Agenda Item No
AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: G. W. Fennell
Tel: 247 4235
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11th FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : REVENUE SUPPORT GRANT AND FORMULA SPENDING SHARE 2005/06
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Yes Eligible for Call In 3 Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Government announced the final Revenue Support Grant Settlement (RSG) for 2005/06 on 27th January 2005 together with the actual Formula Spending Shares (FSS) for that year. This report outlines the final position, comparing the settlement with the consultation figures that were issued on 2nd December 2004 and reported to the Executive Board on 15th December 2004.
2.0 NATIONAL POSITION
2.1 The table below compares the final totals for 2005/06 to the 2004/05 adjusted totals. 2004/05 2005/06 2005/06 VARIANCE Adjusted Consultation Final ’ M ’ M ’ M ’ M % (i) FORMULA SPENDING PLANS Total Assumed Spending (TAS) 75,159 79,577 79,598 4,439 5.9 (ii) AGGREGATE EXTERNAL FINANCE Revenue Support Grant (RSG) 27,315 26,711 26,726 -589 -2.2 Special & Specific Grants 14,279 15,406 15,418 1,139 8.0
TOTAL GRANTS 41,594 42,117 42,144 550 1.3 BUSINESS RATES 15,000 18,000 18,000 3,000 20.0 TOTAL AEF 56,594 60,117 60,144 3,550 6.3 (iii) TOTAL FORMULA SPENDING (TFS) 60,880 64,171 64,180 3,300 5.4
2.2 As can be seen from the table, TAS, RSG, Specific Grants and TFS (FSS) have all increased by small amounts since consultation. The FSS increase relates mainly to updated pupil numbers. The trend of increasing specific grants at a higher rate than the increase in FSS or RSG has continued for 2005/06 with an increase of 8.0% from 2004/05. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.3 The floor for Education/PSS authorities for 2005/06 has been set at 4.0%. Police have been given a floor of 3.75% and fire authorities and shire districts a floor of 2.5%.
3.0 LOCAL POSITION
3.1 For 2005/06, as in 2004/05, Leeds is above the floor. The RSG for authorities in this position is scaled back to help pay for the floor and Leeds loses ’ 554k for this reason.
3.2 Overall Formula Grant support (RSG and NNDR) for Leeds for 2005/06 will be ’ 592.478m compared with ’ 592.386m at consultation, an increase of ’ 92k. That is due to the use of the final FSS and tax base figures. Leeds“ overall grant increase from the adjusted 2004/05 base is ’ 28.047m (5.0%).
3.2 The actual FSS for Leeds is ’ 707k lower than at consultation. This is mainly accounted for by a ’ 676k reduction in Capital Financing FSS because the final settlement uses updated supported borrowing figures and revised scaling factors. In addition Education FSS has reduced by ’ 31k due to changes in unit costs and scaling factors. The following table shows the percentage movement between the final 2005/06 FSS and the final adjusted FSS for 2004/05.
2004/05 2005/06 2005/06 Variance Adjusted FSS at Final FSS between FSS Consul- years tation ’ m ’ m ’ m %
Education 362.988 381.417 381.386 5.1 Social Services 184.219 194.342 194.342 5.5 Highways and Maintenance 27.727 28.137 28.137 1.5 Other Services 154.768 157.600 157.600 1.8 Capital Financing 42.745 49.961 49.285 15.3
TOTAL 772.448 811.457 810.750 5.0
3.3 For metropolitan districts as a whole there is an extra ’ 7.0m in Formula Grant (RSG and NNDR) compared with consultation. The total grant increase (RSG + NNDR) for Leeds is 5.0% which compares to the national average of 5.6%.
3.4 In addition to the figures announced for 2005/06, the Government have also confirmed the amendments to 2003/04 Formula Grant arising from corrections to 2001 census population figures for some authorities. It has been confirmed that Leeds will have to pay back ’ 1.267m as a result of this.
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Members are requested to note the contents of this report.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA 6(b)(i) ITEM NO.:
Originator: A.T.GAY Tel: 74226
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11TH FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT: REVENUE BUDGET 2005/06
Electoral Wards Affected: Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In x Board (details contained in the report) Decision
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. This report sets out the Council“s budget for 2005/06 following detailed consideration of service requirements and taking account of the Local Government Finance settlement.
1.2. This report seeks approval from the Executive Board to recommend to Council that the City Council“s Revenue Budget for 2005/06 be approved at ’ 803.9m. This budget equates to a spending level of ’ 3,549 per Band D property based on a taxbase of 226,508 equivalent Band D properties. This results in a Band D Council Tax of ’ 929.74 which represents an increase of 4.25% for the Leeds element above the Council Tax for 2004/05.
1.3. Detailed budget proposals for each service are set out in the departmental budget documents attached to this report. This information will be consolidated into the Annual Financial Plan and the Budget Book;
¨ The Annual Financial Plan - This document will bring together the revenue budget, capital programme and performance indicators for 2005/06 providing a clear link between spending plans and performance, at departmental level. The relevant summary information and individual departmental financial plans for the 2005/06 revenue budget are attached to this report.
¨ The Budget Book - This is intended for budgetary control purposes and contains an analysis of each department's expenditure at both Functional Heading (objective) and Budget Heading level (subjective). Copies of this document are available to members on request and via the intranet. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1.4. In accordance with the Council“s Policy and Budget Framework, decisions as to the Council“s budget and Council Tax are reserved to Council. As such the purpose of this report is to propose a budget to Council, and thus the decisions recommended by this report are not eligible for call in.
2. BUDGET PRINCIPLES
2.1. All departmental estimates have been prepared at outturn prices and make allowances for known and estimated pay and price increases.
2.2. Contingency provisions have been included in the General Fund (see paragraph 7.5) and within the Local Schools Budget. These provisions are for items not foreseen and for items where there is a risk of variation during the year. In the case of the schools contingency, this would include adjustments required in the application of formula funding, significant increases in pupil numbers, additional statements of Special Education Needs or exceptional in year cost increases.
2.3. The estimates have been prepared in accordance with proper accounting practice. As in previous years, the Authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 - Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities, rather than the Government“s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to Departments. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
3. 2004/05 LATEST ESTIMATE
3.1 The 2004/05 budget was set as follows
’ m
Departmental Spending 760.5
Use of Reserves 2.3
Net Revenue Expenditure 758.2
Reserves
- Estimated 31/3/04 9.7 - Budgeted usage in 2004/05 2.3 - Estimated 31/3/05 7.4
3.2 As members will be aware, a number of significant spending pressures were experienced during 2003/04, most notably within the Social Services department. In order to protect the level of the Council“s reserves, a number of one off sources of
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com2 funding and other actions were identified, with the result that General Fund Reserves as at 31st March 2004 stood at ’ 9.6m. In this context the Council“s external auditor, in the report on the 2003/04 Audit, recommended that the Council finalise its policy on the level of reserves and consider whether the level of General Fund reserves is sufficient to meet future expected demands.
3.3 Many of the pressures that occurred in the 2003/04 accounts have also impacted upon the management of the budget in 2004/05. Budgetary control is an ongoing process operating at various levels throughout the Council.
3.4 As reported to Members in November in the half year financial health report, there have been a number of specific cost pressures in the current year largely offset by one-off savings and income achieved in the year. The current position is detailed below.
3.5 Within Social Services, work led by the Chief Officers has been ongoing to identify savings and constrain spending wherever possible and a series of action plans have been produced. This has been supported by staff from the Corporate Efficiency Review Team who have worked with the Department to improve monitoring systems and control procedures.
3.6 At the half-year stage Executive Board approved additional resources of ’ 6m for the Social Services Department, ’ 3.5m for community care packages and ’ 2.5m for children“s placements. A further ’ 4m was made available if the forecast pressures within the community care and home care budgets continued and the necessary improvements in financial control in these areas were implemented. These improvements are summarised below and the projected variances outlined take account of the full ’ 10m being allocated to Social Services.
3.7 The action taken to date, together with the additional resources approved, has improved the financial position of Social Services since the half-year stage. As a result of the improvements in financial control and monitoring systems the year-end position can now be forecast with greater accuracy. Based on the current position an overspend of ’ 2.5m is now projected, although efforts are continuing across the Department to contain net spend within the resources allocated to the department for the year.
3.8 Community care placements, net of income from health, are currently projected to overspend at the year-end by ’ 1,274k, with a further ’ 771k on domiciliary care including support for adult carers. Further practice guidance has been issued to care managers and gate-keeping panels have been established in each area to ensure consistency in placement decisions. The Care Communication Centre is closely monitoring domiciliary care referrals and commissioning care packages in accordance with revised departmental guidance. These actions have reduced the number of new care packages commissioned in recent months. There is evidence that the PCTs are approving more cases for fully-funded NHS continuing care and Social Services is represented on the decision panels. A senior manager from the Department has been seconded full-time to progress work in this area.
3.9 The pressures on the children“s services budget outlined in the half-year report, which led to additional resources of ’ 2.5m being approved, continue to be evident. The projected year-end overspend on fees to carers is currently ’ 282k, taking account of targeted action to reduce spending where this will not result in unacceptable levels of risk. A gate-keeping panel has been established and work is ongoing to improve monitoring and control procedures. However, the demands on this budget have PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com3 increased slightly since the half-year position and are currently forecast to continue to exceed budget provision.
3.10 Substantial action has been taken across the Department to reduce expenditure on staffing, using a risk-management approach to deliver savings so that essential front- line services are maintained. There has been a particular focus on the use of overtime and agency staff, both of which are now reducing. Targeted recruitment is also taking place to reduce reliance on agency staff and overtime in key service areas. As a result the projected year-end overspend is now ’ 749k compared with ’ 1,054k at the half- year stage and as the financial impact of the action taken becomes clearer this may reduce further. Work continues across the Department to bring the year-end position as close to the budget as possible.
3.11 Expenditure on fleet transport and external hire is currently projected to overspend by ’ 340k at the year-end after targeted action to reduce the number of journeys. This spending relates mainly to external taxi hire for transporting children to school and transport to respite provision across client groups. Again a risk-management approach has been adopted to identifying savings to ensure that vulnerable service users are protected.
3.12 Income from other authorities and external organisations is projected to be ’ 1,106k higher than budgeted. This relates mainly to Eastmoor Secure Unit and partner contributions towards the cost of external placements for children. Income from home care and day care services is projected to be ’ 655k less than the Original Estimate, due to average payments per service user being lower than budgeted and financial assessments being completed slightly later than planned. Housing Benefit and Supporting People income is forecast to be ’ 487k higher than budgeted and this includes the effect of an additional supported living scheme becoming operational.
3.13 Most other departments are targeted to achieve their approved budget through the implementation of actions plans as reported at the half year although there continue to be a number of pressures identified. Learning and Leisure are projecting a shortfall in income of ’ 230k and increased gas costs of ’ 100k. However, a revised action plan has been put in place to mitigate against these pressures. There is also a potential loss of subsidy of around ’ 400k due to overpayment thresholds set by the DWP being exceeded. As reported at the half year there is a ’ 500k pressure relating to the extent to which the cost of providing accommodation to homeless people is not met by benefit subsidy. Latest estimates for all departments reflect all variations approved in accordance with the Council“s Budget and Policy framework. All departments are aware of the need to contain their net expenditure within their approved budget, and it is anticipated that at the year end a balanced position will be achieved taking account of the additional resources allocated to Social Services.
3.14 The West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority has identified one off balances, which can be returned to the districts. The Council“s share of these balances is ’ 1.7m and it is intended to utilise this to maximise the level of reserves at 31.03.05.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com4 3.15 Taking account of the above the General Fund Reserves position to the 31st March 2005 is as follows:
GENERAL FUND RESERVES ’ m
Estimated reserve at 31/03/04 9.7
Actual balance at 31/3/04 9.6
Usage 2004/05 0.6
Estimated reserves 31/3/05 9.0
3.16 In addition to the General Fund Reserves, school balances of ’ 13.6m were brought forward from 2003/04 relating to the local management of schools. These are specifically earmarked for schools and do not form part of the Council's General Fund Reserves. To this effect, any under or over spending by the schools does not impact on the General Fund. The latest indicative assessment by Education Leeds would suggest that schools' overall reserves at 31st March 2005 for carry forward into the 2005/06 financial year are likely to be in the region of ’ 11m - ’ 12m. Additionally, schools are expected to carry forward some Standards Fund allocations that can be spent up to 5 months after the financial year end. The above level of school reserves does not take account of the budget assumptions in the Education non ISB estimates that an element of school reserves are to be used to fund the cost of Voluntary Early Retirement in accordance with the agreement of Executive Board on 7th March 2001. This is borrowing, not from individual schools but rather from overall net balances. The school reserves will be paid back over 5 years from Council resources other than those available for schools.
4 THE COUNCIL'S FINANCIAL PLAN
4.1 Executive Board in November 2004 approved the Council“s Financial Plan. The plan is designed to provide a financial strategy to underpin the Council's Corporate Plan and covers the three financial years 2005-2008. It sets out a framework for the preparation of the Council's annual revenue budget over the planning period by determining how available resources will be allocated between services reflecting Council priorities. The Plan identifies support for the delivery of key priorities.
4.2 The plan forecasts that the delivery of this strategy is dependent not only on the resources available via Government settlements, but also on the success of the Council in realigning resources in the ways set out in the document. The plan forecasts that by way of additional resources, the Council's FSS in 2005/06 will rise by ’ 38.5m, and sets out clear priorities for passporting FSS onto Education and Social services. For all other services, the plan allocates funding for inflation on pay and prices with additional funding for the full year effects of approved developments and for key Council priorities. The plan identifies that the Council faces a number of significant financial pressures across a range of services and that it is clear that delivery of the financial strategy contained in the plan will be challenging. To meet this challenge, the plan targets the delivery of a series of efficiency reviews across all services in order to realign budgets to its priorities. This is also an acknowledgement of the expectations of Government for local authorities to generate efficiencies,
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com5 equivalent to 2.5% pa. Whilst the Government has issued some guidance in this area, this is still being evaluated and there remain some areas of uncertainty. Section 12 discusses this requirement in more detail, and attempts to identify the level of efficiencies that the Council may able to present as part of its Annual Efficiency Statement for 2005/06, which the Council is required to publish in April 2005.
4.3 Executive Board approved the financial strategy contained in the 2004 Financial Plan, and requested departments to prepare budget plans for 2005/06 within the agreed resource allocations.
5 PROVISIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE SETTLEMENT
5.1. The Council received its provisional settlement on the 2nd December 2004, and a report was submitted to Executive Board on the 15th December 2004, which provided full details. The final settlement was received on the 27th January and resulted in a small reduction in capital financing FSS and a small increase in government grant. On a like for like basis Leeds“ FSS for 2005/06 represents an increase of 5.0% over the 2004/05 level and Formula Grant increased by 5.0%, after adjusting for changes in the funding arrangements of specific functions.
5.2. As has occurred on a number of occasions, the Government has made changes to the funding of a number of specific services. The main adjustments are within Social Services, where the funding for Preserved Rights and Residential Allowance funding within community care and the Training Support Programme has been transferred into formula grant. In addition the Civil Contingencies grant has transferred into FSS. These transfers into FSS are offset by changes to the funding of Magistrates Courts“ committees, which will mean that there will be no longer a local contribution as from 2005/06. The total effect of these adjustments is an increase in the Council's FSS and RSG of a net ’ 4.1m.
5.3 Specific government grants are important sources of additional funding for a number of the Council“s services. Within Social Services, the Access and Systems capacity grant has increased by ’ 1.7m to ’ 8.3m in 2005/06. In overall terms most education specific grants have been increased by 4% on a per capita basis, including Learning and Skills Council funding for 6th Forms.
5.4 Within the Financial Plan, many of the funding adjustments were reflected in the planning assumptions for 2005/06, and on a cash, like to like basis the settlement reflects an increase of ’ 3.9m over and above that assumed in the plan as detailed below. Per Financial Per Variation Plan Settlement ’ M ’ M ’ M Education - Schools 17.8 16.9 -0.9 - Other 1.2 1.5 +0.3 Social Services 15.3 14.9 -0.4 Highways Maintenance 0.7 0.4 +0.3 Environmental, Protective and 0.9 2.2 +1.3 Cultural Services Capital Financing 2.6 6.5 +3.9 Total 38.5 42.4 +3.9
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com6 5.5 As can be seen from the above, the FSS for capital financing costs has significantly increased. This reflects changes in the funding of PFI schemes, which at the national level has led to increased resources being made available. In terms of capital financing costs for Leeds, the Financial Plan included resources to match the projected additional cost of borrowing for Leeds. The settlement has provided additional resources which have been directed to front line services.
5.6. The Government is continuing a scheme of 'floors '. This provides a minimum level of Central Government Support (NNDR and RSG). For authorities such as Leeds, the minimum increase is 4.0%. As in previous years, Leeds for 2005/06 is above the floor, however, authorities in this position have had their RSG reduced to help pay for those authorities below the floor. Leeds“ RSG has been reduced by ’ 521k as a result.
5.7. For the current year, the Council's Band D Council Tax (including Police and Fire) is ’ 1,035.48 of which the Leeds element is ’ 891.80. In the Spending Review 2004, the Government assumed that, in 2005/06, an additional 6.7% would be raised from Council Tax. However, because of the projected increase in the national tax base, and the additional ’ 1bn that was added into the settlement over and above the Spending Review 2004, the government have stated that they expect increases in Council Tax on average to be below 5%. The Government has reserve powers to cap authorities whose Council Tax increase is considered excessive. The Government has not given a precise indication of what level of increase would be considered as excessive, however the Local Government minister has stated several times that he expects the average increase to be ”low single figures–.
5.8. The level of Council Tax is a local decision. In addition to being affected by collection rates and the local tax base, an amending report for 2003/04 will also impact upon the level of increases in Council Tax.1
5.9. The data that has been revised in respect of 2003/04 is population. 2003/04 FSS used 2001 population estimates. When the census figures were published for 2001, a number of authorities were concerned that their figures appeared to be wrong, since they showed very big differences from the numbers projected forward from the previous 1991 census. The original 2003/04 FSS and RSG amounts were calculated before the concerns about the population figures could be investigated, and the population figures for 15 authorities have now been revised and new FSS and RSG figures have then been calculated. Since there are quite a number of authorities whose figures have been corrected and since some of the changes are quite large, the impact on FSS and RSG is also quite large, both for those authorities whose population figures have been changed and all other authorities such as Leeds. Leeds RSG has been reduced by ’ 1.267m and this will have to be repaid in 2005/06, which is reflected in the council“s net revenue expenditure.
