Minutes:
Question to: Councillor Bingham
Question from: Councillor King
Subject: Aviary at Ayscoughfee Gardens
Councillor King commented that she had spoken last year to the Portfolio Holder at the time regarding the aviary at Ayscoughfee and provided a number of suggestions to improve the welfare of the birds. She had not seen much improvement and requested an update on the situation. Councillor Bingham commented that animal welfare was important and that the aviary was a vital part of Ayscoughfee Gardens. He had only very recently taken responsibility for this issue within his portfolio and advised that he would ascertain the situation as soon as possible.
Question to: Councillor Bingham
Question from: Councillor J LeSage
Subject: Johnson Water Fountain - signage
Councillor J LeSage commented on the lack of signage alongside the Johnson Water Fountain in Ayscoughfee Gardens. Information on its history and what it represented was required – when would this be installed? Councillor Bingham believed that some work had been undertaken regarding signage – he would find out what the position was and respond with a timeframe.
Question to: Councillor Tyrrell
Question from: Councillor Beal
Subject: Update on depot
Councillor Beal asked for an update on the Authority’s new depot, and when it was anticipated to be up and running? Councillor Tyrrell advised that there had been some teething problems, but that an open day was planned and he would advise when this would be.
Question to: Councillor Worth
Question from: Councillor Scalese
Subject:
Councillor Scalese understood that there had been another meeting of the Spalding Town Board – could an update be provided? Councillor Worth responded that both he and Councillor Gibson had attended a workshop session on Friday. This had been a very productive exercise and feedback from it would now be fed into the process. The next phase would be a general consultation, and an online survey would be launched this week. As part of the workshop, Rose Regeneration had been appointed to draft a vision and an emerging investment plan by the end of May, and this would also be consulted on. The YMCA would be working with younger people – it was important to engage with them to see what their views were. With regard to funding, following the initial receipt of £50,000 to set up the Town Board, confirmation had just been received regarding receipt of a further £200,000 to develop the investment plan and vision. Further funding should be received next year.
Question to: Councillor Bingham
Question from: Councillor Sheard
Subject: Lime trees to rear of Ayscoughfee
Councillor Sheard commented that lime trees to the rear of Ayscoughfee Gardens had become overgrown and were causing damage to the wall bordering Love Lane. It was understood that the pollarding of these trees had been discussed in 2022, and that the work had been signed off and paid for in September/October 2023 but the work had not yet been carried out. Why had this work not been carried out and when would it be done? Councillor Bingham stated that if work had been scheduled there would be a reason for possible delays, but that he would find out what the timeframe was for this work. He believed however that the work was in hand.
Question to: Councillor Astill
Question from: Councillor Harrison
Subject: Update on Customer Service performance
Councillor Harrison requested an update on the performance of Customer Services. Councillor Astill responded that 2023/24 had been a good year for the Customer Services Team. Three out of the four Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) had been green across the whole year and one of them was not. There would be a new set of KPIs effective from 1 April 2024 and a copy of these would be distributed to all members. He would also shortly be receiving an analysis report on the 2023/24 year and this would also be distributed. At a previous meeting he had been asked a question regarding the Out of Hours service and some work was now being undertaken to look at the performance of this alongside the internal Customer Services Team, and he had asked that this data also be included with the Performance Reporting for all Councillors to see.
Question to: Councillor Redgate
Question from: Councillor Brewis
Subject: IDB Special Interest Group progress
Councillor Brewis asked if there had been any further progress with Central Government in relation to the work of the IDB Special Interest Group (SIG). Councillor Redgate advised that final determination of the split of the £3 million that the authorities most affected were presented with at the settlement in January 2024 was still awaited. The SIG had written to the Government once again regarding a long-term funding solution. Councillor Redgate was clear that pace around this issue should be maintained. There were now 31 members of the SIG – membership was increasing as some authorities which had previously had small precepts were now seeing a significant increase in their precepts compared to previous years. The SIG, as part of the District Council Network would be meeting with other councils and MPs on 5 June to press forward on this. It was hoped that this issue would be dealt with before Parliament’s summer recess and before a General Election.
Question to: Councillor Tyrrell
Question from: Councillor Geaney
Subject: Appointment of Head of Environmental Services
Councillor Geaney stated that the Head of Environmental Services had left the Authority – what was the progress on appointing a new head of this service? Councillor Tyrrell responded that an individual had been appointed and that their name and start date would be circulated in due course.
