Agenda and minutes

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting of held on 25 July 2023, copies of which have been previously circulated.

The minutes of the meeting of the 25 July 2023 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman

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 noon on Monday 4 September 2023.

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.)

There were no public questions.

Councillors who are not members of this committee can ask questions under CPR 12  Questions should be relevant to the committee where the question is being asked and also relevant to an item on the agenda. Please contact Democratic Services for more information

Members question time is 30 minutes and questions should be submitted no later than 12.00pm noon on Monday 4 September 2023.

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

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

A Member asked “Does the committee know the full extent to which Adur Homes buildings are affected by dangerous concrete, and if not, would tenants and leaseholders be protected by commissioning an urgent audit to determine the extent of RAAC across our whole estate?”

Members were informed that as far as the Council was aware, no Adur Homes had any RAAC installed within the housing stock. A full intrusive survey would be required to fully assess its presence but construction types such as traditional build e.g. bricks and cavity, timber framed, had not identified such a material.

Consultation with connections in the housing structural world was underway to help understand the professional opinion of this in relation to homes. It was the understanding that the use of RAAC predominantly related to schools and possibly other corporate buildings. Feedback from the Estates Team had been requested.

A Member asked “It is great to see in a report from the Cabinet Member for Communities and Wellbeing that an Antisocial Behaviour conference is being planned for Autumn. ASB is something our traders are asking for support for regularly. Can I be informed what this will consist of and what the threshold is for reporting ASB and then to the allocation of police resources please?”

Members were informed that in February that year, The Safer Communities Team held a successful event, working with Adur Traders to raise awareness of the work of the team and wider council services and the police. This covered promoting reporting mechanisms, the context of the work and how partners’ work could help tackle the drivers of crime and ASB. This approach was to be repeated in the Autumn as there was awareness that businesses were experiencing ongoing issues around shoplifting and ASB. 

There was no threshold for reporting ASB as the ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014 acknowledged that the impact was subjective. However, there needed to be a pattern for the council to be able to use their powers. Whilst it was for the police to respond to how their resourcing was allocated, the consistent message to those experiencing crime and ASB was to always report incidents, as resources would be prioritised (for all agencies) where there was persistent crime or ASB.

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

There were no urgent items.

At the time of publication of this agenda there have been no call-in’s received.

There were no call-ins

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

The Committee had a report before it attached as item 8, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report outlined the revenue financial monitoring position for the end of the 2022/23 financial year for the Joint Strategic Committee, Adur District and Worthing Borough Councils.

A Member asked “can we have these reports at JOSC before they go to full council next year?” Members were informed that yes this could happen.

Resolved: The Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the contents of the report.

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

The Committee had a report before it attached as item 9, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report proposed a budget strategy for the development of the 2024/25 budgets.

Members asked if officers were satisfied the council was in the best place possible to benefit from the business rate income with some of the new developments?

Members were informed that while there were a lot of unknowns they were working with information that was available. That the system did have a safety net and Council could not go below a certain level of income. 

Resolved: The Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the contents of the report.

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 10

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 10, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out background information on the Portfolio of the Worthing Cabinet Member for the Environment to enable the Committee to consider and question the Cabinet Member on issues within their portfolio and any other issues which the Cabinet Member was involved in connected with the work of the Council and the Worthing communities.

A Member asked “In your achievements, you've listed the increase of 3.57% in points of recycling between April and June - bringing it up to 49.61%. Does this continue a trend to where you'd hope the statistics would be at this point?”

Members were informed the recycling stats were trending in the right direction and had seen a steady increase year on year. Over shorter periods the figures had to take into account a lot of factors involved.  Stats such as, weather, amount of green waste collected, seasonal variations and also strike action the year before. However there was an upward trend from previous years results. It’s where they expected it to be but not where they wanted it to be.

The cabinet member advised that they had to be mindful that the levels could fluctuate - so an annual figure was more accurate - including all seasons, weather and cost of living. The waste data flow annual figure was returned in June.

A Member asked “When the cabinet member was last questioned by this committee, a member asked about the proposed reductions to the budget for Worthing Borough Council’s foreshore team. In a written response the cabinet member informed the committee that it had subsequently been decided to make the savings by reducing the budget for the parks function instead. However, when the budget was passed by the cabinet and full council cabinet members made no mention of this change. Can the cabinet member explain the comments in her email including whether the funding for the foreshore operation in Worthing is lower than it was last year, whether the funding for the parks operation has been reduced as she suggested, how this decision was made and what opportunities were given to councillors who are not on the executive to scrutinise this important budget decision?”