1 Amending reports are issued by the Government and recalculate the amount of RSG due to authorities. Such reports will generally be made if there is a significant change in data needing correction to Formula Spending Share (FSS), which may relate to just one authority or to a number of authorities. FSS is the prime factor that determines the amount of RSG, so a change to FSS will generally lead to a change in RSG. Since the total amount of Revenue Support Grant available for distribution at the national level does not change, if some authorities gain or lose RSG due to the use of revised data, all other authorities will see an opposite loss or gain in their RSG. Where the revised data relates to just one authority the effect on other authorities is generally small. However, within the 2003/04 amending report the revised data has impacted upon a number of authorities. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com7 5.10. In its response to the provisional local government finance settlement, Leeds City Council has made clear its concern about the impact of these changes. It should also be noted that a further amending report in respect of 2004/05 is expected, to be effected in 2006/07, and Leeds is again expected to lose, although it is unlikely that the amount will be as great.
6. SCRUTINY OF THE BUDGET
6.1. In accordance with the Council“s constitution, the process for developing the 2005/06 budget has involved the submission of initial budget proposals, in the form of the Financial Plans and departmental plans to the Overview and Scrutiny Boards.
6.2 The Constitutional requirements include the Executive Board giving consideration to the recommendations and comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee when submitting its final proposals to Full Council. The Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed that budget proposals be submitted for consideration to all six Scrutiny Boards and that the Boards would submit their comments to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee
6.3. Departmental financial plans were submitted to each of the Scrutiny Boards and officers from the Department of Corporate Services and service departments were invited to explain the potential implications of the plan upon their services.
6.4. The comments and recommendations of each Scrutiny Board have been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Committee have produced a report, which is attached as Appendix 1. An annex to the appendix summarises the main issues raised by Overview, together with a response, including where appropriate whether the issue or proposal has been provided for within the budget now proposed.
7. PROPOSED BUDGET 2005/06
7.1. In developing the 2005/06 budget, consideration has had to be given to the following issues:
· Impact of the 2005/06 Local Government Finance settlement · Departmental budget submissions in comparison to the resource allocations of the Financial Plan · The need to develop a reserves strategy for the Council · The Council“s spending priorities
7.2. In terms of the impact of the settlement as detailed at 5.4 above, the overall cash increase in the Council's FSS of ’ 42.4m, is ’ 3.9m more than assumed in the financial strategy. Also, as detailed at para 5.9. above, the impact of the 2003/04 Amending report will be to increase the net spending of the Council by ’ 1.3m in 2005/06.
7.3. The Council's Financial Plan assumes that the FSS increase for Education is passported to the service. In reviewing this position, the expectations of the DfES need to be recognised. Of the total increase in the Education FSS of ’ 18.4m, the DfES expect ’ 16.9m to be passed onto the Schools Budget. Following the changes to the structure of Education funding for the 2003/04 settlement, the School's Budget includes more than just the Individual Schools Budget, and includes other pupil led spending, such as outside placements. The Secretary of State has once again announced that for 2005/06 "barring wholly exceptional circumstances", all authorities should passport the full schools FSS increase into a matching increase for the schools budget. The Secretary of State holds reserve powers to determine the increase to be PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com8 passed onto the schools block. Executive Board at its meeting on the 15th December 2004 agreed to confirm the Council“s intention to passport the increase in the schools“ FSS onto the schools budget. This is ’ 0.9m lower than the level of increase assumed by the Financial Plan, but as discussed in the attached report on the Education budget, this increase does provide headroom to direct resources in the region of ’ 1m towards secondary schools, over and above the minimum funding guarantee, in support of the Council“s priority of supporting educational attainment in secondary. It is not proposed to make any other adjustment to the Education budget for the settlement.
7.4. Departments were asked to draw up detailed base budget submissions to meet the resource allocations of the Financial Plan prioritising the Council“s Corporate Plan priorities and in accordance with guidelines laid down by the Director of Corporate Services. In drawing up these base budgets, account had to be taken of the following:-
· Pay Awards and other inflation - the officers pay award is provided for at 2.95% from April 2005, which is the second year of a three year settlement agreed in 2004/05. The teachers pay award is 2.5% from April 2005 and in September 2005 this will be topped up to 3.25% - this equates to a 2.95% increase in the financial year 2005/06. In addition, an increase in the employer“s contribution to the West Yorkshire Pension Fund of 0.8% has also had to be provided for in accordance with the latest actuarial report. In respect to non pay budgets, provision has had to be made for a number of areas where specific information is known, and in some instances significant increases have been provided for. These include a Landfill tax price increase of ’ 3 per tonne and increases in the price of utilities. · In other areas, a general provision of 2.0% has been provided, although departments have been encouraged to critically review the need for providing inflationary allowances for many budgets. · The impact of the funding adjustments included in the finance settlement. · The full year effects of developments built into the 2004/05 budget and other developments approved during the year. · Income and grant effects - including loss of specific Government grants. · The effect of demography and volume changes. · Other pressures within the current level of service. · Identification of efficiencies and other savings in accordance with the Financial Plan.
7.5. As anticipated in the Financial Plan, the detailed preparation of departmental estimates resulted in the identification of significant cost pressures for 2005/06 by departments including the impact of those which have arisen during 2004/05. Significant work has been undertaken to review pressures and a number of efficiencies and proposals for policy review have been developed by departments to contain overall spending. These are further detailed in the reports on the departmental budgets, which are attached to this report. In addition to specific savings and efficiencies built into departmental budget submissions, a number of further savings have been effected corporately. These are:
(a) The Council“s capital plans would require additional supported capital financing costs in excess of ’ 3m. Capital financing costs associated with unsupported borrowing for 2005/06 are estimated at ’ 4.7m. However,
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com9 due to debt restructuring in 2004/05 and allowing for further activity in 2005/06, overall capital financing costs have risen by just ’ 960k.
(b) A contingency of ’ 3.0m is included within the budget to cover spending pressures of approximately ’ 5.5m in total identified by Departments. These primarily included provision for income shortfall and PFI portfolio costs. This risk based approach has been operated for many years.
(c) It has been possible to include within the budget additional income of ’ 4.0m. Members will be aware that as part of the 2003/04 accounts, a decision was taken to bring into account income derived from Section 278 schemes. This was justified on the grounds of supporting the Council“s financial position, given significant departmental spending pressures that emerged during the year. It would be possible to bring into the 2005/06 budget, estimated Section 278 income of ’ 4m, however, this would only be advised as part of a strategy to set reserves in accordance with a sustainable reserves policy. This is further discussed below.
7.6. The proposed budget provides for further support for Corporate Plan Priorities. In summary these additional resources will be spent in the following areas:-
(a) ’ 779k for transforming services, and a range of initiaitves for the more efficient delivery of support services (b) ’ 2.4m to ensure all neighbourhoods are safe, clean, green and well maintained (c) ’ 340k towards communities being thriving and harmonious places where people are happy to live (d) ’ 630k to ensure our children and young people are healthy, safe and successful (e) ’ 820k for independent living (f) ’ 100k to support Leeds as a highly competitive, international city
8 RESERVES POLICY
8.1. The position on the Council“s reserves requires specific consideration in the context of constructing the 2005/06 budget. Under the 2003 Local Government Act, the Council“s Statutory Financial Officer is required to make a statement to Council on the adequacy of reserves. In addition, the Council“s Auditors have emphasised the need for the Council to establish a formal Reserves Policy as set out in the Comprehensive Performance Assessment framework. The auditor“s judgement within the Comprehensive Performance Assessment includes consideration of the adequacy of reserves and it expects that:
”The organisation has clearly identified target levels for reserves and balances that are based on a thorough understanding of its needs and risks.–
8.2 This budget report, which is submitted to Council for approval is the mechanism through which a statement on the adequacy of reserves can be made, and it is proposed that a formal Reserves Policy is now established.
8.3. Reserves at the 31st March 2004 stood at ’ 9.6m. Reserves have stood at or near this level for the past 6 years. In recent years the budget has been set each year with reserves anticipated to be around ’ 7.5m. In practice each year reserves have been higher at outturn and have usually been within the range of ’ 10m to ’ 12m. In 2004/05 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com10 reserves at 31st March are projected to be ’ 9.0m following the contribution from the PTA of ’ 1.7m. Prior to this, reserves would have stood at ’ 7.3m, less than budgeted for as a result of the spending pressures being experienced in year, in particular within Social Services
8.4. When significant budget variations occur, which Departments are unable to deal with, the responsibility to cover the gap tends to fall centrally, despite the fact that the level of reserves held is not sufficiently high to provide an effective true contingency for unforeseen events. This results in one-off funding being used, such as debt financing savings and other windfall income, to fund recurring expenditure pressures. In the context of this, an alternative approach is proposed that from 2005/06 Departments will be required to prepare a budget action plan which sets out how they will deal with spending variations on departmentally controlled budgets during the year up to a limit of, say, 2% of net expenditure. This would mean that variations to the Council“s budget would be planned in advance up to a limit of approximately ’ 7m, excluding Education. It is also proposed that from 2005/06 departmental spending variations at outturn up to these limits are carried forward within the Council“s Financial Plan. Any budget variations above 2% would be dealt with corporately using, where necessary, the General Fund Reserve.
8.5. In the context of the Council“s reserves it is also important to consider a number of other factors which may have an impact on the budget for future years:
· The Revenue Support Grant settlement for 2005/06 included additional grant of ’ 400m nationally which is not guaranteed beyond 2005/06. The implications for Leeds is that approximately ’ 4m of Revenue Support Grant may not recur in 2006/07; · The budget includes a number of one-off income sources, including ’ 1.2m in additional council tax income in respect of the removal of the discount on empty homes as agreed by Council, and the continued use of section 278 monies (’ 4m).
8.6. Whilst the full year effect of efficiency reviews which are built into the 2005/06 budget will generate additional savings in 2006/07, and these should offset the fallout of some of these one-off income sources, it would be prudent to use a proportion of this income to make a contribution into reserves to provide a contingency for the 2006/07 budget. In addition, the Council needs to have sufficient resources to deal with uncertain variations in the Council“s budget, for example the impact of equal pay and job evaluation.
8.7. Whilst it is difficult to be precise about the level of Reserves which the Council should prudently maintain, given the size of the Council“s budget and particularly bearing in mind the level of budget variation experienced in 2004/05, it would seem reasonable to set a range of between 3% and 4% of net expenditure excluding schools, which amounts to a range of ’ 14m to ’ 18m, and including schools between ’ 24m and ’ 30m.
8.8 The proposed budget provides that budgeted reserves are increased to ’ 12m at 31st March 2006; this requires a ’ 3.0m contribution into reserves. It is therefore further recommended that the Council sets a strategy that by the 31st March 2008 the Council increases its reserves to within the range referred to above, which would provide the Council with a more appropriate level of reserves, and coupled with the proposals regarding the management of budgetary risks, this should enable it to deal more easily with in-year spending pressures such as those experienced in 2004/05.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com11 9 2005/06 BUDGET SUMMARY
9.1 Taking account of the above variations to the Council Plan gives an overall Council Budget as follows:-
’ M ’ M
Budget 2004/05 758.2
Financial Plan +38.5
Adjustments to the plan as above - FSS Adjustments +3.9 - 2003/04 Amending report +1.3 - Departmental variations +2.3 - Additional capital financing savings -1.7 - One off income sources -4.0 - Variation on general reserves +5.4 +7.2 Budget 2005/06 803.9
9.2. The table below sets out a summary of the changes from the 2004/05 budget to 2005/06.
’ M
Budget 2004/05 758.2
2003/04 Amending report 1.3
Revised base budget 759.5
Increase in the budget for education 17.7
Increase in the budget for social services 16.5
All other services Effect of pay awards and inflation 10.1 Full Year effects of current year pressures, and other pressures 4.9 Efficiency savings -10.2 Increase in contribution to general reserves 5.4 One off income -4.0 Variation in capital charges 1.0 Additional Support to Corporate Plan priorities 3.0
Base Budget 2005/06 803.9
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com12 9.3. Table 1 appended to this report provides an analysis of the budget by department; Table 2 shows a subjective summary of the City Budget; and Table 3 shows the projected staffing levels at 31st March 2006.
10. CONTRIBUTIONS TO JOINT COMMITTEES AND OTHER BODIES
10.1. Total contributions to joint committees are ’ 2.597m in the Original Estimate 2005/06, and are analysed below. The lead authorities for the joint committees are also shown:-
Lead Authority Leeds, Contribution ’ m Pension Fund Bradford 0.431 Joint Services Wakefield 2.166
In approving these contributions, Members will note that they are not approving the individual budget of the joint committees, but the estimated effect on the City Council's budget.
10.2. Contributions in 2005/06 to other bodies“ amounts to ’ 23.067m
Leeds, Contribution ’ m
Flood Defence Levy 0.051 Passenger Transport Authority (PTA) 22.135 Coroners 0.855 West Yorkshire Probation Service 0.025 West Yorkshire Magistrates Court Committee 0.000
Whilst the City Council no longer incurs expenditure in relation to the ongoing costs of the West Yorkshire Probation Committee, the Council is required to provide for the cost of loan charges in respect of the Probation Services post 1990 capital debt. The Council is no longer required to contribute to the on going costs of the West Yorkshire Magistrates Court Committee.
11. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET
11.1 Taking account of all the above, the proposed budget for 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:‘
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com13 Original Latest Proposed Budget Estimate Budget 2004/05 2004/05 2005/06 ’ m ’ m ’ m REVENUE EXPENDITURE 760.5 758.8 800.9 Less: contribution to (from) General Fund -2.3 -0.6 3.0 Reserve
Net Expenditure 758.2 758.2 803.9 GENERAL FUND RESERVE Brought Forward 1st April 9.7 9.6 9.0 Estimated contribution (use) -2.3 -0.6 3.0
Carried Forward 31st March 7.4 9.0 12.0
12. EFFICIENCIES
12.1. The Gershon report, …Releasing resources to the front line, independent review of Public Sector Efficiency“ was published in July 2004. The Chancellor announced in the 2004 budget statement that a stretching but realistic target to deliver efficiencies of 2.5% per annum over the 3 years of the 2004 spending review would deliver gains equivalent to ’ 20bn a year by 2007/2008. Local Governments“ share of this total is ’ 6.45bn.
12.2. Whilst the Government has provided some guidance, this is still being evaluated and there are some issues which still need to resolved. However, it is known that the Council is expected to make efficiency gains over the next 3 years, and that it will be required to produce an Annual Efficiency Statement signed by the Leader and the Chief Executive. The statement is in 2 parts; one part forward looking and the other part reporting on efficiencies achieved. The forward looking part of the statement must outline the strategy for achieving efficiencies and will be required from April 2005. From June 2006, a statement of efficiencies achieved will need to be published. The Annual Efficiency Statement will be subject to review by the Audit Commission. The Commission will assess whether the evaluation process is adequate and whether reported efficiencies are supported by evidence; an adequate audit trail with supporting evidence is therefore required.
12.3. Recognising that further guidance is still to be provided, which will inform the publication of the Council“s first Annual Efficiency Statement in April 2005, but based upon the available information, an attempt has been made to give an indication of the level of efficiency gains provided for within the proposed budget for 2005/06. This initial work on efficiency gains will put the Council in a good position to meet the emerging requirements to publish a statement in April 2005.
12.4. The available guidance defines efficiency gains to include: · Reducing inputs and maintaining service provision · Lower prices for resources · Additional outputs (in terms of quantity or quality) for the same inputs PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com14 · Better outcomes from redesigned service provision
Whilst the first two categories would likely have an identifiable, cash impact, the final two are what are defined as non cashable, in that they do not result in reduced spending. Currently, guidance suggests that at least half of the efficiency gains should be cashable with the savings capable of being redirected to corporate priorities.
12.5. Gershon identifies the following areas in which efficiencies can be made. In some instances, efficiencies may not discreetly fall into one category. Efficiencies can be classified as: · Back office (corporate and / or support services) · Procurement · Transactional · Productive time · Policy, funding and regulation
12.6. In order to assess the Council“s position, a first step is to determine the target level of efficiency gains. Draft guidance suggests, that for revenue, the calculation will be referenced to the Annual Revenue Budget account (RA) 2004/05 return and is based on net expenditure excluding capital charges minus delegated schools budgets, and adding back specific grants - mainly NRF and SRB. For Leeds this would indicate a 2.5% efficiency target of around ’ 10.5m of which at least 50% must be cashable.
12.7. As part of the process for preparing the budget, departments were asked to identify efficiency gains and these are detailed in the attached departmental budget reports, but in total they add up ’ 16.0m as detailed below:
DEPARTMENT CASHABLE NON- TOTAL CASHABLE ’,000 ’,000 ’,000
Development 472 160 632 City Services 2,130 499 2,629 Corporate Services 1,573 1,573 Learning and Leisure 2,217 2,217 Education 369 369 Neighbourhoods and Housing 814 814 Services Chief Executives 255 255 Social Services 5,300 1,490 6,790 Cross Cutting and Strategic 750 750
TOTAL SAVINGS 13,880 2,149 16,029
12.8. The above statement should only be regarded as indicative at this stage. Further work will be required to refine the position, especially in respect to the non cashable PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com15 efficiency gains, which represent the initial work undertaken by departments to identify areas where additional outputs (in terms of quantity or quality) are being provided for the same inputs or where better outcomes are forecast from redesigned service provision.
13. ROBUSTNESS OF THE BUDGET AND THE ADEQUACY OF RESERVES
13.1 The Local Government Act (Part II) 2003 places a requirement upon the Council's statutory finance officer (The Director of Corporate Services) to report to members on the robustness of the budget estimates and the adequacy of the proposed financial reserves.