Question to: Councillor Redgate
Question from: Councillor Wilkinson
Subject: UKSPF
Councillor Wilkinson stated that as part of the UKSPF fund distribution, the Council had engaged two partners (YMCA and LCF). Could details on the numbers of successful and unsuccessful applicants that had been assisted by these two partner organisations be provided? Was the Authority receiving value for money? Councillor Redgate advised that he could not provide the exact detail at the meeting but would provide a response to all members shortly. He did comment that the two bodies engaged with were specialists in their field.
Question to: Councillor Tyrrell and Councillor Casson
Question from: Councillor J LeSage
Subject: Early presentation of refuse
Councillor James LeSage stated that he had on a previous occasion raised the problem of early presentation of refuse in his ward (St John’s). This problem persisted - could a letter be sent to residents in the area, or stickers applied to bags to highlight the problem. Councillor Tyrrell responded to advise that stickers were already applied, that individuals were notified and posts added to Facebook to advise the public not to present their rubbish before they should. Councillor Casson also advised that the Authority was advised of individuals who did this on a regular basis, and that the Enviro-Crime Officers could address these issues by notifying people, posting letters through door and posts on Facebook to advise regarding early presentation. Councillor Casson requested that Councillor J LeSage send him details of regular offenders so that the enviro-crime officers could address the issue.
Question to: Councillor Tyrrell
Question from: Councillor Sheard
Subject: Bank Holiday refuse collections
Councillor Sheard commented that the refuse collection for the Early May Bank Holiday had not been altered in the same way as all other Bank Holiday collections were dealt with. This had confused members and residents. Had the information been missed from the information charts advising of collection changes, and why was there no consistency? Councillor Tyrrell responded that the decision had been made to keep refuse collections unchanged over the Early May Bank Holiday as it coincided with the Spalding Flower Parade. Any change would have meant that there would have been additional waste to collect. For this reason, the chart advising residents of changes to Bank Holiday collections had not included a change of date for this Bank Holiday weekend.
Question to: Councillor Casson
Question from: Councillor T Sneath
Subject: Environmental Crime Enforcement - number of Fixed Penalty Notices issued and amount of income received by the Council
Councillor T Sneath stated that the Environmental Crime Enforcement contract had been in operation for about a year. How many Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) had been issued by the contractor, and how much income had SHDC received via the contractual income sharing agreement. Councillor Casson did not have the figures to hand but advised that he would obtain and circulate them to members. He stated that a higher income was received from FPNs for littering than fly-tipping, as the latter was more difficult and time-consuming to process. He also commented that monies received through the income sharing agreement were reinvested in items such as new cameras, uniforms etc.
Question to: Councillor Worth
Question from: Councillor Alcock
Subject: Inequity of receipt of non-domestic rates relating to offshore renewable energy schemes
Councillor Alcock referred to the earlier question regarding Internal Drainage Boards and asked whether consideration had been given to setting up a special interest group to address the issue of offshore renewable energy schemes – as he understood it, the authority at the landfall sites benefited from the non-domestic rates, irrespective of where the buildings to service them were required to be sited. If this was the case, could work be undertaken jointly to either address the unfairness of the situation (this area was likely to be gaining a number of unattractive buildings for no benefit) or could the situation be changed nationally, or locally with partners to achieve a more equitable situation where all authorities gained some rates benefit from the schemes. Councillor Worth responded that he had written recently to the minister on this very issue. The scheme in question provided benefit to ELDC but none to BBC and SHDC. He was happy to keep taking up this issue. It had been raised with Greater Lincolnshire Leaders and the Leader of the County Council has suggested that all Leaders from Greater Lincolnshire authorities get together to lobby on this, in addition to the issue of solar farms and pylons. Councillor Worth was not confident of change but would pursue the lobbying option and would forward Councillor Alcock the email response that he had received from the Minister.
Question to: Councillor Worth
Question from: Councillor Sheard
Subject: Pharmacies offering additional health services to the public
Councillor Sheard commented that at a previous meeting, it had been stated that there was an intention to draw up a list of pharmacies across South Holland that offered additional health services to the public – had this been compiled and where could it be viewed. Councillor Worth explained that this issue had arisen following a presentation by Councillor Scalese who was SHDC’s representative on the Health Scrutiny Committee for Lincolnshire. The report was provided by her purely to feed information back from the Committee to give councillors an awareness of what was being discussed, and it was not within the Authority’s remit to deal with issues that arose within the report. He suggested that Councillor Scalese could raise the issue at the next meeting of the Health Scrutiny Committee and obtain the information directly from them.