planning Applications: where a high performance was achieved in the determination of major (91.12%) and minor (87.04%) planning applications within set timeframes;
• Safety Checks: 100% compliance regarding gas safety checks, fire risk assessments, asbestos management surveys and legionella risk assessments;
• Waste Collection: 99.89% of waste collections were successful on the first attempt; and
• Freedom of Information rates: whilst slightly under target, performance had showed a significant improvement and was at its highest levels for two years.

Areas which required improvement:

• Homelessness Prevention: 39.53% of cases were successfully opened while customers remained in settled accommodation, against a 50% target;
• Customer Contact Centre average answer rate was 85.42% against a target of 90%. Efforts were being made to improve performance utilising call routing messages and a social media campaign; and
• Revenues and Benefits answer rate: 77.15% against a target of 87%. Improvement efforts were in hand, which included call routing messages and training.

The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager provided the panel with a presentation (appended to the minutes) and a verbal update in respect of homelessness prevention performance which included the following:  

·       The team was not considered to be under-resourced and officers endeavoured to work closely with professional bodies to deal with cases at the earlier ‘prevention’ stage, nonetheless, rough sleepers, sofa surfers, and those fleeing domestic abuse were required to be accepted in ‘relief’ for a period of assessment;

·       Professional bodies, such as the prison service and NHS, had referred 17 (of 52) cases, which were bound to be accepted in the relief duty.

·       A social media campaign had conveyed the process to be followed when a homelessness case was presented to the council in order to encourage customers to make an approach as soon as possible;

·       Where a local connection to South Holland could not be ascertained, cases would be referred either to the local authority associated with the customers last place of residence or social services where a safeguarding referral was required;

·       The conditions for the application of relief duty were relayed; and

·       SHDC’s Q2 prevention duty performance at 46.2% exceeded the national average of 40.9%.

Members considered the update from the Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager and made the following comments:

·       Members queried how the ‘percentage of homeless cases that were successfully resolved before a customer became homeless’ could be above 100%.

o   The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager confirmed that where prevention cases were extended into another quarter, performance statistics could overlap  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

The Strategic and Operational Property Manager to provide a verbal update to the panel outlining progress made since the last Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field Task Group update to members in January 2024.

The Strategic and Operational Property Manager provided the following verbal update to the panel regarding progress made towards the Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field Task Group recommendations.

• The Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field had been leased to Spalding United Football Club for a 25-year period from 20 July 2024;
• The lease arrangement enabled the football club to benefit from significant grant funding from Lincolnshire FA and the National FA and thereby enabling required enhancements to the ground and allowing quality football to be played at the site for years to come;
• As members of the executive board, the council were to meet with the tenants during the summer of 2025 to review progress of the pre-approved business plan and the 5-year growth plan for grass roots football. Spalding United had undertaken to create more grass roots football teams, such as dads’ football, and women and girls’ teams. In addition, other users were to be encouraged, such as running clubs, with an aim of building overall usage and increased footfall for home games;
• Pinchbeck United were working with Spalding United to ensure differing leagues of football remained buoyant at the site;
• The revenue savings for the council were relatable and healthy and the tenancy arrangement provided an income stream whilst negating any capital outlay; and
• Flexibility remained for all parties and the hope was that Spalding United continued to grow and flourish.

Members considered the verbal update and made the following comment:

• Members noted that a successful outcome had been achieved for both the council and the football club thanked all relevant parties for the work involved.

AGREED:

That the Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field Task Group update be noted.

To review the Partnership’s progress against opportunities identified in the business case and lines of enquiry (report of Councillors Claire Rylott and Stuart Evans (BBC) on behalf of the Partnership Scrutiny Task Group enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of Councillor Claire Rylott and Councillor Stuart Evans (BBC) on behalf of the Partnership Scrutiny Task Group which reviewed the Partnership’s progress against opportunities identified in the business case and lines of enquiry.

As a member of the Partnership Scrutiny Task Group, the Chairman of the Performance Monitoring Panel introduced the report and the Scrutiny and Policy Officer attended virtually to support the item.