13.2 The budget is a financial statement of intent, reflecting the Council“s plans and policies. It is also a means by which the Council controls its spending within the available resources. As such an assessment of the robustness of the budget must assess the possibility that spending may vary from the approved estimates and its potential impact upon the financial health of the Council. The focus of an assessment will be largely around the forthcoming financial year, and needs to consider areas of spending that may vary in year, and would need to be dealt with within the available resources for that year. In considering the robustness of any estimates, the following criteria need to be considered:-
· the reasonableness of the underlying budget assumptions such as: - the reasonableness of estimates for inflationary pressures; - the extent to which known trends and pressures have been provided for: - the achievability of changes built into the budget; - the realism of income targets; - the alignment of resources with the Council service and organisational priorities.
· a review of the major risks associated with the budget. · the availability of any contingency or unearmarked reserves to meet unforeseen cost pressures. · the strength of the financial management and reporting arrangements.
13.3 In coming to a view as to the robustness of the 2005/06 budget, the Director of Corporate Services has taken account of the following issues:-
· The Council has a well developed three year financial plan which provides an overall financial framework designed to underpin the Council's service and organisational priorities.
· Estimates are prepared by departments in accordance with guidelines laid down by the Director of Corporate Services based upon the current agreed level of service. Service changes are separately identified and plans are in place for them to be managed.
· Estimate submissions have been subject to review against resource allocations of the financial plan by the Director of Corporate Services throughout the budget process. This is both in terms of reasonableness and adequacy. This process takes account of previous and current spending patterns in terms of base spending plans and the reasonableness and achievability of additional spending to meet increasing or new service pressures. This is a thorough process involving both financial and non-financial senior managers throughout the Council.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com16 · As explained in the section on the current year, a number of the Council's services have faced significant financial pressures in the current year, particularly in Social Services. These pressures have, where appropriate, been recognised in preparing the 2005/06 budget, and are reflected in departmental budgets.
· Estimates provide for pay awards, which in the case of both officers and teachers are agreed. In respect of other budget headings, departments have been encouraged to review the need for inflation, but central guidance has been provided on a number of budget heads, where it is not possible to avoid additional provision. There is no central provision for pay and price increase which vary from those built into the budget.
· As part of the budget process departments were asked to undertake a risk assessment of their key budgets. These assessments have been summarised within the departmental budget documents. All departmental budgets contain efficiencies, service reviews and savings which are not secured and will require action to deliver but in overall terms the identified risks are regarded as manageable at this time. Some of the key ones are as follows:- · Social Services- demand led expenditure especially within Community Care and Children“s placements · Leisure services - significant levels of grants and other income supporting the budget · Supporting People income across the Council · City Services - the level of third party insurance liability claims exceed the budget · Legislative / regulatory changes
13.4 The Council's financial controls are set out in the Council's Financial Procedure Rules. These provide a significant degree of assurance as to the strength of financial management and control arrangements throughout the Council. These governance arrangements have been enhanced through the ongoing development of procedures to support the annual Statement of Internal Control which is required to be published as part of the Council“s annual accounts. The Council has a well established framework for financial reporting at departmental and corporate levels. Each month the Director of Corporate Services receives a report from each department setting out spending to date and projecting to the year-end. Action plans are utilised to manage and minimise any significant variations to approved budgets. These arrangements are supported by the arrangements for reporting to Members. It is proposed that for 2005/06 quarterly financial health reports are submitted to the Executive Board.
13.5 The report on the 2004/05 budget set an interim target of increasing reserves to 2% for 2005/06. Section 11 of this report sets out proposed position in respect to the General Fund Reserves. The proposed budget provides for a contribution of ’ 3.0m, which would result in the reserve being at ’ 12.0m at the 31st March 2006. At this level the reserve would represent 2.4% (excluding the expenditure of the ISB). In addition, Section 8 sets out the basis for a Council Reserves policy which requires departments to have in place action plans to deal with variations in departmental spending up to 2% with the potential for variations up to this level being carried forward. In overall terms this new reserves policy will provide a sounder basis for the Council in managing unexpected budget pressures in the future.
13.6 In summary, the Director of Corporate Services considers that the proposed budget for 2005/06 is robust and that the level of reserves are adequate because:-
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com17 - budget monitoring and scrutiny arrangements are in place which include arrangements for the identification of remedial action.
- cost pressures have been identified and resourced.
- risks are identified and will be subject to control and management. As part of the Council“s reserves policy departments are required to have in place a budget action plan which sets out how they will deal with variations during the year up to 2%.
- the budget is not dependent on the usage of reserves and the general reserves provide an adequate level of support as part of a three year strategy for increasing the Council“s reserves in line with its reserves policy.
14 BUDGET AND POLICY FRAMEWORK
14.1 In accordance with the Budget and Policy Framework Rules, the Executive Board are required to make proposals to Council regarding the extent of virement and the degree of in-year changes which may be undertaken by the Executive. These are set out in Financial Procedure Rules.
14.2 These rules have been reviewed during the year and amended to take account of Area Management and other developments with changes being approved by the Council Business committee.
14.3 It is proposed that Financial Procedure Rules are further amended to take account of the proposals included in Section 8. It is also proposed to amend and simplify the delegated limits for virement as detailed in appendix 2.
15 RECOMMENDATIONS
15.1 The Executive Board is asked to recommend to the Council the adoption of resolutions (i) to (iii) below:
(i) To note the proposed contribution of ’ 0.6m from General Fund Reserves in 2004/05 and to agree that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to determine the final level of contribution to or from reserves upon the closure of the 2004/05 Accounts.
(ii) That the Revenue Estimates for 2005/06 totalling ’ 803.9m, as detailed and explained in this report and accompanying papers be approved.
(iii) That the Reserves Policy detailed in this report be approved.
15.2. That the Executive Board recommend to Council that the extent of virement and the degree of in year changes, which may be undertaken by the Executive is as per appendix 2 and that Financial Procedure Rules are amended accordingly.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com18 APPENDIX 1
Report of Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Scrutiny of the Council“s Financial Plan 2005/06
Date of Publication: 28th January 2005
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Report of Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Scrutiny of the Council,s Financial Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08
SESSIONAL EVIDENCE
Reports and Publications Submitted
· Report of Scrutiny Support Manager 16th September 2004 · Executive Board Report, 21st July 2004 - Financial Performance - Outturn 2003/04 · Leeds City Council Financial Plan 2005 - 2008, including Departmental Plans. · Individual Scrutiny Board reports following Scrutiny of the Budget · Report of the Director of Corporate Services - Scrutiny of the Financial Plan - Additional Information · Executive Board report - 15th December 2004, Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement 2005/06
(copies of the written submission are available on request from the Scrutiny Support Unit)
Witnesses Heard
· Director of Corporate Services · Chief Officer (Financial Management) · Head of Accountancy (Control), Corporate Services
Dates of Scrutiny
· 16th September 2004 · 19th November 2004 · 14th January 2005 · 28th January 2005
Site Visits
None undertaken
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Report of Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Scrutiny of the Council,s Financial Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08Inquiry into
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Council's constitution includes a requirement for the initial budget proposals of the Executive Board to be submitted for consideration by scrutiny. For the purposes of the budget, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee is responsible for reporting to the Executive the outcome of Scrutiny Board deliberations. However the Terms of Reference for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee state that:
”To assist the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in its deliberations, individual Scrutiny Boards will consider Budget proposals relating to their particular Terms of Reference and forward their conclusions and recommendations to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee
1.2 This report presents the comments of individual Scrutiny Boards and the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
1.3 A summary of the evidence considered in arriving at our conclusions is presented at Appendix 1.
2.0 THE SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY
2.1 In previous years, the process for Scrutinising the Budget has been for individual Scrutiny Boards to look in detail at departmental issues and financial plans. The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has then, at this stage, simply passed on to the Executive the comments of the individual Scrutiny Boards without any consideration of the cumulative impact of each of the Scrutiny Board“s comments on the overall Council budget.
2.2 Whilst acknowledging the important input Scrutiny made, it is fair to say that this process sometimes resulted in those individual Boards recommending budget increases for the department under Scrutiny. The cumulative affect of this was a series of budget bids which when combined were unsustainable.
2.3 For this year we agreed that to improve the process, particularly in terms of providing an overview commentary on the budget, Overview and Scrutiny Committee would play a more proactive role, focusing on the Executive“s initial budget proposals and how departments planned to align their budgets accordingly. It was agreed that individual Scrutiny Boards would be requested to ask departments to consider how they would balance their budgets and the likely implications for service delivery.
2.4 We are pleased to report that Scrutiny Board“s stuck to the brief set them and we would like to thank Members and those officers who have undertaken some excellent work.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.5 On receipt of the comments from Scrutiny Boards we agreed to undertake a process of balancing those comments with the objectives of the Administration and the Executive“s initial budget proposals.
3.0 THE BOARDS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Individual Scrutiny Boards have scrutinised the budget proposals falling within their terms of reference. The comments and recommendations resulting from this process are attached as Appendix 1. A number of Scrutiny Boards have made recommendations which they, as individual Scrutiny Boards will pursue. There are, however, a number of recommendations which Overview and Scrutiny Board wish to endorse and present as the collective view of the Committee. These are identified below.
Recommendation 1
That the Director of Corporate Services be requested to carry out further research into the Government,s rationale for the variation in the increases to the Primary block and Secondary block funding for education in order to establish whether there are factors that the Council should take account of in its own financial planning.
Recommendation 2
That at least ’ 1m additional funding is allocated next year and in 2006/07 towards raising secondary achievement from the headroom identified in the schools budget.
Recommendation 3
That opportunities for more effective use of resources, for example through co-location and inter-authority co-operation be explored as part of a longer term approach to budget planning.
Recommendation 4
We recommend that the department of City Services investigates the possibility and feasibility of meeting some of the costs of highways maintenance through the capital budget rather than the revenue budget.
Recommendation 5
That the ’ 15.3m Social Services increase for 2005/06 being passported to the Social Services Department is supported by the Executive Board.
Recommendation 6
That progress reports on cross cutting reviews within Departments should be reported to the appropriate Scrutiny Board and to Overview and Scrutiny Committee on a regular basis.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Recommendation 7
That Education Leeds and Social Services be subjected to the same rigour in terms of achieving efficiency savings as other departments.
Report Agreed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 28th February 2005
Signed by the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee½½½½½½½½½½.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 1 SCRUTINY BOARD (LIFELONG LEARNING)
COMMENTS ON BUDGET PROPOSALS 2005/06
November 2004 The Board considered the Financial Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08 approved by the Executive Board on 17th November 2004, as their initial budget proposals for 2005/06. Additional information was also provided by the Learning and Leisure Department and Education Leeds regarding areas of budget pressure and proposals for responding to these as far as they had been currently developed.
The Scrutiny Board (Lifelong Learning) makes the following comments to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee:
· The Board discussed the provisional allocations, and in particular the difference within the overall Education Formula Spending Share (EFSS) between the increases for the primary and secondary blocks. Members noted that partly as a consequence of the level of variation, the Council was now using its Audit Commission statistical neighbours as a more robust comparator for levels of primary and secondary funding as opposed to national comparisons.
Recommendation: That the Director of Corporate Services be requested to carry out further research into the Government,s rationale for the variation in the increases to the Primary block and Secondary block funding in order to establish whether there are factors that the Council should take account of in its own financial planning.
· Members considered the limitations placed on budget flexibility by the nationally imposed minimum per pupil guarantee (MPPG) of additional funding for schools. However, they were told that even within this restriction, there was some scope to redirect funding. They noted that the MPPG was higher in the primary sector than the secondary sector in order to assist with the costs of implementing workforce reform in schools. However, it was acknowledged by officers that the additional 1% allocation was very unlikely to be sufficient, and that schools and the Schools Forum were likely to consider this a priority area for use of any headroom in the schools budget, when the annual consultation takes place.
· Other priority spending areas for the available headroom included secondary achievement and behaviour support. Officers commented that targeting funding on behaviour would also have the effect of realigning resources to secondary attainment. Whilst agreeing that workforce reform and behaviour were key issues, the Board was strongly of the view that secondary achievement was the top priority for any additional resources.
· Members also noted that additional resources were being targeted at priority issues through funding streams not included in these papers, such as the Leadership Incentive Grant, Private Finance Initiative, and the Six Schools Project.
Recommendation: That at least ’ 1m additional funding is allocated next year and in 2006/07 towards raising secondary achievement from the headroom identified in the schools budget.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Members were informed of the Gershon Review“s implications for schools, which would be expected to target more efficient ways of using existing resources, in order to free up some of the funding required for new initiatives and pressures such as workforce reform.
· The Board noted that in some cases, schools still held significant balances which could also help to address these issues. Members were also reminded that one of the issues in Leeds was the number of smaller primary schools and that one of the aims of the continuing primary review was to ensure sustainable schools.
· The Board clarified that there is a government expectation that the schools element of the EFSS is passported to schools, with a reserve power available to the Secretary of State to direct that this be done. However the same is not true of the LEA element of the EFSS, which could be redirected should the authority so choose. The Council“s Financial Plan assumes that it will be passported.
· The Scrutiny Board was conscious of the continuing trend for more and more delegation to schools and of the consequent pressures that this placed on governing bodies. They suggested that Education Leeds should explore ways in which to …translate“ the strategic level budget discussions and calculations into a format that could be presented to governors to reflect more closely their roles, for example information on the key priorities and targets that they were expected to deliver or contribute to within the budgets delegated to them. It was recognised that the standard of information provided to governing bodies was improving, but at the same time, the levels of responsibility were also constantly increasing.
Recommendation: That Education Leeds explores ways of further improving the budget information presented to governors.
· Members noted that approximately ’ 31m of the department“s ’ 86m budget fell within the Learning division of the Learning and Leisure Department. At the time of the Board“s meeting, the overall position for the department showed a gap of approximately ’ 4.5m to balance the budget. Proposals to address the pressures were being developed and would become available within the next few weeks. The Board were informed that the Leisure Scrutiny Board were reconvening in December to consider further information from the department.
· The Board acknowledged that the differential increases in indicative levels of national funding between the various service blocks left a number of Council services, including the leisure services, with very small increases compared to education and social services.
· The Board also asked about the scope for more effective use of resources, for example through co-location of facilities at a local level, and through inter-authority co-ordination at a more regional level. They also discussed the wider educational benefits of leisure and recreational opportunities for creating healthy communities.
Recommendation: That opportunities for more effective use of resources, for example through co-location and inter-authority co-operation be explored as part of a longer term approach to budget planning.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Update on Budget comments from Scrutiny Board (Lifelong Learning)
At its meeting on 13th January, the Board received an update from officers in relation to the Learning Division of the department.
This identified plans to address the shortfall, which included additional resources of ’ 0.5m allocated to the department, and a programme of 6 reviews designed to bridge the remaining gap. Members discussed the realistic nature of the review targets and the impact on customers of the proposals.
In conclusion the Board welcomed the department“s proposals for delivering a balanced budget.
.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com SCRUTINY BOARD (NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING)
COMMENTS TO OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ON THE NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING BUDGET
The Scrutiny Board is encouraged to note that the department presented to Members on 14th December 2004 a balanced budget for 2005/06.
The Board noted that the Department is facing pressures of ’ 5.1m, comprising ’ 4.2m departmental pressures and a corporate efficiency target of ’ 0.9m.
The Department has been allocated ’ 1.7m of central funding to allow it to cover inflationary pressures and implement manifesto priorities in Community Safety and Regeneration, leaving a gap of ’ 3.4m to be bridged,
The Board notes that the Department has identified ’ 3.4m of savings. At the time of the Scrutiny Board, these savings proposals had not been ratified by the Executive.
The Scrutiny Board has a number of issues around the Department“s identification of savings, particularly around the reduction or removal of grants. The Board has resolved to receive additional information from the Director on how revenue efficiencies and other savings have been drawn up.
From a corporate perspective, and of relevance to Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Board endorses the proposal that a proportion of the ’ 1.6m additional revenue available for …other Council services“ be directed to fund community safety.
No other substantial issues were raised by Board Members
SCRUTINY BOARD (SOCIAL CARE)
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COMMENTS ON BUDGET PROPOSALS 2005/06
During December 2004, the Scrutiny Board (Social Care) formally considered the Financial Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08 approved by the Executive Board on 17 th November 2004, as well as the proposed Social Services Departmental Plan for 2005/06.
The Board also considered supplementary information from the Social Services Department outlining the areas of budget pressure and the Department's proposals for responding to these.
In conclusion, the Scrutiny Board (Social Care) makes the following comments to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee:
In acknowledging that there is no requirement for the Council to passport any increases in the Formula Spending Share (FSS) for 2005/06 to the Social Services Department, the Board welcomes the Council's commitment to passport the ’ 15.3m Social Services increase for 2005/06 outlined in the Financial Plan 2005/06 to 2007/08.
Recommendation: That the ’ 15.3m Social Services increase for 2005/06 being passported to the Social Services Department is supported by the Council
However, to help achieve financial balance and stability within the Department, the Scrutiny Board also acknowledges that such increases need to be seen within the context of significant policy development and service improvement. The Board therefore supports the Department's intentions to review and modernise existing policies within the Department to help manage and improve service delivery and efficiency, particularly in services facing increased demand pressures, for example, domicilliary care services.
Members were informed that a lot of this work has been developed as part of the Delivery and Improvement Programme which looks at modernising services and increasing efficiency within the Department. Members therefore requested that regular update reports on the implementation of the planned efficiency reviews outlined in the Delivery and Improvement Programme be brought to the Scrutiny Board for consideration.
Recommendation: That the Social Services Department provides regular update reports to the Social Care Scrutiny Board on the implementation of the planned efficiency reviews outlined in the Delivery and Improvement Programme.
Particular importance was also placed on ensuring that the underlying principles of the Children Act were being incorporated into the future plans of the Social Services Department
Recommendation: That the underlying principles of the Children Act are incorporated into the future plans of the Social Services Department
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com In line with the Department's proposed programme of efficiency reviews, Members noted the proposed saving of ’ 5.4m in 2005/06 linked to a review of eligibility and service reconfigurations. In acknowledging this potentially huge saving, the Board emphasised the need for the Department to ensure that frontline services will not suffer as a result of this saving and that those individuals who are eligible will receive the appropriate service and will not be put at risk.