Members were informed the budget set for the year included an allowance for savings to be made by the Parks & Foreshore Team of £44k. The savings were being achieved as a result of a successful re-organisation of the service which had focussed on reductions in management expenditure rather than cutting any 'frontline' services. Funding for the Foreshore Team was unaffected by these changes and was not reduced.  This decision was made through the normal process of budget setting which includes discussion of options with the officer team and colleagues in the wider group.

A Member asked “The cabinet member’s report highlights the implementation of the kerbside collection of waste  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/40/23-24

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 11

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 11, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out background information on the Portfolio of the Worthing Cabinet Member for Housing and Citizens Services to enable the Committee to consider and question the Cabinet Member on issues within their portfolio and any other issues which the Cabinet Member was involved in connected with the work of the Council and the Worthing communities.

A Member asked “In the financial report we received for this meeting, it is noted that there has been a marked increase in homelessness due to the Cost of Living crisis. As we head into Winter, it can be assumed this will only continue to be the case. You note in your briefing about adequate provision. What plans are in place to ensure we can protect those in our communities facing homelessness this Winter?”

Members were told the strategic approach was to develop supply to ensure all those experiencing homelessness were provided with housing. This was a mix of developing the Councils’ own stock, contracting with private providers and partnering with others, the long term aim being to achieve a pathway for single homeless that would prevent the need for anyone to rough sleep. They had a pipeline of schemes which included supported accommodation for those with complex needs and supported temporary accommodation to reduce the impacts on those experiencing homelessness and support them more quickly into independence. This was not without challenges given the existing market conditions with development costs rising and would not be achieved for this winter. 

Plans for the coming winter were to provide temporary accommodation with support, they had procured additional accommodation and were working with Turning Tides to make plans for those rough sleeping to have accommodation. Turning Tides provided day services and the administration continued to work with them. 

A Member asked “You mention in your briefing note about improvements to communications via the online customer portal. What is the process and how easy is it to present as homeless to the council if you do not have access to the internet?”

Members were informed anyone who did not have access to the internet could call the service or attend Portland House, appointments were given to see an officer in person. Those threatened with or experiencing homelessness could either receive support to complete the form online, or a paper form was completed and the team created the online application on their behalf. The West Sussex Strategic Homeless Group were funding posts hosted at Chichester, to work on projects across the county. One of the current pieces of work underway was testing access to homelessness services, in particular, making an online application and website content to enable improvement to access of homeless services across the county. The Cabinet Member was committed to preventing homelessness; and ensuring the most vulnerable could access the team and unlike most  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/41/23-24

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 12

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 12, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out background information on the Portfolio of the Worthing Cabinet Member for Community Wellbeing to enable the Committee to consider and question the Cabinet Member on issues within their portfolio and any other issues which the Cabinet Member was involved in connected with the work of the Council and the Worthing communities.

A Member asked “A couple of months ago, I took part in the Council's LGBTQ+ Big Listen event and heard of the fear these communities continue to experience when visiting pubs and bars in our town, as they are unsure of where they may be treated with hostility or even worse, experience hate crime. What is being done to protect the LGBTQ+ community in Worthing and show that we are an inclusive town that has a zero tolerance approach to prejudice and abuse?”

Members were informed the LGBTQ+ Big Listen event was held to ensure there were good community conversations with the LGBTQ+ residents, this was in addition to holding celebratory events around the month of Pride and the annual Pride event. The Cabinet Member said they stand with the LGBTQ+ communities against hate crime and actively encouraged such crimes to be reported. The Safer Communities team was there to support the community if additional assistance was needed in respect of Crime and Antisocial Behaviour.

A Member asked “Last year it was reported that 1 in 10 women in Britain say they have had their drink spiked at some time. What is being done to protect women from this crime and what more can be done to raise awareness of it and increase reporting?”

Members were told they proactively engaged with appropriate campaigns about women’s safety and publicised national and regional campaigns, such as those run by charities like Drinkaware and/or Stamp Out Spiking, this was alongside a suite of other campaigns such as Ask Angela, a campaign around women feeling unsafe in settings such as pubs and clubs and Ask Ani where there were concerns around domestic abuse.

The A&W Licensing Team coordinated a two date Drink Spiking Awareness event in South Street Square, Worthing. The event went well and the team spoke to over 100 people over two days. Giving out all the 100 anti-spiking scrunchies and over 200 anti-spiking bottle stops. The A&W Partnership Team were looking to repeat the event and Sussex Police Licensing used it in other areas such as Chichester. Feedback was good with the majority of people saying 'the event was a great initiative’. The support received from the 7 late night venues and other partner agencies was amazing. 