The Chairman of the Performance Monitoring Panel highlighted the following main points:

• That the panel comprised three members from each authority of the partnership. SHDC membership was drawn from the Performance Monitoring Panel and included Councillor Alcock, Councillor Booth and Councillor Brewis;
• Attendance at the virtual meetings for SHDC members had proved  challenging at times due to IT issues;
• Work of the task group included the gathering of evidence from all three Leaders, the Senior Leadership Team, Senior Officers, the Staff Forum. Enquiries focussed on areas members felt required preparedness for the future, such as in the areas of recruitment, retention and ICT;
• The three Leaders provided interesting and differing perspectives on the questions;
• It was encouraging to see that staff engagement had improved however perspectives in some areas were different to that expressed by senior officers;
• Members felt that the current arrangements for the joint scrutiny task groups of the partnership should be less prescriptive for future years, including that:
  • The ‘annual’ task group only take place if this was needed and not undertaken annually as a matter of course;
  • That the subject matter was able to be varied; and
  • That the membership was not tied to Chairman, Vice Chairman and one other councillor, as currently prescribed. Other interested members needed to have the ability to take part.
• The final report of the task group was at Appendix 1.

Councillor Booth and Councillor Brewis congratulated the task group on the work undertaken which highlighted the progress made by the partnership. The Scrutiny and Policy Officer was also thanked for her support during the process.

Councillor Booth added that he felt the joint partnership task group was very worthwhile and that the work had highlighted the differences between the districts.

AGREED:

a)    That the Annual Joint Scrutiny of the Partnership 2024 final report at Appendix 1 and associated recommendations be noted; and

b)    That the report be recommended to Cabinet.

To inform the Performance Monitoring Panel of the 2023/24 Tenant Satisfaction Measure Results (report of the Assistant Director – Housing enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Housing which informed the Performance Monitoring Panel of the 2023/24 Tenant Satisfaction Measure results.

The Housing Transformation Programme Manager and Business Support Manager attended for this item.

The Housing Transformation Programme Manager introduced the report and raised the following points:

• From 2023/24, the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) required all landlords to complete Tenant Satisfaction Measure surveys on an annual basis;
• The exercise enabled tenants to hold their landlord to account and represented a means by which the RSH understood areas upon which to focus inspections;
• No deviations from the format were permitted, including survey questions;
• The operating environment for the sector included that:
  • Tenants were the least satisfied they had been in the last five years with a decline in satisfaction and a 30% increase in formal complaints;
  • One third of landlords had large volumes of overdue repairs with a 60% increase in completion times. It was noted that SHDC was currently performing well in these areas with voids below target days and repairs completed within set timescales;
• A summary of the approach for the Tenant Satisfaction Measure survey was at Appendix A;
• The Tenant Satisfaction Measure results, which referred to Housemark data, was at Appendix B; and
• A presentation which summarised the report, and included RSH data released since the report was published, was given to members at the meeting and appended to the minutes.

 Members considered the report and made the following comments:

• Members expressed concern regarding the anti-social behaviour (ASB) statistics for the ‘rural’ South Holland when compared to the national picture. Was this a growing problem in the district?
  • The Housing Transformation Programme Manager responded that:
    • The RSH had undertaken work which enabled accurate comparisons for 10,000 units across the country;
    • The statistics related to SHDC’s approach as a landlord rather than the community safety however the two teams worked together with the transfer of cases as applicable;
    • The survey results indicated that not all neighbour disputes were being categorised as ASB cases and it was felt that engagement with tenants regarding ASB required improvements;
    • A similar situation had been identified regarding complaints and a huge effort had been made within the last six months to address the issue which included that:
      • Work had been undertaken to ensure that all informally reported complaints were recorded as formal complaints;
      • A working group met every six weeks to review all complaint cases and to identify trends and learning;
      • Reports were provided regularly to the Portfolio Holder and six-monthly to Cabinet which included an update on trends and performance as well as service improvements undertaken in response to complaints; and
      • A similar focus regarding ASB would take place within the next 12 months.

• Members asked if regular comparisons of SHDC performance against national performance was undertaken and whether such findings could be reported to all members on a monthly basis. Members stated that even where SHDC performed above the national average, the council should aim to attain  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

To set out the Work Programme of the Performance Monitoring Panel (report of the Assistant Director – Governance (Monitoring Officer) enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Governance which set out the Work Programme of the Performance Monitoring Panel.