However, in order to alleviate and manage the current service demand pressures, the Board also recognised the need for the Department to move towards promoting greater independence and empowering more people to make choices about what services they receive. In principle, the Board therefore supported the proposed new approach by the Department of actively sign posting clients, where appropriate, to alternative supporting agencies and care services within the city. However, in discussing the practicalities of such an approach, the Board considered it vital for the Department to sufficiently invest in developing its communication links between the different services across the City and to ensure that the necessary infrastructures and networks are developed to safeguard individuals and not put them at risk.
Recommendation: Whilst the Board supports the Department,s move towards promoting greater independence and empowering more people to make choices about what services they receive, the Department must ensure that individuals are not put at risk.
Recommendation: To ensure the safety of those individuals being re-directed to alternative supporting services, it is vital that sufficient investment is made by the Department in strengthening the communication links between the different services across the City and for the necessary infrastructures and networks to be developed.
In line with promoting independent living, Members queried the uptake of the Direct Payments Scheme which enables those individuals who have received a Community Care Assessment and are eligible for mainstream services to purchase and manage their own care services. This approach also helps to alleviate service demand pressures within Social Services. Members noted that there are approximately 100 people using the direct payments scheme in Leeds. The Board therefore recommended that the Department actively promotes the scheme within Leeds and welcomed the proposed ’ 1.5m investment set out in the 2005/06 budget for increasing Direct Payments.
Recommendation: That the Department actively promotes the Direct Payments Scheme in Leeds in line with the independent living approach.
The Board identified the need for the Department to be more explicit when communicating what services are available and the entitlement of individuals to these services. Particular importance was also placed on taking into account the customer,s expectations of the services available. Whilst the Board acknowledged the wide range of information leaflets produced by the Department about its services, Members queried whether such leaflets are easily accessible, are being utilised effectively and are being targeted at the appropriate service user groups.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Recommendation: That the Department further develops its customer focus approach by communicating more effectively with the public on the role and purpose of what services are available and being more explicit about the eligibility and entitlement of individuals to such services.
To ensure a consistent approach across the city, the Board also identified the need to improve communication links with frontline staff and for the Department to invest in developing and delivering extensive training packages for frontline staff on what services are available and the entitlement of individuals to such services. Particular reference was made to the Department,s –Better Care Higher Standards, Statement. Members queried whether staff used this Statement and identified the need to ensure that this was revised annually.
Recommendation: That the Department addresses as a priority the communication barriers with frontline staff and invests in developing and delivering extensive training packages to frontline staff on what services are available and the entitlement of individuals to such services.
In line with the Department,s proposed efficiency reviews on its current transport policies and attendance management and workforce matters, such issues will also be addressed by the Scrutiny Board in line with its current major inquiries into the transport arrangements of the Department and the recruitment and retention of staff.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com SCRUTINY BOARD (CITY SERVICES)
SCRUTINY OF THE BUDGET
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 At its meeting on 13th December 2004, Scrutiny Board (City Services) received a presentation on the proposed budget for the City Services department and held a lengthy discussion on the proposals.
1.2 The Board has also undertaken a series of working groups to allow detailed discussions with the department regarding the financial challenges being faced. Recommendations made by the working group are included in these recommendations.
1.3 Attached at Appendix 1 is the note of the working group sessions held prior to the Board meeting.
2.0 THE BOARD,S RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Although it is clear there is still some work to be done to ensure that the budget is balanced, the Board and the department are confident that this can be achieved. We recognise the difficult choices faced by the department and through our discussions have sought to support and give guidance to the process. We are particularly supportive of proposals to license yellow new development signs placed by developers. We feel that not only will this raise revenue, but will allow the department to control their life span and where they are placed. The Board has therefore approved the proposed budget subject to the following recommendations and suggestions.
2.2 We discussed the processes the department has in place for producing a balanced budget and noted that a number of reviews were currently taking place, but there were still some savings to be found. We recommend that the department identifies further savings in order to produce a balanced budget.
· We recommend that the department continues to review the budget and identify savings to result in a balanced budget.
2.3 Although we are aware of the budget situation across all Council departments we questioned whether the department charged other Council departments a realistic rate for the services that City Services provides. We recommend that the department reviews whether or not the costs of providing these services are met by the charges made, where this might be appropriate. We felt that there was scope in assessing the feasibility of requesting a contribution from Education Leeds to the cost of providing school crossing patrol services, for example.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · The Board recommends that the department reviews its charges to other departments to ensure costs are met where appropriate. We also recommend investigating the feasibility of charging, partly or fully, for services which are currently funded by the department, as in the example of school crossing patrols.
2.4 The Board noted that energy costs are increasing significantly nation-wide and that this has a considerable effect on the energy bills faced by the department. We learned that the Asset Management team in the Development department have the role of reducing energy costs Council-wide. We therefore recommend that the department liases closely with Asset Management to reduce energy costs in the City Services department.
· We recommend that the department liases closely with Asset Management to reduce energy costs in the City Services department.
2.5 We discussed the limited total budget available to the department and which services should be prioritised, as it would not be possible to fund all the new projects and services that the department would like to provide, as well as the core service provision. We agreed that recycling projects such as glass collection and disposal of garden waste should be prioritised in the budget setting process, as this impacts on landfill costs, and costs of the collection of black bins. Members of the Board support the work being done to educate the public further about what materials could be recycled, as this would reduce contamination in the green bins and at Household Waste Sorting Sites, thereby reducing disposal costs further. We are currently investigating these matters in more detail in a separate inquiry into Recycling Issues.
· We recommend that the department continues to prioritise recycling especially glass collection and disposal of garden waste. The department should also educate the public further on recycling matters, with the aim of impacting on other waste management costs.
2.6 We considered ways to decrease the tonnage of waste and therefore disposal costs to the department, while still maintaining a clean city, and were pleased to learn that waste from skips provided by the Council“s contractors used in community clean-ups did not count towards the Council“s waste tonnage. Members encouraged officers to promote the use of skips in this way.
· We recommend that the department consider ways of collecting waste which do not count towards the Council,s waste tonnage e.g. through charity skips, and promote these.
2.7 The Board debated the effects of enforcement on the rest of the work done by the department and acknowledged that improved enforcement meant lower costs for street cleansing, waste disposal etc as there would be less rubbish to clean up and more waste would be recycled.
2.8 We also discussed possible service improvements to the street cleansing service and agreed that an improved street cleansing service (including road sweeping, street sweeping and gully cleansing) was a priority for the department in the coming year and that increased enforcement and improved street cleansing could improve all areas.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · The Board recommends that the department concentrate on improving the street cleansing service throughout the city.
· We recommend that the department prioritises improved enforcement.
2.9 As a way of recouping costs, we considered the possibility of a recovery method for recovering energy from waste. We noted that electricity is generated at the Gamblethorpe capped landfill site and suggested that the department investigate other means of recovering energy from waste and the feasibility of other options.
· We recommend that the department investigate and report back on the feasibility of a recovery strategy for converting rubbish into energy.
2.10 We discussed the receipt of DEFRA grants by the department and we noted that this type of funding is short term and that replacement funding would need to be sought when it ends. We recommend that the department pursues further grants, particularly from DEFRA, in order to fund existing and new projects to increase recycling levels.
· We recommend that the department seeks further grants, particularly from DEFRA in the future to assist in replacing current time limited funding for further waste management grants.
2.11 We noted that there were a number of service improvements which could possibly be funded by outside sources, such as applying to DEFRA, if the opportunity became available, for funding for free home composters for those households which would like one. Other suggestions included possible funding from the Drug Action Team for an improved 7-day needle picking service, and contribution from Area Committees towards additional street washing services.
· We recommend that the department pursue possible sources of outside funding for service improvements: · Continue with and develop education and enforcement work and investigate external sources of funding for education and enforcement work. · Pursue funding from DEFRA for free home composters · Pursue funding from DAT for a 7-day needle picking service · The department to contact Area Committees about funding for additional street washers in their areas if there was a demand for additional street washing. · Try and obtain funding from ALMOs for the high rise recycling scheme.
2.12 The Board also discussed funding for associated highway maintenance works when new developments are being built and suggested that the department pursues developers for funding for these works. This issue was discussed more fully during the Board“s inquiry into Highways Services.
· We recommend that the department pursues developers for funding for associated highway maintenance works when new developments are built.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.13 We considered the winter maintenance schedule and noted that winter maintenance of secondary routes could be improved by different degrees, at varying costs. We suggested that increasing the number of grit bins available to the public could improve winter maintenance at a reduced cost to the department and that the department should investigate this.
· We recommend that the department determine the costs for increased provision of grit bins to enhance winter maintenance.
2.14 We considered the costs of highways maintenance and suggested that these costs might be better met through increased capitalisation rather than through the revenue budget. This issue was discussed more fully during the Board“s inquiry into Highways Services.
· We recommend that the department investigates the possibility and feasibility of meeting some of the costs of highways maintenance through the capital budget rather than the revenue budget.
2.15 The Board discussed the department“s initial proposals to charge for parking in the evenings and on Sundays. The Board had mixed views on this. We understand that car parking spaces are a valuable asset in the city centre which could generate income for the department, however Members also expressed concerns that evening and weekend charges would stifle activities in the city centre and would affect access to shops, colleges and entertainment. To balance this, however, we did feel there was some scope for the provision of very short stay parking spaces outside banks, for example, with the appropriate charges being levied. The Board felt that there should be a thorough review of the car parking charging policy.
· The Board recommends that the department reconsiders its proposal to charge for car parking in the evenings and on Sundays and conducts a thorough review of the carparking charging policy.
2.16 Members of the Board visited a number of City Services department locations including the Transport Services depot which maintains the City Services vehicles, including refuse trucks. We commend the expertise of the staff working at the depot, and were pleased to hear of the stringent and frequent inspections of the vehicles. We have questioned the number of refuse vehicles in for repair / inspection and have sought further information on what this …downtime“ costs, particularly as replacement vehicles are used. We understand that there are statutory requirements involved in maintaining safe vehicles, however, we recommend that the department reviews how this might be undertaken in order to minimise …downtime“ of refuse vehicles and the resulting cost to the department.
· The Board recommends that the department reviews the maintenance arrangements for refuse vehicles to seek ways of minimising vehicle –downtime, and the resulting cost to the department.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com SCRUTINY BOARD (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES)
SCRUTINY OF THE BUDGET PROPOSALS
RECOMMENDATIONS TO OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 At its meeting on 29th November 2004, Scrutiny Board (Development Services) received information on the budget relevant to its remit. This information was discussed. The department explained that further work was needed to be undertaken on a more detailed action plan.
1.2 Members agreed to hold an additional meeting in order to receive further information from the department on 20th December 2004. A more detailed action plan was presented by the department and the Board discussed the issues raised. The Director explained that these were still officer proposals and had not received approval from the Executive Board Member and therefore had no formal standing.
2.0 THE BOARD,S RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Following in-depth discussions around the Development department“s budget submission, the Board broadly supports the department“s work in ensuring that the budget is balanced. Members have acknowledged that there is still the detail to be progressed over the coming months and has requested that updates be provided at the appropriate time.
2.2 Members noted that in real terms the budget for the Development department has been reduced and there is an identified shortfall of ’ 1.8m. It was noted that the department“s action plan is intended to cover this shortfall. A number of areas have been identified as priorities and the Board supports the department in maintaining these priority areas. These areas include, for example, Planning Services, Building Standards and Compliance Services, Highways Development Control, Planning Policy, Disposals, Facilities Development Unit and Design Services. The Board accepted that other discretionary areas would carry a higher vacancy rate and that the priority areas would not be subject to this.
2.3 Among the issues discussed were the number of pressures facing the department, such as the high workload in Planning Services, the new local development framework and new legislation such as the High Hedges legislation which may bring additional responsibilities to the department but no additional funding.
2.4 The Board noted that the department“s action plan proposes reviewing income generation, including additional advertising income, pre-application charges for major planning applications and fees from land disposals. The corporately led efficiency reviews of support services were also discussed.
2.5 The Board was concerned that tourism may not be receiving the investment it needed, however, it was recognised that due to the current budget pressures and ongoing discussions about the future delivery of tourism in the Region, the service could only be maintained at its current level. Members do wish to highlight the need
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com to make the city high profile and support the department“s representation to Yorkshire Forward on behalf of the city.
2.6 Members also acknowledged that the department had in place stretched targets regarding the revenue raised through advertising opportunities. The Board wish to encourage the department to develop these advertising opportunities in order to meet the agreed targets.
2.7 Board acknowledge that there remains work to be done and would like to be kept informed of development of the action plan in the months to come. Members would particularly wish to receive a draft protocol for the proposed pre-application services and charges once this has been developed.
RECOMMENDATION 1
That the Scrutiny Board (Development Services) receives the draft protocol for pre- application services and charges once this has been developed by the department.
2.8 Members noted that currently there is no formal mechanism, between City Services and Development Highways officers, for ensuring maximum gain is achieved from developers. It was noted that there is a Joint Highways Board which deals with delegated decisions, but does not provide a forum for developing an approach to the use of money obtained from developers for highways improvements. The Board is therefore recommending that the department, in conjunction with City Services, develops a formal mechanism to allow this dialogue.
RECOMMENDATION 2
That the department, in conjunction with City Services, develops a formal mechanism for ensuring that money from developers is maximised and used effectively.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com SCRUTINY BOARD (CENTRAL AND CORPORATE FUNCTIONS)
SCRUTINY OF THE BUDGET
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
At its meeting on 30th November 2004, Scrutiny Board (Central and Corporate Functions) received reports and a presentation on the proposed budget for 2005/2006 in respect of Central and Corporate Functions. This incorporates the Chief Executive“s and Corporate Services Departments, Joint Committees and Other Bodies and Strategic issues.
The Scrutiny Board is encouraged to note that the departments presented to Members at this meeting a balanced budget for 2005/2005.
In respect of the Chief Executive“s Department the Board noted it is facing budgetary pressure of ’ 1.691m and is making proposed savings of ’ 704,000. The Corporate Services Department is facing budgetary pressures of ’ 2.390m and is making proposed savings of ’ 2.402 which includes efficiency reviews.
The Scrutiny Board had a number of issues around the departments identification of savings. The Board requested further information in respect of the following issues:-
· staff figures for the last three years in respect of the Chief Executive's and Corporate Services Departments and projected figures for 2005/2006
· on the overseas visits undertaken by members and officers in 2004/2005 and those planned for 2005/2006 showing the costs for each.
· vacancy factor for all Council Departments in respect of 2004/2005 and 2005/2006.
· analysis of discontinued operations referred to on page 70 of the agenda Strategic Departmental Plan.
· pay and reward structure and the budget provision for 2005/2006.
· details of the proposed savings in the Equalities Team of ’ 28,000.
The Scrutiny Board received these details at its meeting on 4th January 2005.
The Scrutiny Board (Central and Corporate Functions) commented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee that some of the key areas it was concerned about were the implications and costs of implementing new legislation within the Departments. It is difficult to quantify these costs and the consequential budgetary pressures which may arise. Reference was made in particular to the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Licensing Act 2003. In addition Members were concerned at the Equality Unit and the Human Resource pay and reward strategy which may have additional budgetary implications in the future.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com SCRUTINY BOARD (LEISURE)
SCRUTINY OF THE BUDGET
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
At its meeting on 22nd November 2004, Scrutiny Board (Leisure) received reports and a presentation on the proposed budget for 2005/2006 in respect of the Leisure element of the Learning and Leisure Department.
In respect of the Leisure element of the Department the Board noted it is facing budgetary pressure of ’ 3.566m. At this stage the Department was not in a position to report on possible areas of savings to try and attain a balanced budget.
The Scrutiny Board asked for further information in respect of the:-
· legal requirements for the spending of education monies and details of other authorities who have put forward a case to the Secretary of state to divert passported monies for other purposes. · options available to bridge the funding gap in the Leisure element of the budget. · the payment of monies with regard to the loss of security services at Redhall and whether this should be met by the Learning and Leisure Department
The Scrutiny Board received these details at its meeting on 4th January 2005. Members learnt that a number of areas were being considered as a way of achieving a balanced budget. These included targeted improvements to sickness statistics, achievable levels of staff vacancy factors, procurement of goods and services, revenue savings during capital refurbishment works, additional income, limit inflation increases to essential expenditure only, efficiencies within the library and support services. The Executive Board Member Leisure attended the meeting and reported that no specific savings against each of these headings could be identified at this stage.
The Scrutiny Board (Leisure) commented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee that it strongly supports the view that progress reports on cross cutting reviews within Departments should be reported to the appropriate Scrutiny Board/s on a regular basis. The Scrutiny Board also suggested that where there is a proposed reduction in the level of service within a Department that this should automatically be considered by the relevant Scrutiny Board. Finally, Members did express concern at the short timescales the scrutiny process has in considering each years budget.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ANNEX 1 Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Recommendations
Recommendation Response
1 That the Director of Corporate Services be requested to carry out This will be considered as part of the annual review of the Financial further research into the Government“s rationale for the variation in Plan, although general information on the national totals tends to be the increases to the Primary block and Secondary block funding for limited. education in order to establish whether there are factors that the Council should take account of in its own financial planning. 2 That at least ’ 1m additional funding is allocated next year and in Agreed and reflected within the 2005/06 budget 2006/07 towards raising secondary achievement from the headroom identified in the schools budget. 3 That opportunities for more effective use of resources, for example In light of the Gershon report regarding efficiency reviews, the through co-location and inter-authority co-operation be explored as recommendations of the Capital strategy and asset management plan, part of a longer term approach to budget planning. and the council“s support to the Centre of Excellence, this is an area of work which is high on the Council“s agenda. 4 We recommend that the department of City Services investigates The proposed budget for 2005/06 reflects the cost of financing ’ 8m of the possibility and feasibility of meeting some of the costs of capital highways repairs. highways maintenance through the capital budget rather than the revenue budget. 5 That the ’ 15.3m Social Services increase for 2005/06 being The Executive have undertaken to passport the ’ 15.3m onto Social and passported to the Social Services Department is supported by the have agreed an additional ’ 1.2m to fund the ongoing budget pressures Executive Board. within the department.
