The deadline for questions to be submitted to the Monitoring Officer is 12 February 2024.
Minutes:
The Chair confirmed that in Councillor P Canavan’s absence his question, and the Portfolio Holder’s answer, would be circulated by email and included in the minutes of the meeting.
Question from Councillor P Canavan:
Bournemouth’s culture sector is a strong Unique Selling Point for the town and one I would suggest should form a central pillar of any strategy to regenerate the town centre. I welcome the additional one-off money announced at Cabinet on 7 February but could the Leader tell me the exact amount of money allocated and what this will be spent on?
Also, what concrete & achievable plans has the Council developed as a result of the Town Centre Summit and the so-called Days of Action to regenerate Bournemouth Town Centre and does it include a strong cultural offer that compensates for the loss of GIANT and The Ivy.
Response from Councillor V Slade, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places:
The financial constraints that BCP council is having to work under have made it necessary to find savings and efficiencies across every department of the council, including culture.
We recognise the importance of culture to the wellbeing and prosperity of the residents of BCP and as part of our tourism offer. The additional funding provided by the revised Local Government settlement and reported to Cabinet on 7th February enabled us to restore £76,000 towards culture. Cabinet have agreed that this should go to grassroots and community based cultural organisations but given that this fund has only been agreed at the meeting this evening, it would be premature for us to make further plans about how it will be used. The intention is for the fund to be used as a grant pot through which community organisations can bid, but the details around this have not yet been confirmed.
One of the key priorities of this administration is Bournemouth Town Centre and we were quick to seek the ideas of the community through the Summer Survey, which was followed up in the autumn by the Town Centre Summit where we asked key partners to work with us to revitalise the town centre. The opportunity to invest additional funds through the final settlement which we are referring to as the Town Centre Improvement Fund. Although details are still to be finalised, this is proposed to be split across the 3 town centres as follows: Bournemouth £179K, Poole £119K, Christchurch £60K.
In terms of the Town Centre Summit, this has been successful in bringing partners together to take collective action on priorities raised and in terms of lobbying Government to support us.
Work achieved by the council to date includes the use of UKSPF funding for increased cleansing and graffiti teams including new reporting systems, the purchase of new bins (due to be delivered in march), restoration and planting of planters at Beale Place, The Triangle and Lansdowne, increased parking enforcement and a change to the late evening closure at Horseshoe Common to support restaurants. Additional trading standards and environmental hygiene visits are being undertaken and the town team that we launched in the autumn with Dorset Police continues.
Days and Evenings of Actions were started in January and will continue through the spring. We are working to develop an inward investment brochure based on the town centre and we are working on empty shops and with our landlords. We are making good progress on the bus improvement plan corridor between Bournemouth Railway Station and Gervis Place and we are continuing to support Westover Road traders with bespoke meetings.
We have announced today the appointment of Sir Conor Burns as the chair of the new Bournemouth Action Partnership which will continue the work started through the summit and We are meeting with the Secretary of State to seek Government support for a range of measures that can help to progress the town centre revitalisation.
I will update council on the outcome of this meeting in due course and continue to work with partners, investors and communities to restore pride in Bournemouth and turn its fortunes around.
Question from Councillor G Farquhar:
At Cabinet on the 7th February I asked a question relating to definition of non-essential spending and how as Members we can challenge a refusal by a decision maker to not to allow for preventative or essential maintenance, repairs, replacement remedial works. The reply from the Section 151 Officer confirmed there is the ability for people to argue their case and that conversation can be reflected on.
My question is; how does a Member escalate an argument to a higher Decision Maker or Director/Leadership when a Manager or Officer has given a no answer within their area of responsibility/authorisation level?
Response from Councillor V Slade, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places:
Thank you, Councillor Farquhar, for your question.
The financial pressures facing local government are well documented and BCP Council is no different. The budget that we have been working to deliver since we formed the Administration last year has required every department to consider its spending and to ensure that budget holders actively drive down the cost of the service. Current and previous procedures adopted in respect of a freeze on non-essential expenditure place a lot of onus on the budget holder to be satisfied that they are adhering to the established criteria. It also allows for escalation as high up as the chief executive, although it would be expected that this would be exercised through the budget holders line management structures to service and corporate directors in the first instance.
If a Member is not happy with the decision of a budget holder it is suggested they email the budget holder’s line manager or service director to consider it further. Furthermore, there are regular meetings that involve group leaders with the leader of the Council and Democratic services and this sort of issue can always be flagged during such meetings. As I confirmed in my email to all Members today, my door is always open and if there are specific issues I am always happy to talk them through and see if we can unlock the problem.