The Democratic Services Officer introduced the report and highlighted the following main points:

• Appendix 1 detailed the forthcoming meeting dates and expected items:
  • Members were satisfied that the Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field Task Group verbal update at the current meeting met the requirements for the annual update.                                                                   
• Appendix 2 outlined the task group information. A number of the task groups were dormant, and the document included proposals from the Chairman and Vice Chairman which suggested which task groups remain on Appendix 2 and which could potentially be removed. The following proposals were made and agreed by the committee that:
  • The South Holland Centre Task Group be removed from Appendix 2 however regular reports to continue to come forward to the committee;
  • The Sir Halley Stewart Playing Field Task Group be removed but that an update report continue to come forward to the committee annually, as per current practice;
  • The Public Open Spaces Task Group be removed however consideration was needed as to how this subject moved forward in a different way;
  • The Visitor Economy Task Group be removed but consideration would take place to reinstate the Task Group subject to member satisfaction of a Destination Lincolnshire Visitor Economy report due to come forward to the Policy Development Panel in due course;
  • The Public Toilets Task Group be removed;
  • The Swimming Pool and Leisure Centre Contract Task Group be retained pending progress of the new facility; and
  • The Effectiveness of CCTV Task Group be retained due to the ongoing hope by members that facilities be extended into the wider district.

AGREED:

That the Performance Monitoring Panel Work Programme be noted.

To provide members with an update on the South Holland Centre Budget (report of the Assistant Director – Leisure and Culture enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Leisure and Culture which provided members with an update on the South Holland Centre budget as requested by the Performance Monitoring Panel at its meeting held on 16 October 2024.

The covering report was introduced by the Community Development Manager which outlined the following:

• Background to the report including that the work at the South Holland Centre was supported by a Business Development Plan;
• Summary of the financial position; and
• The detailed budget for the South Holland Centre was included at exempt Appendix 1 and was to be considered in closed session at agenda item 17 of the current meeting.

Members considered the report and made the following comments:

• Members asked for details of any intervention and involvement by members regarding the running of the South Holland Centre.
  • The Community Development Manager responded that monthly meetings were held with the Portfolio Holder.

• Members queried if the Business Development Plan had previously been provided to members and whether the document could be provided upon request.
  • The Community Development Manager confirmed that members had received the Business Plan and that it could be provided upon request.

• Members stated that the South Holland Centre should be considered an asset to the district and be used for a wider range of activities, both cultural and non-cultural. A mission statement was needed as an addendum to the Business Development Plan which outlined the council’s vision for the venue.
  • The Portfolio Holder for Assets and Strategic Planning responded that:
    • The volume of ticket sales for live shows, including pantomime, evidenced that South Holland Centre was a positive asset to the district; and
    • Work was being undertaken with the South Holland Centre Manager and the Community Development Manager to look at future options for the venue which aligned contemporary audience/visitor expectations with value for money considerations. The approach for utilisation of all spaces at the venue was being considered.
  • The Community Development Manager added that:
    • Visitor numbers had reached 30,000 since April 2024;
    • Increased ticket sales for this year’s pantomime had been achieved;
    • A range of community shows had taken place in the venue; and
    • The small but dedicated team at the South Holland Centre ensured that audiences had a positive experience.

• Some members suggested that research be made into venues beyond the boundaries of the district whilst other members highlighted demographic and geographic differences of such venues which rendered operational comparisons irrelevant.

• Some members reported extremely positive experiences of recent visits to the South Holland Centre and that the programme had improved.

• Members queried whether income could be made from pantomime programme sales.
  • The Community Development Manager responded that, as part of the current partnership pantomime agreement, Polka Dot Pantomimes had the rights to produce and sell pantomime programmes.  

• Members stated that the promotion of South Holland Centre events to outlying villages of the district needed to be improved and that an increase in general marketing activity was required. Members suggested the regular utilisation of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

There were none.

Under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public were 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 Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

To consider the exempt appendix relating to agenda item 14.

Consideration was given to the exempt appendix (Appendix 1) of agenda item 14, which detailed the South Holland Centre budget 2024/25.

AGREED:

That the contents of Appendix 1 be noted.