6 That progress reports on cross cutting reviews within Departments Agreed should be reported to the appropriate Scrutiny Board and to Overview and Scrutiny Committee on a regular basis. 7 That Education Leeds and Social Services be subjected to the Resource Allocations for both departments within the financial plan were same rigour in terms of achieving efficiency savings as other based upon forecast FSS increases. Due to significant demand pressures departments. within Social Services and limited increases in FSS for LEA functions, both services have been required to identify efficiencies within their resource allocations.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix 2
MAXIMUM DELEGATED LIMITS FOR REVENUE VIREMENT
Approval Type Full Council Executive Board Director of Departmental Area Corporate Services * Directors Committees **
’ ’ ’ ’ ’
A)Supplementary Votes ( i.e. release of general fund reserve) No specific ’ 1,000,000 ’ 1,000,000 None None limit
B) All Budgets Into or out of all Budget headings within the Budget Book :
1. Within a department No specific ’ 1,000,000 500,000 100,000 100,000 limit
2. Between Departments No specific ’ 1,000,000 500,000 None 100,000 limit
C) Self 轜Financing (from External Funding)
- policy change No specific None None None None limit
- within current policy No specific No specific limit No specific limit No specific limit N/A limit
* With the support of Departmental Directors and/or area committees ( in relation to area committee functions) ** In relation to area committee functions only and with the support of the relevant departmental director
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: Central Accounts
1 Introduction
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the Strategic Services budgets for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % Strategic 43,765 Gross expenditure 29,254 40,724 11,470 39 45,435 16,181 55 14,150cr Income 3,445cr 10,847cr 7,402cr 215 7,828cr 4,383cr 127 29,615 Net expenditure 25,809 29,877 4,068 16 37,607 11,798 46 Charges to other depts 19cr 19cr 0 0 19 100cr 29,615 Net Cost of Service 25,790 29,858 4,068 16 37,607 11,817 46 Asset Management Revenue Account 73,946 Capital Financing 67,558 68,598 1,040 2 79,009 11,451 17 133,902cr Capital Charges 130,957cr 140,566cr 9,609cr 7 156,170cr 25,213cr 19 59,956cr Net Cost of Service 63,399cr 71,968cr 8,569cr 14 77,161cr 13,762cr 22 Corporate and Democratic Core 13,571 Gross expenditure 15,026 15,026 0 0 15,057 31 0 1,177cr Charges to HRA 1,231cr 1,231cr 0 0 1,291cr 60cr 5 12,394 Net Cost of Service 13,795 13,795 0 0 13,766 29cr 0cr Non Distributable Costs 3,614 Gross expenditure 6,426 5,451 975cr 15cr 4,040 2,386cr 37cr 3,614 Net Cost of Service 6,426 5,451 975cr 15cr 4,040 2,386cr 37cr Total Net Cost 14,333cr of Service 17,388cr 22,864cr 5,476cr 31 21,748cr 4,360cr 25
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. As a result of this, the authority now has to budget centrally for the effects of income earned by the pension fund assets, and the increase in the present value of existing pensions liabilities (the present value increases annually, because the benefits are one year closer to settlement). The net effect of these two items is to increase the net cost of service for Strategic Accounts by 16m. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
2.2 The variations between LE and OE also reflect the allocation to departments of centrally held budgets, including 1.3m of Contingency and 1.2m of Corporate Plan Priorities. In addition, the budget for LPSA income has been increase by 4.3m Cr.
2.3 There has been an overall variation of 8.6m Cr on the budget for the Asset Management Revenue Account. Within the figures for capital charges, statutory charges made to the Housing Revenue Account for capital financing costs have increased by 4.7m, reflecting the HRA s share of overall capital financing costs.
There has been a net increase of 15.9m in the reversal of general fund departmental capital charges. 13.6m of this arises because capital charges in the LE 2004/05 have been updated to take account of asset values at 31st March 2004. There has also been an increase of 4.1m in anticipated departmental charges for capital expenditure which does not generate an asset, and an increase of 1.4m in the budget for the reversal of associated grant income, giving a net change of 2.7m.
3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 3.5m Cr)
3.1 Strategic ( 12.7m) 3.1.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 721 Cr
Changes in prices 114 Other factors not affecting the level of service 14,415 Variations in charges for capital 13 Cr Efficiency savings 1,138 Cr
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 12,657
3.1.2 Changes in prices
The budget for Miscellaneous Improvements in the Community and Environment has been increased by 50k, an increase of 500 per elected member.
The budget for the dividend payable to the Council by Leeds Bradford Airport has been reduced by 64k, reflecting the position in the current year.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.1.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. As a result of this, the authority is now required to budget centrally for the effects of income earned by the pension fund assets, and the increase in the present value of existing pensions liabilities (the present value increases annually, because the benefits are one year closer to settlement). The net effect of these two items is to increase the net cost of service for Strategic Accounts by 16m. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
A budget of 1.3m has been included in 2005/06 in respect of the Government s Amending Report on the 2003/04 RSG settlement. This item is explained in section 5.8 of the overall budget report.
The authority has budgeted to receive 2m Cr income in 2005/06 under the Business Growth Initiative. A budget of 4m Cr has also been included for income receivable in relation to Section 278 schemes. Both of these items are discussed more fully in the overall budget report.
There have been some variances in budgets held centrally for allocation to departments. The level of the Contingency budget has been increased by 400k in 2005/06 to 3m, and the Corporate Plan Priorities budget of 1.4m has been allocated to departments. Budgeted NRF income has been reduced by 341k, and the budgeted income of 529k for LPSA monies which was specific to 2004/05 has been deleted for 2005/06.
The budgeted level of interest receivable on bank balances has been increased by 502kCr.
As in previous years, the Strategic budget contains variations relating to late changes within the budgets of central departments, which it has not been practical to reflect in their recharges to service accounts. When the actual charges are made in the accounts, these costs will be fully allocated to services. The variation in such charges held in the Strategic budget in comparison to the 2004/05 budget is 3.6m.
The 2004/05 OE budget for the Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Assemblies ( 147k) has transferred into the budget for Chief Executive s Department for 2005/06. 121k in capital charges in relation to other assets accounted for in the strategic budget.
3.1.4 Efficiency savings
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). A budget of 750k Cr has been included within the Strategic Accounts for the outcome of a review of transactional and support services, which will identify efficiencies across departments.
A budget of 388k Cr has also been included for the savings in tax and NI arising from a scheme in which employees receive childcare vouchers.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.2 Asset Management Revenue Account ( 13.8m Cr)
3.2.1 Service accounts are charged with an accounting cost of capital reflecting the latest valuation of assets. Within the Asset Management Revenue Account these service charges are credited and replaced by the actual cost to the Council of its borrowings.
The budget for external capital financing costs has increased by 11.4m. This is made up of an increase in anticipated interest costs of 4.8m and an increase in the Minimum Revenue Provision (the amount which the Authority is statutorily required to set aside to fund debt) of 6.6m. Within the figures for capital charges, statutory charges made to the Housing Revenue Account for its capital financing costs have increased by 9.3m, reflecting the HRA s share of the overall increase in capital financing costs.
There has also been a net increase of 15.9m Cr in the reversal of general fund departmental capital charges. These include charges for the use of fixed assets, charges to reflect the benefit of capital expenditure which does not generate a fixed asset (e.g. improvement grants or IT developments), and income from any associated grants received to fund such expenditure.
· There has been an increase of 13.6m Cr in departmental capital charges for the use of fixed assets. This arises because the OE 2004/05 capital charges were set on the basis of asset values at 31st March 2003. The capital charges in the 2005/06 budget have been updated to take account of asset values at 31st March 2004. · There has been an increase of 3.8m Cr in departmental charges for capital expenditure which does not generate an asset, and an increase of 1.4m in the budget for the reversal of the associated grant income, giving a net change of 2.3m Cr.
3.4 Non Distributable Costs ( 2.4m Cr)
3.4.1 The 2004/05 Non Distributable Costs budget included 1.4m relating to the unused share of the mainframe computer system. With the disposal of the mainframe, this budget has been removed from the OE 2005/06. The remaining reduction of 976k relates to an anticipated reduction in the FRS17 Past Service Cost pensions adjustment which is reversed by an appropriation entry, and has no impact on Council Tax.
4 Risk Assessment 4.1 The construction of the budget involves a risk assessment. However, it should be appreciated that some budgets are subject to more risk than others. In particular, the budget for 750k Cr of cross departmental efficiency savings in transactional and support services is dependent on the successful and timely conclusion of the review.
Briefing note prepared by: M Hasnip Telephone: x74722
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: City Services
1 Introduction
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % 145,436 Gross expenditure 142,541 154,552 12,011 8 161,398 18,857 13
12,822Cr Income 12,766Cr 14,412Cr 1,646Cr 13 24,645Cr 11,879Cr 93 132,614 Net expenditure 129,775 140,140 10,365 8 136,753 6,978 5
Charges to other 60,190Cr departments 57,080Cr 64,055Cr 6,975Cr 12 62,074Cr 4,994Cr 9 Net cost of service 72,424 72,695 76,085 3,390 5 74,679 1,984 3
2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities rather than the government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase the net cost of service 944k. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve. The balance of movement between the OE 2004/2005 and the LE 2004/2005 can be accounted for by releases from Central Contingency and contributions from Reserves.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 1,984k)
3.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 72,695 Changes in prices 3,025 Other factors not affecting the level of service 904 Variations in charges for capital 860 Changes in service levels 675 Cr Efficiency savings (cashable) 2,130 Cr
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 74,679
3.2 Changes in prices
The impact of the budgeted pay award together with an increase in the employers superannuation contribution will result in an increase of 1,025k. Other price variations largely reflect known contract and energy increases, an uplift for payments to Highways Maintenance ( 291k) and a further 3 per tonne increase in Landfill Tax based on projected tonnages ( 702k).
Income variations ( 524k) incorporate a review of price and tariff bandings for both on street and off street parking ( 241k).
3.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service
The 2004/2005 budget contained efficiency related cost reductions to be derived from the introduction of both Refuse Collection route rationalisation ( 500k) and a review of refuse vehicle requirements ( 300k). As it has not been possible to deliver these in the manner envisaged, it has been necessary to build these anticipated savings back into the base budget.
Despite the fall out of DEFRA funding ( 41k) to support recycling activity in multi storey flats, the department will continue to provide this service.
In response to a review by Transport Services Division to ensure it is making appropriate charges to its clients to reflect the level of services provided, Streetscene services has increased its transport expenditure ( 241k).
As a result of a recent re-tendering exercise in respect of landfill contracts, it is projected that the cost per tonne of disposing of household waste will increase by 18.5% ( 611k). Due to the uncertain nature of the volume of waste arisings an element has been provided for in Central Contingency.
Expenditure on disposing of recyclable waste is expected to increase by 262k, and this largely reflects the increased cost associated with the innovative partnership to recycle street arisings rather than dispose of this material in landfill.
An additional grant of 558k has been received from DEFRA to help the Council in its initiatives to divert waste from landfill and encourage recycling.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The completion of capping works at the closed landfill site at Gamblethorpe, will lead to an increase in income receivable from electricity generation ( 89k).
Income receivable from disposing of trade waste is forecast to reduce ( 200k) largely as a result of Property Maintenance Division no longer undertaking responsive maintenance work for two of the ALMOs.
Additional income ( 250k) from RASWA (Road and Street Works Act) will be generated through a new code of practice, which allows for implementation of charges on notified openings on the Highways infrastructure. The budget also reflects a further 100k for the continuation of additional RASWA income received in 2004/2005.
The full year effect of the loss of income resulting from the sale of Quarry Hill car park for development ( 368k) can be partially offset by the continuation of additional car parking income being realised in the current financial year ( 299k).
The budget reflects the introduction of licences for the placement of developer signs on Highways apparatus ( 30k).
The forecast business plan surpluses for Commercial Services ( 512k) will be recycled to contribute towards departmental expenditure in 2005/2006.
Contained within the budget is the requirement to generate 200k in advertising income from the utilisation of the department s asset base. In addition the Outline Business Case for the Street Lighting PFI, which has a planned contract commencement in 2006/2007, assumes a certain level of advertising income. In order that the optimum level of advertising income can be generated, a pilot study of advertising on street lights is being undertaken in 2005/2006.
As explained in paragraph 2.1 a technical adjustment has been made in respect of FRS17. The overall impact of this year on year is to increase the net cost of service by 631k.
3.4 Variations in charges for capital
Capital Charges have increased by 860k. This increase can be explained by a revaluations of City Services assets ( 407k) and the impact of capital charges associated with the decision to procure vehicles through unsupported borrowing rather than operating leases ( 453k).
3.5 Changes in service levels
The increased cost ( 200k) for the disposal of Streetscene SORT materials reflects the fact that material collected is segregated into separate elements within the U.K. prior to be being forwarded on to the market.
The budget now reflects the cost to the department of providing community skips to voluntary organisations such as furniture stores ( 32k).
The provision of CCTV to all Waste Sorting sites is planned to be completed in 2004/2005 and for those more vulnerable sites additional security will be provided ( 42k).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Following the Decriminalisation of Parking Enforcement in March 2005, the department will take on responsibility for all parking enforcement across the City. The anticipated net cost of this service is 1,016k Cr which supports the provision of highway services.
It is proposed to utilise unsupported borrowing to develop waste land on Kirkstall Road as a car park . After taking account of capital financing costs it is anticipated that this proposal would generate an operating surplus of 40k.
A review is underway regarding the levels of subsidy in Parks catering outlets and the Members Dining outlet. It is proposed that such subsidies be eliminated during the financial year.
3.6 Efficiency savings
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this department the following efficiency gains have been identified.
Nature of saving cashable non-cashable total k k k 1. Following the fall out of DEFRA grant 427 427 to fund kerbside collection of SORT for those properties that currently don t have this facility, the department will continue to provide this service by absorbing the associated costs within the current cost of SORT. 2. Following the fall out of DEFRA grant 72 72 to fund the emptying of the new recycling litter bins, the department will continue to provide this service by absorbing the associated costs within current budgetary provision. 3. The implementation of new staffing 291 291 structures within the Waste Management service has resulted in service levels being maintained but at a reduced cost. 4. As a result of the new landfill 530 530 contracts, which allow for direct delivery of waste collected, it is intended to cease operating the East Leeds Transfer Loading Station. 5. Price inflation increases are limited to 361 361 known contract and energy increases. All other expenditure is cash limited with any inflationary increases being absorbed within current service provision. 6. A review of vehicle requirements and 190 190 utilisation within the refuse collection service will lead to better planning and less reliance upon external hire. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 7. A review is to be undertaken of the 218 218 delivery of the refuse collection service in those wards where additional costs are incurred. The purpose of rationalising service delivery so that the current level of service is maintained but at a reduced cost. 8. Purchase of a new engine at the 190 Gamblethorpe closed landfill site, which will be more economic and efficient in the extraction of methane, will result in increased production of electricity for sale to the National Grid. 9. A reduction in the level of sickness is 350 to be targeted across all divisions of City Services. Achievement of the targeted reduction will result in less of a requirement to cover absent staff with Agency staff and overtime
4 Budget Realignment
4.1. This budget supports the following Strategic outcomes:
(i) All neighbourhoods are safe, clean, green and well maintained The cost (80k) to the department of providing LEAP (Local Environment Action Programme) to all wards across the City six times a year has now been provided for within the budget.
The budgeted number of grits within the Winter Maintenance budget has increased to the number required in an average winter. This enhancement has been funded through a realignment of resources within the Highways service.
Additional resources have been provided to support the capital financing costs associated with a further 8m of unsupported borrowing to deliver an enhanced highway maintenance programme. This increased investment will contribute towards addressing the current level of maintenance backlog to bring the network up to the required condition, and ensures that despite a reduction in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) settlement, expenditure on highway maintenance will continue to increase.
A regular bulky collection service ( 27k) will be provided to households through the consolidation of the service into SORT rounds.
5 Risk Assessment 5.1 In determining the City Services budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared. The key risks relating to the department include:
· Failure to deliver targeted cost reductions resulting from the implementation of rationalising the refuse collection service and reviewing refuse vehicle requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Failure to incorporate the 2004/2005 DEFRA funded scheme for the kerbside collection of green liners into current SORT provision. · That the anticipated staffing and vehicle savings relating to the closure of East Leeds Transfer Loading Station are not realised. · Failure to achieve budgeted tonnage for recycling and amount of Household Waste to be landfilled. · Number and value of Highways third party liability claims differ from the assumptions made in the budget. · That the implementation of the new RASWA code of practice is delayed. · That the level of anticipated PCN s issued are less than forecast and therefore the anticipated level of income from parking enforcement is below the budgeted level. · Non achievement of budgeted car park income. · Failure to achieve advertising income targets. · Commercial Services fail to generate the level of budgeted surpluses. · Price increases (inflation) are greater than those included in the budget submission. · That City Services does not achieve the targeted reduction in the number of days lost to sickness for each FTE.
5.2 In order to mitigate against these risks, the department has drawn up departmental budget action plans which allocates responsibilities to manage these risks to individual managers. Since progress is monitored at senior management level, appropriate action can be taken to address identified variations to the approved budget.
Briefing note prepared by: Richard Ellis Telephone: 74291
U:\UNIVERSE\ESTIMATE\Budget 05\Briefing Notes\City Services Briefing note 0506.doc
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: CORPORATE SERVICES (including Cost of Collection)
1 Introduction
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 % 000 000 % Gross expenditure 111,658 113,065 1,407 1 114,540 2,882 3
Income 55,621cr 55,610cr 11 0cr 54,310cr 1,311 2cr Net expenditure 56,037 57,455 1,418 3 60,230 4,193 7
Charges to other depts and organisations 48,728cr 49,033cr 305cr 1 54,114cr 5,386cr 11
Net cost of service 7,309 8,422 1,113 15 6,116 1,193cr 16cr
2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities rather than the government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase expenditure by 740k. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
2.2 The increase in net cost of service in the LE is accounted for by the above mentioned pensions increase plus a number of virements from other departments that have taken
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com place during the year, mainly adjustments for support services and also consolidation of funding for the Network Infrastructure Project (NIP).