Supplementary question from Councillor G Farquhar:
Thank you for that reply. It does give me some degree of understanding of the decision-making process to say ‘yea’ or ‘nay ‘based upon the circumstance of the issue. So my question is this:
I believe as a Ward Councillor that some things which are not beneficial to or even hazardous to the health of residents are being overlooked because we need to save money. So is there a ‘nuclear button’ that I can press to say I have a fear or a concern for public health, or for the services which are agreed to be delivered by the council to escalate, and would that be listened to? Thank you.
Response from Councillor V Slade, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places:
Speaking as a Ward Councillor, if I was concerned that there was a matter of public safety, health and safety, or personal safety, I would automatically pick up the phone to the appropriate service director. I think we all have a responsibility if there is a genuine problem.
However, I would say that we should use those things cautiously because I would not want every one of the 76 Members suddenly running to our service directors and claiming ‘health and safety’ because we all know what trouble that gets us all into. We do have to use common sense. We do have to understand that our staff are put under pressure. They have to work within their budgets. And last week we heard the aspirations of all of the other Groups and we know the aspirations of all of these people here are the things we're not able to do because we don't have enough money. And therefore it would be wrong for us to just say “go ahead and spend the money” when actually we know the things we can't do and that other people are being told “no” because someone over here is being told “yes.” So I think it's right that we respect our officers when they make a decision and that we go through a proper process of escalating it and saying “help me understand what went wrong there”.
But if it's a matter of public safety or personal safety, pick up the phone, use Teams, drop an email to somebody who can make that decision. And if necessary, you can go all the way to Graham Farrant.
Question from Councillor G Farquhar:
What steps is the Local Authority taking to alert, report and monitor to rectification the reporting of graffiti on non-public installations i.e. Commercial premises, service buildings and installations such as cable boxes and roadside furniture, post boxes and telephone boxes? And how can these be improved to ensure that graffiti is removed in a timely fashion and Service Level expectations for ensuring our public realm and amenity does not deteriorate to the point of neglect?
Response from Councillor K Wilson, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regulatory Services:
Thank you for your question. As a local authority BCP Council have limited powers to secure action by private property owners to remove graffiti from their own property.
There are powers under Section 215 of the Town and Country Planning Act and Section 43 Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014 which can utilised for specific cases, but it is far from a timely solution due to the administration, investigation and legal challenges and has to be prioritised in line with other statutory duties within the Environmental Protection Team where demands are significant.
?
Where resource permits and certain thresholds are met with regards to offensiveness and/or severity of the adverse impact, officers will identify those responsible and where necessary, serve the relevant notices.? This can be challenging and understandably owners can feel victimised twice by having criminal damage to their property and enforcement from the Council to clear afterwards.?
Residents can report incidences of graffiti to relevant utility companies and other asset holders requesting action as detailed on our webpage.
Incidents of graffiti are the responsibility of the property owner, and they should be contacted directly.
Supplementary question from Councillor G Farquhar:
Thank you very much for that answer. Based upon the answer and the fact that appropriate legislation is referred to, because of the limitations of the local authority, will the portfolio holder undertake to explore Section 215 and the appropriate Acts such as the 2005 Cleaner Neighbourhoods and Environment Acts to see what pressure could be brought to bear, particularly on features of our environment.
I'm a great believer that like attracts like, and should a franchise or a retail outlet or a cable provider not look after their equipment, then very quickly, as we've all seen on our own wards, that further graffiti gets attracted. That sense of neglect, that sense of loss of community, continues desperately.
My question to the portfolio holder is, will we once again look at how we can improve our reporting to those parties that are responsible for that property, such as telephone boxes, and ensure that it goes through to a reasonable level of service level agreement? Because at the moment, I'm sure that they are making some effort, but perhaps that's not serving the residents of our three towns.
Response from Councillor K Wilson, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regulatory Services:
Thank you, Councillor. Yes, I'm more than happy to go away and work with you, have a meeting with you and with officers on how we can improve this. I do understand, though, that it is a very resource-heavy thing. And if you have individual cases, I'm happy to contact the utility companies directly if there are particular ones that have been causing particular issues. But in general, I think the initial part of my answer still stands. But I'm happy to go away with you and discuss this with you. Hopefully that's helpful.