Agenda and minutes

Joint Overview & Scrutiny Committee - Thursday, 21st March, 2019 6.30 pm

Venue: Gordon Room, Stoke Abbott Road, Worthing

Contact: Chris Cadman-Dando  email:  chris.cadman-dando@adur-worthing.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

JOSC/18-19/66

Declaration of Interests

Members and officers must declare any disclosable pecuniary interests in relation to

any business on the agenda. Declarations should also be made at any stage such

an interest becomes apparent during the meeting.

 

If in doubt contact the Legal or Democratic Services representative for this meeting.

Minutes:

There were no declaration of interests made

JOSC/18-19/67

Substitute Members

Minutes:

Councillor Ann Bridges declared her substitution for Councillor Carol Albury

JOSC/18-19/68

Confirmation of Minutes

To approve the minutes of the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting of

held on XX XX XX, copies of which have been previously circulated.

Minutes:

Resolved: that the minutes of the meeting of 24 January and 7 February be confirmed as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman

JOSC/18-19/69

Public Question Time

So as to provide the best opportunity for the Committee to provide the public with the fullest answer, questions from the public should be submitted by 12.00pm Tuesday XX XX XX

 

Where relevant notice of a question has not been given, the person presiding may either choose to give a response at the meeting or respond by undertaking to provide a written response within three working days.

 

Questions should be submitted to Democratic Services democratic.services@adur-worthing.gov.uk

 

(Note: Public Question Time will operate for a maximum of 30 minutes.)

Minutes:

A member of the public asked the following question:

West Sussex Air Quality Strategy was listed  and confirmed by the committee  in the JOSC work programme as an agenda item for this meeting (21st March). Platform for our Places lists Breathing Better- improving air quality as a project to support and deliver this strategy. Why has this important topic been taken off the agenda for this meeting and with this in mind why, when the Council is about to purchase five new diesel vehicles when all evidence supports the detrimental effect diesel engines have on air quality? Why is not closer attention being paid by Councillors to pollution in the District when levels of NO2 are high for example in Shoreham High Street Worthing and along the A27?

The Chairman of the Committee explained that the meeting had been rescheduled for September in order that relevant officers from West Sussex Public Health could attend. The Head of Wellbeing explained that the vehicles purchased were the vehicles available to be bought for the size needed. One smaller hybrid truck had been purchased. The Committee was told that the area mentioned in the question was primarily the responsibility of the highways authority and outside of the Borough’s jurisdiction. Full air quality results for the year would be released in the summer.

JOSC/18-19/70

Items Raised Under Urgency Provisions

To consider any items the Chairman of the meeting considers to be urgent

Minutes:

There were no urgent items

JOSC/18-19/71

Consideration of any matter referred to the Committee in relation to a call-in of a decision

Minutes:

There were no call-ins of a decision

JOSC/18-19/72

Review of Dog Warden Service pdf icon PDF 147 KB

To consider a report by the Director for Communities, copy attached as

item 7

Minutes:

 

Before the Committee was a report by the Director for Communities, a copy of which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to the signed copy of these minutes as item 7.

 

Following a report considered at Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JOSC) in July 2018 in relation to dog fouling and litter a request was made by JOSC  that a review of the Dog Control Service being conducted be reported to the Committee.The report before members outlined the review of the Dog Control Service and compared the service delivery model with other local authorities in East and West Sussex.

 

The Head of Wellbeing and the Team Leader- Specialist Food & H&S were present to answer questions.

 

A Member asked the following question: The local comparisons listed are fine, but why not ask the LGA who are the 2 or 3 best dog control authorities in the UK? The Head of Wellbeing expressed a desire to always look to improve and learn.

 

A Member asked the following question: Can the dog wardens confirm how decisions are made when it becomes necessary to dispose of a stray dog and can you reassure me that no dog requiring vets fees are put to sleep due to financial considerations? Members were told that a dog was only put down if a vet had given the opinion that the animal was suffering and it was necessary to do so 

 

A Member asked if there had been consideration of an independent review of the service and was told by the head of wellbeing that Reviews would be welcome.

 

A Member asked the following question: Paragraph 3.3 Appendix A (Agenda page 13 Microchipping) – one of the biggest issues I have read about is that a low percentage of stray dogs are microchipped, can you tell me what your statistics are please and what can be done to encourage micro-chipping take-up.  Members were told that it was a legal requirement to have your dog microchipped. The main issue occurred when a dog was found with a microchip but owners had moved address.

 

A Member asked the following question: Does the dog warden service have any plans to introduce poo bag dispensers for dog walkers at our local parks? Members were told that the experience of other authorities had shown provision of this service had not been positive and had led to vandalism and littering.

 

A Member asked the following question: The report concludes in paragraph 8 in favour of an in house operation. The advantages listed in paragraph 7 are quite generic. How is it that such an approach was not used on Pest Control last year, before the service was privatised? The advantages listed would be relevant to that service too.  Members were told that the two services were not comparable as pest control was a service paid for by customers, the in-house service had been seen to be not financially viable and the dog warden service was  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/18-19/72

JOSC/18-19/73

Interview with the Leaders pdf icon PDF 221 KB

To consider a report by the Director for Digital and Resources, copy attached as item 8.  