3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 1,193k cr)
3.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 7,309
Changes in prices 1,108 Other factors not affecting the level of service 1,305 Variations in charges for capital 3,005 Changes in service levels 348 Increase in charges to other departments, ALMO s and Education Leeds (5,386) Efficiency savings (cashable) (1,573)
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 6,116
3.2 Changes in prices
Provision for the agreed pay award and increase in superannuation amounts to 1,145k. Only unavoidable increases in price inflation have been included amounting to 118k in respect of contractual arrangements within ICT Services.
The charge for raising a summons in respect of recovery of Council Tax has been increased by 5 to 50 and for business rates by 20 to 65. These fee levels are comparable with core cities local authorities and the increase results in additional income to the Council of 155k.
3.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service
Several grants in the area of Housing Benefits are falling out in 2005/06 with a net effect of 514k, including an amount of 212k in respect of the new Academy system. This results in considerable financial pressure on the service as the main source of funding, the Administration Grant from the DWP, has increased by less than 1% taking it to 5,306k.
In 2005/06 the Government have altered the funding of local authorities in respect Civil Contingencies responsibilities. Funding is now received via FSS whereas previously a direct grant of 173k was credited to the Peace and Emergency Planning Unit.
Since the approval of the OE 2004/05 a number of budget transfers, mainly relating to the support services restructure, have taken place and the net impact on Corporate Services is to increase expenditure by 1,027k.
ICT recharges attributable to services within the department have increased by 514k which is largely due to the capital costs of the Network Infrastructure Project (see section 3.4 below).
As explained in paragraph 2.1 a technical adjustment has been made in respect of FRS17. The overall impact of this is to increase expenditure by 536k.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The basis of reallocating the net cost of Housing Benefits Administration has changed in 2005/06 to reflect gross benefit payments which means that the charge to Neighbourhoods and Housing has increased by 1,590k.
3.4 Variations in charges for capital
The variance in capital charges between years is almost entirely is accounted for by the costs of the Network Infrastructure Programme. The charges in turn are recharged out to other Council departments and external bodies as part of the inclusive charge for the managed service .
3.5 Changes in service levels
From September 2004 administration of the Education Maintenance Allowances scheme transferred from local authorities to a national body. The impact is loss of specific grant of 63k however the staffing structure in Student Support has been reduced by 2 fte s saving 35k.
The ICT staffing budget has been increased by 150k to strengthen the departmental IT support teams which provide essential support to front line services. An additional 50k has been injected into the ongoing development of the risk management function that is closely linked to the CPA action plan. Both these changes are funded from realigning resources within Corporate Services, mainly via the efficiency saving areas detailed in 3.7 below.
The Revenues and Benefits Service is currently bidding for potential external funding of 610k in respect of Workflow and Homeworking initiatives. To gain the funding the Council is required to fund some of the costs and this is estimated at 120k. A key objective of these initiatives however is that savings, mainly in accommodation costs, are realised in the medium term.
3.6 Increase in charges to other departments
3,816 relates to increases in charges to other Council departments and external organisations of which 3,429k is the change in ICT charges and, as explained above, is almost entirely attributable to the capital charges for the Network Infrastructure Project. In the OE 2004/05 not all the cost of ICT Services was charged out to departments resulting in a net cost of service of 1,325k. In the OE 2005/06 all costs of ICT have been recharged to clients which largely accounts for the overall reduction in net cost of service for the department as a whole.
Other charges included in this category are increases in charges to capital of 770k, an increase in charge to the Corporate and Democratic Core ( 42k) and the charge from Revenues to Cost of Collection ( 605k).
3.7 Efficiency savings
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this department the following savings have been identified.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Nature of saving Cashable Non- Total Cashable 000s 000s 000s Departmental savings Realisation of cost savings from the 655 655 mainframe exit project Transfer of weekly paid employees to monthly pay 120 120 Improved efficiency as result of implementation of the Academy system in Revenues and Benefits 250 250 Closure of Great George Street cash office and decommissioning of Council 140 140 wide cash receipting system Review of staffing structures in Financial Management and Financial Development 68 68 ICT Services: review of running cost budgets 119 119 Printer rationalisation 75 75 Realign training budgets to meet departmental priorities 90 90 Produce plans and statements in electronic format 13 13 Review of publications and subscriptions 9 9 Continued improved performance in detection of Housing Benefit fraud ( Weekly Incorrect Benefit income) 34 34 Total departmental savings 1,573 1,573 Cross cutting savings Review of transactional and support services 750 750 Total cross cutting savings 750 750 Total savings 2,323 2,323
4 Risk Assessment 4.1 In determining the 2005/06 budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared.
4.2 The key risks to the department are in the area of housing benefits and particularly the recovery of overpaid benefits. The OE 2005/06 assumes subsidy of 902k in respect of Local Authority error overpayments which is reliant on the Council staying within a predetermined threshold.
Briefing note prepared by: Charles Oxtoby Telephone: 247 4228
U:universe/estimate/budget05/corporate services briefing note 0506.doc
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Education Services
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the Education budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years has been prepared at outturn prices, and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 SUMMARY OF THE REVENUE BUDGET Actual Original Latest Variation Original Variation 2003/04 Estimate Estimate OE to LE 04/05 Estimate OE 04/05 to Actual (OE) (LE) (OE) OE 05/06 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % Gross 496,626 Expenditure 461,875 448,818 13,057Cr 2.8Cr 492,934 31,059 6.7
131,937Cr Income 73,988Cr 55,567Cr 18,421 24.9 77,398Cr 3,410Cr 4.6Cr 364,689 Net Expenditure 387,887 393,251 5,364 1.4 415,536 27,649 7.1
Charges to other 863Cr Departments 811Cr 812Cr 1Cr 0.1Cr 865Cr 54Cr 6.7Cr Net Cost of 363,826 Service 387,076 392,439 5,363 1.4 414,671 27,595 7.1
2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05. The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost (the estimated increase in the present value of our pension liabilities which arises from employee service during the year), rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. Although the Teachers superannuation pension scheme does not require any FRS 17 adjustments, any VER pensions payable to teachers do fall within the requirements of FRS 17. Therefore the FRS 17 adjustment has decreased the net cost of Education for 2004/05 by 1,732k, primarily because Teachers VER costs are reversed out of the net cost by the adjustment. There is no impact on Council Tax levels
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution to the new Pensions Reserve. 2.2 The 5.4m increase in the Net Cost of Service in the 2004/05 Latest Estimate is primarily due to a 6.8m increase in capital charges resulting from a revaluation of schools and other education properties. This is offset by the 1.7m decrease in net costs arising from the FRS17 adjustment explained above. Additional Building Schools for the Future development costs of 0.3m are to be funded initially from school balances and repaid by annual contributions from the ISB.
3 EXPLANATION OF VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2004/05 AND THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2005/06 ( 27,595k)
3.1 Education Funding Settlement 2005/06
The table below shows the 2005/06 Education Formula Spending Share (EFSS) national total and total for Leeds. The Leeds increase of 5.08% compares to a national increase of 5.65%, however, the increase per pupil for Leeds is 6.6% compared to a national 6.7%. This is below the national average due to a combination of demography, where Primary pupil numbers are decreasing faster than the national average, and relative changes in socio-economic indicators, where the indicators show that the relative level of need has reduced against that of other LEAs.
National Leeds 2004/05 Education Formula 26,380m (adjusted **) 362.99m Spending Share (EFSS) 2005/06 Education Formula 27,870m 381.42m Spending Share (EFSS) Increase in Funding for all Education 1,490m = 5.65% 18,428m = 5.08% Services Pupil Number Change -88,090 = -1.2% (*) -1,558 = -1.5% (*)
Increase in EFSS per funded pupil 6.7% 6.6%
(*) Leeds under 5yrs and 5-10yrs primary school pupil numbers are decreasing faster than the national average.
(**) The 2004-05 national adjusted figures take into account changes in the calculation of grants and distribution mechanisms, changes in responsibility and the removal of funding for new City Academies from EFS.
The funding framework defines the Education budget into three blocks:
The Schools Block, that contains all delegated expenditure and central expenditure in support of the education of individual pupils. The LEA Block, that contains expenditure on support services. The Youth and Community Block, containing expenditure on Youth, Community and Adult Education.
Within the EFSS increase for Leeds, 16.932m is for the Schools Block and 1.029m for the LEA Block. The Council s Executive Board in approving its Financial Plan endorsed the passporting of the EFSS increase of 16.932m for the Schools Block in line with DfES regulations. Further details of the DfES School Funding Regulations are contained in Appendix A. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com As the LEA Block is not covered by the DfES passporting regulations, the total increase in resources delivered by the Council s budget strategy, which amounted to 0.944m, is slightly less than the LEA Block EFSS increase of 1.029m. This provides an overall increase for the Education Budget for 2005/06 of 17.876m (excluding Youth, Community & Adult Services) analysed between the blocks as follows:
Leeds Schools Block 16.932m (5.18%) Leeds LEA Block 0.944m (2.66%)
A further 12k has been provided for items chargeable to the Youth and Community Block. This gives an overall resource increase of 17,888m.
The table below shows how the increases in Schools and LEA blocks are reflected in the various Education Budgets.
Schools Block LEA Block Youth Block Total k k k k Individual Schools Budget 15,010 - - 15,010 Client Administered Budget 286 -1,323 -8 -1,045 Education Leeds Contract 1,471 2,215 56 3,742 Education Client Budget 3 52 -36 19 Early Years Education Grant 162 - - 162 Total 16,932 944 12 17,888
Excluded from the figures in the table above are asset rentals, PFI development costs (which will be charged to a sinking fund and repaid over 25 years) and the accounting adjustment relating to Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 17. The figures shown for Early Years Education Grant are not shown in the Council s Education Budget. The above analysis can be reconciled to the increase in the Net Cost of Service as follows:- k Increase in Education Budget Blocks 17,888 Asset Rentals 7,436 FRS 17 adjustment 1,177 PFI/BSF Development Costs 1,562 Early Years Grant (in Early Yrs) 162 Cr Other adjustments incl net VER funding 306 Cr Increase in Net Cost of Service 27,595
3.2 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows: k Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 387,076
Individual Schools Budget 15,010 Client Administered Budget 1,410 Client Budget (includes Education Leeds contract) 3,739 Variations in charges for Capital 7,436
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 414,671
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3 Individual Schools Budget
Original Estimate 2004/05 295,351k Original Estimate 2005/06 310,361k Increase 15,010k
3.3.1 In determining the ISB, the increase in the Schools FSS Block has been split 1,922k to meet required increases in the centrally retained elements of the schools block and 15,010k for the ISB. The Minimum per Pupil Funding Guarantee remains in place for 2005/06 to ensure that all schools receive a minimum (approximately 4%) increase in funding on the majority of their formula funding. The minimum funding guarantee is set 1% higher in Primary schools than in Secondary and Special Schools as the DfES forecast that the implementation of Planning Preparation and Assessment (PPA) time in Primary schools will be more costly. Based on projected pupil numbers it is estimated that the minimum per pupil guarantee will cost in the region of 12,300k across Primary, Secondary and Special schools.
Within the Minimum Funding Guarantee k · Pay and price increases 9,700 · Increase in gas prices 890 · Teaching Assistants 540 · Primary 1% Workforce Reform 1,370 · Demography -1,800 · Growth 1,600 Sub-total 12,300
Outside of the Minimum Funding Guarantee
· Rents/premises/NNDR 410 · Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contribution to sinking fund 1,750 · Class Size Pledge 130 · School closures/Reorganisation -1,380 · Growth 1,800 Sub-total 2,710
Total ISB Increase 15,010
· Pay and Prices 9,700k Inflation of 2.95% for pay awards and 3% for other costs have been assumed together with an increase of 0.8% in the employers superannuation rate for support staff.
· Gas Prices 890k Gas prices are set to rise by 55.2% leading to an increase in schools energy costs of 890k.
· Teaching Assistants 540k In 2003/04 a new career structure for teaching assistants was introduced. The cost of this is estimated to increase by 540k as staff progress up the salary scales.
· Primary 1% Workforce Reform 1,370k The additional 1% through the minimum per pupil guarantee for primary schools is estimated to cost 1,370k PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Demography -1,800k Pupil numbers are forecast to reduce in Primary in 2005/06 by 1,025 and in Secondary by 50. The formula savings generated based on current AWPU values would be 1,800k.
· Rents/Premises/NNDR 410k Costs of rental payments for temporary accommodation, NNDR increases and other premises factors in the allocation formula require an additional 410k
· PFI 1,750k The Unitary charge costs for PFI schools are estimated to be higher than the allocations through the premises formula. In order to cover this gap the PFI factor within the formula will be used to fund the difference. This funding will be delivered to PFI schools and becomes part of the Governors contribution to the Unitary Charge. It is estimated that the funding required in 2005/06 will be 1,750k. . · Class Size Pledge 130k The cost of the Class Size Pledge is expected to increase by 130k based on forecasts of Key Stage 1 numbers in January 2005.
· School Closures/Reorganisation -1,380k It is estimated that savings through school closures and reorganisation will save 1,380k. This is due to a combination of premises savings, small school protection savings and one-off funding required in 2004/05.
· Proposals to allocate budget growth 3,400k Having allowed for the funding changes detailed above it is anticipated that there will be approximately 3,400k available to build into the formula. In line with providing schools with the minimum per pupil guarantee some of this funding must be pupil led.
The City Council has determined within its Financial Plan that a first call on budget growth should be to provide additional funding to secondary schools in order to address the issue of achievement. Whilst the City Council has historically funded education at a higher level than the Government suggested levels through Standard Spending Assessment and now Education Formula Spending Share the relative funding of Secondary schools compared to Primary has been lower than in comparable LEAs. Also, a major initiative within the City is No Child is Left Behind that seeks to find new initiatives to support schools.
These factors have been reflected in proposals to change the formula that have recently been consulted on with schools and the Schools Forum. The results of this consultation and proposals for the allocation of growth within the ISB will be presented to the Executive Board on 11/02/05 in a separate report. In support of the Authority s Strategic outcome Our children and young people are healthy, safe and successful , it is anticipated that additional resources in the region of 1m over and above the minimum funding guarantee will be directed towards secondary schools.
3.3.2 Learning and Skills Council Responsibility for the funding of post-16 provision transferred to the Learning and Skills Council from April 2002. The provisional level of direct grant support to schools for 2005/06 is 26.740m, an increase of 2.440m (10.0%). The increase guarantees a minimum 4% per pupil addition.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3.3 Schools Standards Grant (SSG) The provisional level of funding for 2005/06 is 11.5m, an increase of 0.34m (0.3%). For 2005/06 a school will receive the higher allocation based on the DfES grant table below or an amount that equates to an increased of 4% per pupil on the per pupil value of the SSG received in 2004/05. This equates to the larger of:
(A) the following scale: Primary Secondary Special No. of Pupils No. of Pupils No. of Pupils 0-100 11,000 0-600 82,000 0-100 28,000 100.5-200 21,000 600.5-1200 98,000 100.5+ 38,000 200.5-400 31,000 1200.5-1800 115,000 400.5-600 46,000 1800.5-2400 132,000 600.5-800 62,000 2400.5+ 148,000 800.5+ 71,000
or (B) the following formula: ( X Y ) * Z * 1.04, where
X = total of SSG received by the school in 2004/05 Y = the number of pupils used to calculate the school s SSG in 2004/05 Z = the number of pupils used to calculate the school s SSG in 2005/06
This mechanism is designed to ensure that all schools receive at least a 4% increase in SSG per pupil compared to 2004/05.
3.3.4 Devolved Standards Funds
· Grants ceasing in 2005/06 or no longer available Seed Challenge (grant 35) The 2004/05 allocation was the last year of Seed Challenge funding.
Beacon Schools (Grant 11) As already notified to schools, Beacon School contracts that ended in 2004-2005 will not be renewed. Beacon School contracts that run beyond 2004-2005 will continue to be funded until the end of the contract.
· Inflation Proofing The grants within the School Development Grant have been increased by 4% in cash terms (the same rate as the main per pupil guarantee). Targeted and demand led grants have also been uprated, with the exception of those grants where increased costs will be negotiated between the DfES and individual schools: Beacon Schools, Training Schools, Leading Edge and Fresh Start.
· Consultation Schools are being consulted on the proposed basis of devolution of all the Standards Funds and Excellence in Cities grants.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3.5 Teacher Reform Grants The Government s intention was that this grant was to transfer into EFS from April 2005. It has now been decided that the grant will be paid to LEAs as a non ring-fenced specific formula grant. Through the formula Leeds has been allocated 14.140m. This amount is a cash-limited sum and must be managed by the LEA to support the cost of paying teachers that reach the upper pay scale, teachers who progress on the upper pay scale and other performance points awarded to teachers. The first call on this allocation will be to continue to fund schools for the full cost of teachers that reach the upper pay scale (UPS1). The remaining Grant will be used to contribute to the cost of progression on the upper pay scale and other performance points.
3.3.6 Schools Devolved Capital Devolved Formula Capital will continue at least through to 2007/08. The national formula for allocation is: Per school Per Primary Per Secondary Per SEN pupil Pupil pupil 2005/06 13,150 49.40 74.10 148.20 2006/07 17,000 61.00 91.50 183.00 2007/08 18,500 63.00 94.50 189.00
The large increase between 2005/06 and 2006/07 includes the transfer of ICT infrastructure (currently within grant 31a) to devolved formula capital.
3.4 Client Administered Budget
Original Estimate 2004/05 6,209k Original Estimate 2005/06 7,619k Increase 1,410k
The Client Administered budget has increased by 1,410k in the original estimate 2005/06, 1,177k of which is due to the accounting treatment for pension costs under Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 17 (as explained in 2.1). PFI/BSF development costs of 1,562k are to be funded from school balances and repaid by annual contributions from the ISB. Net borrowings from school balances to fund school balances have decreased by 284k. The movement on the Client Administered budget, after adjusting for these funding and accounting arrangements, is a net decrease of 1,045k, as referred to in paragraph 3.1 above.