A Member asked “The Local Plan has a social objective to 'ensure new development integrates into existing communities, supporting local centres to enhance the well-being of all people, and reduce equalities'. How do you feel the  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/42/23-24

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 13

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 13, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out the revised discussions and recommendations from the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JOSC) Working Group which was created as part of the JOSC Work Programme to review the previous JOSC reports and recommendations on the Adur and Worthing evening and night time economy (ENTE) from 2020 through to 2023.

A Member asked for details on future partnerships with bus companies.

Members were told that while the quality bus partnership had ended years previously, a new partnership had been worked on in the last 6 months, which included all the buses that ran through Worthing, with a plan to look at ENTE and sustainable travel. In that forum, they could gain some traction with operators.

Resolved: The Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed to

1. Note the contents of the report 

2. Receive an annual review report on progress with the works to improve the evening and night time economies as part of its Work Programme at a future meeting

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 14

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 14, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report outlined progress and plans for implementing the work contained in the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JOSC) Work Programme for 2023/24.

Members discussed the proposed attendance of the Police and Crime Commissioner and local commander at the meeting of JOSC on 30  November as well as the attendance of a representative from Southern Water. The committee had received an invitation to attend a tour of the East Worthing water treatment works to be followed by a Q&A.

Resolved: The Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed to:-

1. Note the progress to deliver the JOSC Work Programme; 
2. Accept the invitation  of Southern Water to tour the water treatment works on a date to be confirmed but that Southern Water also be requested to attend  a meeting of JOSC to answer questions from the committee (Preferably 2 November); 
3. Hold an interview with the Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner and local Police Commander at the JOSC meeting on 30 November 2023; and 
4. Defer the interview with the Chief Executive regarding ‘Our Plan’ from the meeting on 30 November to an alternative date.

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 15

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 15, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out background information on the Portfolio of the Adur Cabinet Member for Communities and Wellbeing to enable the Committee to consider and question the Cabinet Member on issues within their portfolio and any other issues which the Cabinet Member is involved in connected with the work of the Council and the Adur communities.

Members asked about community tensions and response to youth crime. Members were informed that the Cabinet Member had met with the inspector to improve policing and discussed new techniques that were being introduced. That a lot of crimes were now being reported back to the police and they were working on procedures to process all the new data. Members were also informed that the governments’ policy on restorative justice was a good tool to have available though it wasn't the answer to everything and that both the charity sector and senior schools had done great work in this area.

To consider a report by the Director for Digital, Sustainability and Resources, copy attached as item 16

The Committee had a report before it, attached as item 16, which had been circulated to all Members, a copy of which is attached to a signed copy of these minutes. This report set out background information on the Portfolio of the Adur Cabinet Member for Adur Homes and Customer Services to enable the Committee to consider and question the Cabinet Member on issues within his portfolio and any other issues which the Cabinet Member is involved in connected with the work of the Council and the Adur communities. 

A Member asked “Given that we have overspent in Adur by 447k in 22/23 and we have only put aside 381k for overspend in the 23/24 budget, do we need to consider increasing this in the face of predictable increased demand?”

Members were informed budget setting would take account of the increasing costs, in the meantime there were things in place intended to reduce the current predicted overspend and burden on the  temporary accommodation budget:

• new supply of General Needs stock that would be realised in financial year that would increase move on from temporary accommodation and reduce the burden on the budget
• New supply of temporary accommodation through contracting as well as potential within the Southwick buy back scheme
• Homelessness Prevention work, where Household Support Fund and Homelessness Prevention fund would increase the prevention activity to reduce the flow into temporary accommodation

A Member asked “A portion of Adur's discretionary housing payments to cover shortfalls in resident's housing benefit or universal credit was sent back to the treasury. It spent 89% of its allocation. Councillors are often contacted by residents unable to afford rents so it's not like the demand isn't there. Could you tell us why all of this money wasn't allocated?”

Members were informed there was a DHP underspend since 2018 of between £10k and £30k each year in Adur. The main criteria for awarding a DHP was that the customer must show that they were in financial need, there were subsidiary considerations regarding the effectiveness of an award - that if an award was made it would enable them to make long term changes to better afford their property. Other factors such as a person’s health and household would be taken into account when making any award.

The main reason for most unsuccessful awards was that they had not demonstrated that they were in financial need - i.e. when completing the application form they had stated that their income was actually higher than their expenditure.

The next reason would be that the property was unsuitable/ unaffordable in the long term and the tenancy could not be preserved following a short term award. Not every DHP application met the criteria applied to receive a payment.

A Member asked, “I received an email from a tenant of Adur Homes as her kitchen was unusable. This tenant lives in a 2 bedroom property and has 3 children. The kitchen in the property was in a poor condition when she  ...  view the full minutes text for item JOSC/46/23-24