Minutes:

 

Before the Committee was a report by the Director for Digital and Resources, a copy of which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to the signed copy of these minutes as item 8. 

 

The report set out background information on the Portfolios of the Adur and Worthing Leaders. The information in the report sought to enable the Committee to consider and question the Leaders on issues within their portfolios, as well as, high level strategic issues which the Leaders are involved in which was connected with the work of the Councils and the Adur and Worthing communities.

 

A Member asked the following question: Noting the reference to reputation management/public consultation in paragraph 4.1, do the Leaders believe the recent changes in waste collection have been a triumph in this respect? Members were told that it was believed that the best available choice was made in respect of the waste collection. There was no evidence to suggest that the decision had any reputation management implications. 

 

A Member asked the following question: The recent LGA review report opened by describing the changing face of Worthing's demography - e.g. younger profile of people moving in from other areas. How do the Leaders feel that W&A Councils are responding to this changing situation as a high level strategic issue? The Worthing Leader stated that claims about changing demography had been exaggerated to some extent and that there was an aging population. Steps had been taken in conjunction with West Sussex County Council to increase capacity in schools by supporting the creation of a new school and building extra capacity in existing schools. Members were also told of the improvement of existing and building of new leisure facilities  and the improvements to the Borough’s play areas.

 

A Member asked the following question: Media/Comms & Public consultation - Many of our constituents are concerned with a lack of transparency & democracy issues (for me personally it is the number one concern too) with regard to council engagement with public. Perceiving consultations as a “tick in the box exercise, lack of feedback on consultation comments a dismissive nature towards their concerns when attending committee meetings”. A case in point is the complete lack of public consultation regarding a wider discussion of the use of taxpayer owned public land under the stewardship of Adur District Council. Ie a discussion on what locals would like to see - before it becomes a prescribed developer-led planning application. What work will you do to ensure the public’s concerns are addressed and are allowed to become real stakeholders in these projects? And what will you do to ensure consultations on said public land projects are more prominent on the website, addressed through council and councillor communications and a provision of suitable plan viewings and discussions at a time and date suited for all demographics? Members were told that there had been extensive engagement during the local plan process and that major development within the District were  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/18-19/73

JOSC/18-19/74

Delivering Platforms for our Places - Progress Report - July to December 2018 pdf icon PDF 140 KB

To consider a report by the Director for Digital and Resources, copy attached as item 9.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

Before the Committee was a report by the Director for Digital and Resources, a copy of which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to the signed copy of these minutes as item 9. 

 

The report before Members with an overview of progress on the delivery of the commitments set out in ‘Platforms for our Places’ over the period July to December 2018. The Chief Executive, Leaders and relevant Executive Members were present to answer questions at the meeting. The Chief Executive gave Members a precis of progress to date. 

 

A Member asked the following question: Resources: Why not simply say in these paragraphs that we have been starved of resources from Central Government for too long in this period of austerity? The Worthing Leader told Members that he didn’t think the preposition of the question was true. 

 

A Member asked the following question: Will the investment in our car parks be completed ahead of the summer tourist season? The committee was told that essential maintenance works to the Grafton Multi Storey Car Park are due for completion at the end of May 2019. Further investment in Buckingham Road MSCP was planned towards the end of the 2019/20 financial year and Officers were working on the technical brief for this project. Investment in the High Street MSCP was planned for the following financial year, 2020/21. All works would be staged to ensure adequate provision is maintained during any period of works.

 

A Member asked the following question: What is the total number of priorities in Platforms for our Places? Are they all of equal priority? Members were told that there were 38 commitments and 146 actions. Priorities were avoided so some actions were not downgraded at the expense of others

 

A Member asked the following question: Do you agree that this approach to working with the County Council would appear to have failed completely, given the cuts to services and long term under investment in Worthing and Adur? Members were told that the relationship had not failed and sited successful projects such as ultrafast broadband, growth deals and the Worthing Public Realm the relationship with West Sussex County Council added value to the work of the Councils. 

 

A Member asked the following question: How confident are we that the current number of rough sleepers identified in the recent count is accurate and robust?  Members were told that there was confidence that the number recorded on the night the count was taken was accurate. 

 

A Member asked the following question: As housing is so important, what can be done to address the target in the Local Plan which falls far short of the actual needs target? Members were told that in relation to worthing work was ongoing with the local plan to look to maximise development potential and ensure that the Council could  deliver as much housing as possible. However, given its geographical location it was clear that the Borough had insufficient  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/18-19/74

JOSC/18-19/75

Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2019/20 pdf icon PDF 239 KB

To consider a report ny the Director for digital and Resources, copy attached as item 10

Minutes:

 

Before the Committee was a report by the Director for Digital and Resources, a copy of which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to the signed copy of these minutes as item 10. 

 

The report outlined progress with the work contained in the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JOSC) Work Programme for 2018/19 and requested that the Committee consider its Work Programme for 2019/20. 

 

The Committee considered a request as submitted by Councillor Les Alden. The item was voted upon and accepted to be included as part of the work programme with Councillors Waight and Smytherman asking that their votes to abstain from the item be noted. A working group was set up to carry out scrutinise the work outlined in the request.

 

The Committee agreed to recommend its Work Programme to the Councils for approval  

 

Resolved: that the work programme 2019/20 as amended be recommended to Council for approval