The following additional budget pressures/reductions have been provided for: Unavoidable service pressures k Pay and price increases 222 Schools Maternity Scheme 30 SIMS Licence 40
Savings not affecting service levels Suspended employees -20 Recoupment -217 VERs/Ongoing pension costs -49 Corporate Convenors recharge -58 Miscellaneous Properties -18 Community use of schools -16 Subscriptions/Long service awards -20
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Service reductions Contribution to Clark Hall -29
Service developments PFI/BSF Scheme development costs 898 Prudential Borrowing for the Primary Review 136 Revenue contribution to capital 100 Standards Funds (additional net income) -493 Neighbourhood Renewal Project (NRF) income -200 Other grant income -73
Total 233
· Pay and Prices 222k Provision of 2.95% has been allowed for pay increases for both teachers and officers. Other price inflation has been allowed at 2.5%.
· Schools Maternity Scheme 30k Additional provision has been made for increased levels of staff in schools taking maternity leave and changes in the scheme regulations.
· SIMS Licence 40k The cost of the licence required to operate the SIMS system in schools has increased by 40k over and above that allowed for inflation.
· Other minor savings -103k Reduced provision has been made for suspended employees within schools, miscellaneous properties, community use of schools, subscriptions, long service awards and the contribution for Clark Hall.
· Recoupment -217k The estimated cost of educating Leeds pupils with special needs in other LEAs offset by income from educating other LEA pupils within Leeds schools will reduce by -217k in 2005/06.
· VERs/Ongoing Pension costs -49k Reduced provision is required due to trends. This excludes the repayment costs of new VERs borrowed from school balances.
· Corporate Convenors -58k The net contribution towards Corporate Convenors costs has been removed as the costs are to be provided for centrally.
· PFI/BSF Development Costs 898k The current strategy of spreading the development costs of PFI schemes over 6 years will cease in 2005/06 and be replaced by a sinking fund. Reduced development costs of -342k for the 10-primary school scheme, -369k for the combined secondary PFI scheme and -96k for the 7-school scheme are offset by additional provision of 1,705k for the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) scheme.
· Prudential Borrowing/Revenue contribution to capital 236k Provision of 136k has been made for prudential borrowing for the Primary Review and 100k has been provided as a revenue contribution to the Capital Programme.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Standards Fund and other grant income -766k The net change in standards funds devolved to schools together with increased income on retained schemes is -493k (the expenditure on retained grants being within the Education Leeds contract sum). NRF income has increased by -200k for Study Support and other grants income by -73k respectively (expenditure within EL) due to new schemes.
3.5 Education Leeds Contract
The Education Leeds Contract comprises 2 elements, the Basic Charge and the Grant Funded Charge.
3.5.1 The Basic Charge
Contract Sum 2004/05 39,417k Adjusted Contract Sum 2004/05 39,537k Contract Sum 2005/06 42,065k Increase 2,528k
Following negotiations between Education Leeds and the Council, it is proposed to increase the contract for 2005/06 by 2,528k from the adjusted 2004/05 contract sum. The 2004/05 Education Leeds budget was underwritten by 1,208k of operating surplus over and above the contract sum. For 2005/06, 1,389k of operating surplus and one- off grant income will be used to support the Education Leeds budget.
Inflationary increases allowed within the contract sum include 2.95% for teachers and officers pay awards and 3.05% for Soulbury staff. The employers superannuation rate for the West Yorkshire Pension Fund has increased from 8.4% to 9.0% and provision of 100k is included for this rate increase within the Pay and Prices figure of 1,394k below. Also included in that figure is inflation for running costs of 704k (approx 2.5%) and income increases of 254k (approx 3%).
Unavoidable service pressures k Pay and price increases (pay awards, superannuation rate, running costs) 1,394 Home to School/College Transport 423 ICT Leasing/increased nos of PCs/Freedom of Info Act software 97 ICT Desktop maintenance and Netware Infrastructure 256 VAT Liability 75 SEN Inclusion Service restructure 51 BSF Team (previously part funded from EL balances) 293 PFI Team (additional contract monitoring post) 42 West Park (fye loss of rental income) 28 Other miscellaneous pressures 42 Sub-total 2,701
Savings Outdoor Pursuits (fye) -52 Key Skills Officers (fye residual funding) -102 Outside Placements -100 Secondary Partnerships -200 Primary Partnerships -117 ICT School Support (met from standards fund) -57 Reduction in EL Contingency -70 Extended Schools (met from standards fund) -59 Education Leeds Investment income -78 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds Learning Network (reduced charge) -131 Organisational Change Team (reduced staffing) -57 Estate Management/PFI Teams (reduced running costs) -45 PFI (transfer of consultancy costs) -51 Music Service (staffing turnover re NQTs) -35 Success for All Initiative -50 Legal costs -19 Personnel (staffing reductions) -80 Sub-total -1,303
Service developments Transitional Learning Centre 200 Neighbourhood Renewal Project Study Support 200 Alternative Programmes/Pupil Referral Service/Pupil Placement 306 Admissions ICT system/call centre costs 72 Leadership Support Team (additional Team Leader post) 30 Laptop Security 25 Europe Week contribution 10 Al2gether Now (extended support) 13 School Improvement Team (additional Admin Support/QA capacity) 266 School Interventions 150 Youth Council 20 Healthy Schools 19 Sub-total 1,311
Total (including 181k increased use of EL balances) 2,709
3.5.2 The Grant Funded Charge
Contract Sum 2004/05 12,398k Adjusted Contract Sum 2004/05 12,278k Contract Sum 2005/06 13,492k Increase 1,214k
The grant funded charge reflects the gross levels of retained Standards Funds and other specific grants made available to the LEA and passed on to Education Leeds. The OE 2004/05 has been adjusted by -120k due to a change in classification of some schemes and is offset by an adjustment of 120k within the Basic Charge. The overall level of these funds has increased due to:
· Expenditure in relation to new grant funded projects 76k · The level of retained standards funds has increased by 1,138k. The main increases are 154k for Workforce Reform, 278k for Excellence in Cities, 110k for Vulnerable Children and 865k for Extended Schools. These increases are offset by reductions in some grants including -166k for the Behaviour Improvement Programme.
3.6 Client Budget The Education Client budget has increased by 7,433k, essentially due to increased capital charges of 7,436k which reflect a revaluation of school properties. Provision for the School Clothing Voucher scheme has increased by 36k due to inflation and trends in demand. The temporary financial support provided to the independent New Horizons PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com School comes to an end saving 22k. Additional central charges of 11k are offset by a reassessment of the cost of Discretionary Awards saving 15k. Savings of 27k arise on the running cost of Education Residual Properties, partly offset by a 9k reduction in rental income.
4 EFFICIENCY SAVINGS
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the Council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of the Education Budget the following savings have been identified.
Nature of saving Cashable Non- Total cashable k k k Cash limited retained standards funds 135 135 Review of essential car user allowances 30 30 Music - use of Newly Qualified Teachers 35 35 ICT School support expenditure met from 57 57 grant Organisational Change Team reduced 57 57 consultancy costs Estate Management/PFI Teams reduced 45 45 running costs Printing/postages reduced costs 10 10 Total 369 369
The above efficiency savings have been reflected in the Education Leeds contract charge.
It should be noted that expenditure within delegated schools budgets is not subject to the same requirements for efficiencies to be identified within the Council s Annual Efficiency Statement. Separate guidance has been issued by the DfES on efficiency savings expected to be made in schools.
5. RISK ASSESSMENT
In determining the Education budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared.
Among the risk areas identified are the level of insurance claims, especially from major school fires and storm damage. Other potential risk areas are PFI/BSF development costs, with possible slippage on scheme timetables, and the number of staff seeking VERS due to the impact of falling rolls and school reviews on staffing numbers. Further examples of risk areas are the possibility of schools seeking alternative providers for traded services currently delivered by Education Leeds, and the management of
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com demand-led services linked to policy or legislation, such as Outside Placements and Behaviour Support Services. .
Briefing note prepared by:
Martin Hollos/Lise Stower Education Leeds (for budgets relating to Schools, Client Administered and the Education Leeds Contract)
Directorate of Corporate Services Education Client Budget
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix A
DfES Regulations regarding school funding
· Passporting of Schools block increase The Secretary of State expects Local Authorities to increase their education budgets by the full increase in EFSS. In this respect the Secretary of State has asked LEAs to confirm that the Schools Block will increase by at least the increase in the Schools Formula Spending Share (SFSS). The City Council have informed the Secretary of State for Education and Skills that Leeds intends to increase the schools block in 2005/06 by the full 16.932m increase in SFSS. · Restrictions on increases to the Central Schools Block The schools block is made up of delegated school budgets known as the individual schools budget (ISB), funding devolved to schools from the Standards Fund and Excellence in Cities grants, and centrally retained funding known as the Central schools block. For 2005/06 the Secretary of State has again set out additional regulations that allow LEAs to only increase the central schools block by no more than the same percentage increase as the ISB and devolved funding to schools. Three items are excluded from this requirement: · increases in the cost of education for pupils under five in private, voluntary or independent settings; · increases in contributions to the standards fund; and · any funding retained to assist schools in financial difficulty. · The Minimum per Pupil Funding Guarantee The Minimum per Pupil Funding Guarantee remains in place for 2005/06 to ensure that all schools receive a minimum (approximately 4%) increase in funding on the majority of their formula funding. The minimum funding guarantee is set 1% higher in Primary schools than in Secondary and Special Schools as the DfES forecast that the implementation of Planning Preparation and Assessment (PPA) time in Primary schools will be more costly.
The DfES regulations specifically exclude funding from the following formula factors in calculating the guarantee:
Funding for Rates; Individual pupil funding that moves in-year. In Leeds this is Funding for inclusion level 2 funding; Key stage1class size funding; LSC funding for sixth forms Funding through a specific PFI factor.
In addition, LEAs can request that additional local factors be excluded, where leaving funding within the baseline would result in an inequitable distribution. Following discussion with the Schools forum, the DfES approved that the following items could be excluded from the baseline: Safetynet; Small School Salary protection; FFI level 1 pupil led funding; FFI transitional adjustments.
However, the DfES will only approve the exemption of particular factors based on named schools where the application of the guarantee would lead to significantly anomalous outcomes.
It is intended to make individual application to the DfES where the application of the guarantee would lead to a significantly anomalous outcome in 2005/06. This is likely to include schools that have received Safetynet funding in 2004/05 or specific additional one off funding due to reorganisation.
A spreadsheet to allow schools to model the effects of the minimum funding guarantee has been made available on INFOBASE for schools.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created w ith FinePrint pd fFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: Learning and Leisure
1 Introduction
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % 145,284 Gross expenditure 147,816 156,239 8,423 6 157,667 9,851 7
46,532cr Income 47,858cr 50,489cr 2,631cr 5 49,705cr 1,847cr 4 98,752 Net expenditure 99,958 105,750 5,792 6 107,962 8,004 8
Charges to other 10,967cr departments 10,481cr 14,085cr 3,604cr 34 9,929cr 552 5cr Net cost of service 87,785 of Service 89,477 91,665 2,188 2 98,033 8,556 10
2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities rather than the Government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase the net cost of service 1,459k . There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
An increase in capital charges of 749k is also included in the LE 2004/05.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 8,556k)
3.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 89,477
Changes in prices 3,603 Other factors not affecting the level of service 2,372 Variations in charges for capital 2,253 Changes in service levels 2,545 Efficiency savings (cashable) -2,217
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 98,033
4.2 Changes in prices ( 3,603k)
The 2005/6 Revenue Budget includes provision for a 2.95% pay award from 1st April 2005, and a superannuation increase of 0.7%, providing a total increase of 2.8m.
Running cost inflation totals 1.8m and is primarily accounted for through the increases in energy prices ( 900k), NNDR ( 137k) and Nursery Education Grant ( 100k). Income inflation amounts to 1,200k and mainly comprises 326k within Sport and Active Recreation and 335k within Cemeteries and Crematoria.
4.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service ( 2,372k)
IT charges have increased by 1,464k mainly due to increased capital charges for the Network Infrastructure Programme (NIP). The NIP is provided as part of the managed IT service to the Department.
As explained in paragraph 2.1 a technical adjustment has been made in respect of FRS17. The overall impact of this year on year is to increase the net cost of service by 1,088k.
4.4 Variations in charges for capital ( 2,253k)
Capital charges have increased by 2,253k primarily due to the increased revaluation of the Department s fixed assets.
4.5 Changes in service levels ( 2,545k)
The 2005/6 budget provides for a 500k increased expenditure to improve the environment in urban parks and a 100k increase for improvements in allotments and public rights of way. A further 350k is provided for within Parks and Countryside representing 300k for the fallout of the Parks SRB scheme and 50k for continuing maintenance costs of Section 106 agreements.
The additional revenue effects ( 50k) of capital investment in the libraries at Otley and Horsforth have been included within the 2005/6 budget.
An additional 110k has been injected into the Book Fund and 400k for the Parkswatch scheme. The budget also provides for 670k which represents the horticultural maintenance
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com service previously provided within the Housing Revenue Account and now transferred to General Fund. Finally, 302k is provided for reduced leisure centre income trends.
The loss of Security rent at Redhall ( 63k) and Mansion House rent ( 65k) have been provided within the budget together with 100k reduced Cemeteries and Crematoria income trends. An additional 175k is provided for caretaking costs at Community Centres, 85k for the increase in Libraries headquarters annual rental, 25k for relocation of part Connexions Youth to Eastgate and a further 50k for the training budget.
The restructuring of fees ( 500k) within the Early Years service has also been provided for. Changes have been made to the charging system in order to make fees fairer and simpler. The new charging policy takes into account the impact of the Working Tax Credit thereby minimising the impact on families.
4.6 Efficiency savings
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this department the following efficiencies have been identified.
Nature of saving cashable non-cashable total k k k 1 Community Centre Review 75 0 75 2 College use of premises 100 0 100 3 Sport income initiatives 100 0 100 4 Construction Skills Learning Centre efficiencies 100 0 100 5 Parks & Countryside income 243 0 243 initiatives and efficiencies 6 More efficient and effective procurement processes 500 0 500 7 1% sickness/vacancy savings 500 0 500 8 Cash limit back office 186 0 186 9 Efficiencies within the Library services 163 0 163 10 Efficiencies following the Jobs & Skills restructure 250 0 250 TOTAL SAVINGS 2,217 0 2,217
5. Budget Realignment
5.1. This budget supports the following Strategic outcomes:
(i) All neighbourhoods are safe, clean, green and well maintained The 2005/6 budget provides 400k for the Parkswatch scheme plus 160k for an extra grass cut as part of the Corporate Plan Priority work. Both of these are undertaken by Parks and Countryside. As discussed in paragraph 4.5 above, the 2005/6 budget provides for a 500k increase in expenditure to improve the environment in urban parks and a 100k increase for improvements in allotments and public rights of way. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com (ii) Our children and young people have healthy, safe and successful lives
As discussed in paragraph 4.5 above, 110k has been included for the purchase of additional library books.
6. Risk Assessment 6.1 In determining the 2005/6 budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared.
6.2 The Learning and Leisure budget for 2005/06 is dependent upon the raising of 49.7m of external income either from grants or from service users. If this income is not achieved it could have a significant impact on the Department s budget. Of this total, approximately 10m must be raised from leisure centres and this is managed through the weekly monitoring of phased activity income per leisure centre. There is potential for grant fallout within Jobs and Skills of approximately 11m. Grant applications are made on an annual basis and implications will be outlined if any grant is not forthcoming. Finally, there is significant capital development within the Department which could have implications on the revenue budgets where costs might be higher than anticipated or income levels lower. Costs are being closely monitored and any impact assessed.
Briefing note prepared by: M Afzal Telephone: 39 50388
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: Neighbourhoods and Housing 1 Introduction 1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the Department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06. 1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework. 1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % 128,558 Gross expenditure 207,402 207,064 338cr 0cr 206,590 812cr 0cr
96,699cr Income 176,270cr 176,774cr 504cr 0 174,088cr 2,182 1cr 31,859 Net expenditure 31,132 30,290 842cr 3cr 32,502 1,370 4
Charges to other 1,614cr departments 2,857cr 4,784cr 1,927cr 67 2,207cr 650 23cr Net cost 30,245 of Service 28,275 25,506 2,769cr 10cr 30,295 2,020 7 2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows: The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities, rather than the Government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to Departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase the net cost of service by 351k. There is no impact on Council Tax levels, as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
In addition a variation in capital charges in the LE of 3.3m, due to variations in deferred charges reflecting movement in budgeted capital spend and funding, has contributed to a reduction in the Net Cost of Service.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 2,020k 3.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows: 000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 28,275 Changes in prices 790 Other factors not affecting the level of service 3,906 Variations in charges for capital 2,889 Cr Changes in service levels 1,027 Efficiency savings (cashable) 814 Cr Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 30,295 3.2 Changes in prices 790k An allowance of 790k has been made for changes in prices and this is to reflect the known pay award 2.95%, increases in non-staffing expenditure 2%, and, where chargeable, fees have been projected to increase at 3%. 3.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service 3,906k There has been a variation in recharges from OE to OE of 1.6m. This is mainly due to IT charges in relation to the Network Infrastructure Programme (NIP). The NIP is provided as part of the managed IT service to the Department. These have largely been offset by other savings of 1.1m.
The net cost of Housing Benefits has increased by 2,219k. The main reason is a change in the basis of apportioning the net cost of Benefits Administration contained within Corporate Services, resulting in an increase of 1,590k. The cost is now reallocated on the basis of gross housing benefit payments whereas previously it was shared 50/50 between Rent Allowances and the Cost of Collection. In addition an amount of 500k held in the contingency fund in 2004/05 relating to subsidy claimable from the government has now been incorporated into the 2005/06 base budget. As explained in paragraph 2.1 a technical adjustment has been made in respect of FRS17. The overall impact of this is to increase the net cost of service by 697k. 3.4 Variations in charges for capital 2,889k Cr Variations in capital charges in the LE and OE 05/06 is mainly due to a reduction in deferred charges of 2.1million reflecting a reduction in the budgeted Improvement Grant payments within the Capital Programme. 3.5 Changes in service levels 1,027k There are significant service adjustments for 2005/06. These are, principally: · 395k to joint fund, with West Yorkshire Police, 34 PCSO s. · 257k for support to the East And South East Leeds (EASEL) scheme. · 75k towards the legal cost of implementing ASBO s. · 165k to continue the development of the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) and Joint Services Scheme. · 110k towards the cost of improving telephone responses by transferring services to the Environmental Call Centre. Note that savings made, and shown below, compensate for this change. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · 100k has been included in anticipation of the legislative changes to the Licensing (Entertainment) Laws. · ( 68k) has been removed from the provision for Grounds Maintenance, this is to reflect the value of work carried out to land transferred to Learning & Leisure. 3.6 Efficiency savings ( 814k) Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this Department the following efficiency gains have been identified.
NATURE OF SAVING CASHABLE NON- TOTAL CASHABLE 000 000 000 1 Review of supervisory structure CCTV 92 0 92 2 Review of structure LIAP 89 0 89 3 Review of supervisory and management structure 125 0 125 Community Safety 4 Review of Community Safety Office 10 0 10 Accommodation 5 Review of Environmental Health structure 125 0 125 6 Savings on supplies and services 343 0 343 7 Review of Community Centre running costs 30 0 30 TOTAL SAVINGS 814 0 814
4. Budget Realignment
4.1. This budget supports the following Strategic outcomes:
(i) All neighbourhoods are safe, clean, green and well maintained As referred to in paragraph 3.5 above, the department s budget provides for: · 395k to joint fund, with West Yorkshire Police, 34 PCSO s. · 257k for support to the East And South East Leeds (EASEL) scheme. · 75k towards the legal cost of implementing ASBO s.
(ii) Transforming our services As referred to in paragraph 3.5 above, the department s budget provides for: · 165k to continue the development of the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) and Joint Services Scheme. · 110k towards the cost of improving telephone responses by transferring services to the Environmental Call Centre.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5. Risk Assessment In determining the 2005/06 budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the Department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared.
The Department considers the Homeless service to be of high risk, both in terms of costs associated with the provision of self-contained accommodation, and also in ensuring the maximum receipt of Housing Benefit to offset this cost. This will be managed by regular monitoring of numbers and costs, and weekly correspondence with the Housing Benefits team to ensure income recovery.
Briefing note prepared by: Julia Bradbury and Charles Oxtoby Telephone: 0113 2475986
U:universe/estimate/budget05/briefing note proforma 0506.doc PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
DEPARTMENT: SOCIAL SERVICES
1 Introduction
1.1 This report has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The Original Estimate, as in previous years has been prepared at outturn prices, and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
1.3 In agreeing the 2005/06 budget for the Social Services Department as set out below members are approving the recommendation that the line of eligibility for statutory services is set between the moderate and substantial categories, having taken account of feedback from the consultation process and the resources available to the Department. Further information on this is provided in section 5 below.
1.4 The 2005/06 budget is based on the start of a challenging programme of service improvement and business reconfiguration, which gives rise to some areas of significant risk. These are outlined in section 6 below.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 03/04 to (OE) (LE) (OE) OE05/06 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % 306,691 Gross Expenditure 322,249 332,611 10,362 3 335,411 13,162 4
108,072Cr Income 114,438Cr 113,277Cr 1,161 1 116,971Cr 2,533Cr 2Cr 198,619 Net Expenditure 207,811 219,334 11,523 6 218,440 10,629 5
Charges to other 23,546Cr Departments 23,788Cr 23,920Cr 132Cr 1Cr 16,080Cr 7,708 32 Net Cost of 175,073 Service 184,023 195,414 11,391 6 202,360 18,337 10
2.1 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the Latest Estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the above table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
2.2 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:-
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The Authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 - Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use of market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities rather than the Government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to Departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase the net cost of service 2,108k. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
2.3 The 2005/06 Original Estimate reflects an increase in the Social Services Formula Spending Share (FSS) of 4,825k to reflect specific grants transferring into FSS. These funding transfers relate to Preserved Rights and Residential Allowance funding within community care and the Training Support Programme. After taking account of these adjustments and changes relating to pensions, central charges and capital charges, the Social Services budget for 2005/06 has been increased by 15,649k, slightly more than the value of the FSS increase. In addition costs associated with PFI development in the service have been provided for within the central contingency.
3 Explanation of Variations Between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 18,337k)
3.1 The 2005/06 budget for Social Services has been prepared in the context of a growing imbalance in recent years between the demands and expectations on the Department and the resources available to meet them. This imbalance was one of the drivers for the Delivery and Improvement Programme that is working towards service improvement within a framework of affordability. A key element of the service improvement agenda is promoting independence and choice for service users. Delivering efficiencies across the department is also an important element.
3.2 This context gives rise to a challenging programme of service improvement and business reconfiguration across the Department over a two to three year period starting in 2005/06. The detail of this within the 2005/06 budget is set out in sections 3.5 to 3.8 below, followed in section 5 by consideration of eligibility for services in accordance with the statutory requirement for an annual review.
3.3 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000
Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 184,023
Changes in Prices 7,536 Other factors not affecting the Level of Service 18,073 Variations in charges for Capital 672 Cr Changes in Service Levels 1,300 Cr Efficiency Savings (cashable) 5,300 Cr
Net Cost of Service - Original Estimate 2005/06 202,360
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.4 Changes in Prices
3.4.1 Provision of 2,816k has been included in the Original Estimate 2005/06 for the 2.95% pay award from April 2005 and the 0.25% higher than budgeted pay award from April 2004. In addition, provision of 381k has been made for an increase in the employers superannuation rate.
3.4.2 Price increases for 2005/06 amount to 5,219k. Of this, 3,288k relates to community care client placements and 146k to independent sector domiciliary care. Inflation provision has been made of 298k for the Joint Commissioning Service for People with Learning Disabilities, 272k for fees to carers, and 231k for outside placements. The remainder relates to various running expenses.
3.4.3 Increases in the level of fees and charges is estimated to generate income of 880k. This includes 246k for housing benefit and supporting people, 224k for income relating to community care and 269k for income from other organisations, mainly in respect of Eastmoor Secure Unit. Provision has been made to apply inflationary increases to charges to service users for the period since they were last increased, up to a maximum of two years.
3.5 Other Factors not impacting upon the Level of Service
3.5.1 The Social Services budget for 2005/06 includes 4,825k to reflect specific grants transferring into the Formula Spending Share (FSS) as outlined in section 2.1 above. As explained in section 2.2 above, the Authority is now required to comply with FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. The impact of accounting for FRS 17 in the 2005/06 budget is an increase in net costs of 2,156k. A further 1,065k relates to changes in central charges, mainly for Information Technology. This includes the Council s continuing investment in the Network Infrastructure Programme and the ongoing costs of the Electronic Social Care Records System.
3.5.2 The community care budget net of income has increased by 2,839k. This represents provision for new placements in 2005/06 and the full year effects of 2004/05 placements, offset by discharges from placements made in previous years. There has been an increase of 1,738k in the Access and Systems Capacity Grant for 2005/06, which has been used to part fund the increased costs within the community care budget, and the Carers Grant has also increased by 794k. Additional provision of 1,000k has been made for the Joint Commissioning Service for People with Learning Disabilities. The independent sector domiciliary care budget includes additional provision of 3,634k to reflect increased demands on this budget being experienced in 2004/05.
3.5.3 Net additional funding of 907k has been included within the children s services budget. Increased budget provision of 1,907k reflects higher levels of children looked after than were budgeted in the 2004/05 Original Estimate, partly offset by 1,000k for planned reductions in numbers during 2005/06. Reducing numbers will bring Leeds closer to national comparators, but this will be subject to a risk management approach to ensure that vulnerable children are properly protected. Provision of 561k has also been made to move closer to nationally recommended payment rates for foster carers. Additional provision of 833k has been made for placements for children with complex physical disabilities or challenging behaviour. Reduced costs of 400k have been included in the 2005/06 budget to reflect a reconfiguration of children s services and less reliance on expensive residential
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com placements. The government grant to support improved adoption services has increased by 483k for 2005/06 and the Choice Protects grant is 363k higher than in 2004/05.
3.5.4 The 2005/06 budget reflects the work of the Delivery and Improvement Programme within the Department, addressing the need to modernise services as outlined in the Joint Review. As part of this work, the need to reconfigure services for older people and deliver them more appropriately and efficiently has been identified and a reduction in costs of 1,000k has been included in the 2005/06 budget. A reduction of 800k has been included for the meals service to reflect a review of service delivery, with a further 200k for a review of holiday and short breaks provision.
3.5.5 Additional provision of 4,607k has been included within the staffing budget to address the ongoing effect of spending pressures in 2004/05 and to eliminate the turnover factor within residential services. This reflects the increasing difficulties in providing adequate staffing levels to meet statutory care standards requirements and will reduce reliance on agency staff and overtime.
3.5.6 The transport budget has increased by 1,321k to reflect pressures on this budget in 2004/05. This is partly offset by 750k to be achieved through a review of the Department s transport policy, which will include encouraging independence amongst adult service users. Cost reductions of 700k have been included for general running expenses, which includes some cash-limiting of budgets for 2005/06.
3.5.7 Budget provision of 750k has been included relating to Housing Benefit and Supporting People income. This reflects possible income losses through increased Section 117 cases that cannot be charged for their services, any impact on supporting people charges following contract reviews and any adverse impact of National Care Standards Commission (NCSC) registration decisions. A reduction in the budget provision of 973k for fees and charges mainly relates to home care and day care income. This reflects the income levels of service users varying from the assumptions within the 2004/05 budget prepared before all financial assessments had been completed. Additional income of 200k is included to reflect a review of some aspects of the charging policy for home care and day care during 2005/06, with a further 300k for a review of meals charges. There have been substantial increases in government grants to support the workforce, with an additional 841k for the National Training Strategy and 540k for the Human Resources Development Strategy.
3.6 Variations to Capital
3.6.1 Capital charges have reduced by 672k from the 2004/05 to the 2005/06 Original Estimate. This is mainly due to a reduction in deferred charges reflecting movements in projected capital spend.
3.7 Changes in Service Levels
3.7.1 The Delivery and Improvement Programme has identified the need for service realignment and improvement for which budget provision has been made in the 2005/06 budget. Additional provision of 1,500k has been included within the community care budget for increased direct payments, promoting independence and choice for adult service users. The funding for this will be transferred from those services that the direct payments will replace.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.7.2 There is a need to invest more resources in active care management and reviewing to ensure that service users receive services most appropriate to their needs. Additional staffing resources of up to 1,400k will be identified for this function from within the overall staffing budget.
3.7.3 In the context of achieving financial stability as outlined in sections 3.1 and 3.2 above, a reduction in costs of 1,600k reflects the proposals set out in section 5 below regarding eligibility for statutory services. 300k has been included within the budget to increase the capacity within the city to provide services for people who do not have needs that are eligible for the Department s services. This investment will support voluntary organisations and the development of social enterprises.
3.8 Efficiency Savings
3.8.1 Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the Council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend, whereas non cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure; efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public; and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this department the following savings have been identified.
Nature of Saving Cashable Non Total Cashable 000 000 000 1. Reduced staffing costs through improved attendance management/ recruitment procedures 1,450 1,450 and VERs where savings can be achieved 2. Improved financial control and monitoring procedures leading to more effective budget and 1,800 1,800 contract management within community care 3. Re-tendering within community care and 1,200 1,200 children s services 4. Procurement and routing/vehicle utilisation 250 250 efficiencies within client transport provision 5. Increased cost-effectiveness within staff transport 200 200 provision 6. Improved income collection systems 400 400 7. Reconfiguration of staffing to facilitate improved 1,400 1,400 care management and reviewing 8. Use of mobile technology interacting with departmental systems to facilitate reduced See note 50 50 travelling time and more flexible working. below 9. Use of digital pens and mobile phone technology within Community Support Services in part of the See note 40 40 city to reduce manual recording below TOTAL 5,300 1,490 6,790
Note: Cashable savings not included in the budget to be confirmed following more detailed work and non-cashable savings based on current released capital resources.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4 Budget Realignment 4.1 This budget supports the following Strategic Outcomes:
(i) At each stage of life people are able to live healthy, fulfilling lives The modernisation and reconfiguration agenda for Social Services set out within the 2005/06 budget supports the overall Council Plan closing the gap priorities by targeting the Department s resources on those with greatest needs. The Council Plan priority of helping older people to live independently and reducing health inequalities is supported within the Department s 2005/06 budget by some key investment. The 1,500k for direct payments, 3,634k for domiciliary care services and up to 1,400k for staff to actively care manage and review cases will all contribute to this priority. The 300k investment to increase the voluntary organisation and social enterprise capacity within the city will also support this theme.
(ii) Our children and young people have healthy, safe and successful lives The Council Plan priorities within children s services are to reduce the numbers of looked after children and to improve the attainment and stability of placements of looked after children. The increased investment of 2,468k in fostering services will help to improve the quality of services for looked after children in support of these priorities and a cost reduction of 1,000k has been set aside to reduce the numbers of children in the Council s care.
5 Eligibility for Services
5.1 Since the introduction of Fair Access to Care Services (FACS) statutory guidance in April 2003, each Local Authority is, as part of its budget setting process, required to review at what level eligibility for statutory services should be set with reference to the available resource to meet such eligible needs. In undertaking this review, Department of Health guidance advises that consultation should take place with users, carers and our partners about the criteria which are used to determine eligible need, with this consultation being used to determine the reasonableness of the criteria applied.
5.2 In line with guidance, we have sought the views of over 600 service users and carers whose needs were assessed in the later months of 2004. We have through media statements and the Council website invited people not included in the original sample to let us have their views and we have invited our partners to let us know their views with regard to the reasonableness of our criteria. At the end of the formal consultation process 134 users and carers had responded, of whom 99 (74%) indicated that they were extremely, very or quite satisfied with the eligibility criteria as a way of deciding who will be entitled to Social Services. The table below sets out the matrix of responses.
How satisfied are you with the eligibility criteria as a way of deciding who will be entitled to Social Services? Number Extremely Satisfied 25 Very Satisfied 34 Quite Satisfied 40 Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied 16 Fairly Dissatisfied 2 Very Dissatisfied 5 Extremely Dissatisfied 4 No Response 8 Total 134
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Of the eleven people expressing dissatisfaction with the criteria, four were concerned about the continuing availability of some services, three were concerned about whether the criteria applied to health services provision, two raised concerns about the application of the criteria to people whose mental capacity might be impaired through illness and the final two respondents raised issues with regard to the effectiveness of the services they are currently receiving. Responses from our partners have been supportive of our approach and representatives of specific service user and carers groups have provided us with helpful comments with regard to the application of the criteria.
5.3 Following this consultation process it is our belief that the criteria applied to determine eligibility are reasonable. However, elected members are now required to determine the level of eligibility above which a person would be entitled to statutory social care. The current level of eligibility, which has been set between low and moderate levels since April 2003, has led to the demand for statutory services exceeding the available resource to meet that demand. Maintaining this position is not sustainable. In consequence some people with very significant levels of need may be required to wait for some services whilst individuals with much less pressing needs may continue to receive a service.
5.4 In order to address this growing anomaly and to better match demand to available and sustainable resources in coming years, it is recommended that the Leeds line of eligibility be set between the moderate and substantial categories. This will ensure that those people with critical and substantial needs are able to access the appropriate level and quality of statutory services. People whose needs are assessed at a lower level will have them met by signposting to the growing range of locally based non-statutory services which have been developed over the past number of years and whose capacity we are actively working to enhance.
5.5 In accordance with the guidance, the needs of existing service users will be reviewed over the course of the coming year against the local eligibility criteria and no service to an existing recipient can be adjusted without such a formal review process having taken place. Where this is the case we will ensure that people are signposted to alternative non-statutory services which are willing and able to help.
6 Risk Assessment 6.1 In determination of the Social Services budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared. The Social Services budget for 2005/06 is based on the start of a challenging programme of service improvement and business reconfiguration. This gives rise to some areas of significant risk as outlined below. 6.2 The most significant areas of risk within the 2005/06 budget relate to front-line services of a demand-led nature, for which activity may exceed budgeted levels. These budgets include community care packages for adults, including those commissioned within the pooled budget for people with learning disabilities, and children s placements. Another important risk is that the impact of Supporting People contract reviews and Commission for Social Care Inspection registration decisions may exceed the budget provision made.
6.3 Other noteworthy risks relate to the achievability of all the budgeted savings through service reconfiguration and implementing efficiencies. These include the 5,300k cashable efficiency savings set out in section 3.8.1 above and the cost reductions from raising the
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com eligibility threshold, reconfiguring services for older people and a review of the Department s transport policy.
6.4 Given these areas of risk, the department has produced action plans and is developing monitoring reports to enable these risks to be managed effectively. Monthly monitoring reports on actions taken and key activity data will be presented to the Departmental Management Team alongside the monthly financial reporting. This work is being actively supported by the Corporate Efficiency Review Team.
Report prepared by: Ann Hill Tel: 24 78555
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEEDS CITY COUNCIL 2005/06 BUDGET REPORT
Department: CHIEF EXECUTIVE S
1 Introduction
1.1 This briefing note has been produced in order to inform members of the Executive Board as to the main variations and factors influencing the department s budget for the Original Estimate (OE) 2005/06.
1.2 The figures for actual spend in 2003/04 and the latest estimate (LE) for 2004/05 have been included in the following table. Variations between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 reflect approved variations in accordance with the Budget and Policy framework.
1.3 The Original Estimate, as in previous years, has been prepared at outturn prices and as such there is no central provision for pay and prices.
2 Summary of the Revenue Budget
Actual Original Latest Variation OE to Original Variation OE 2003/04 Estimate Estimate LE 04/05 Estimate 04/05 to OE 05/06 (OE) (LE) (OE) 04/05 04/05 05/06 000 000 000 000 % 000 000 % 33,291 Gross expenditure 34,204 34,652 448 1 36,478 2,274 7
4,963cr Income 4,943cr 5,297cr 354cr 7 5,343cr 400cr 8 28,328 Net expenditure 29,261 29,355 94 0 31,135 1,874 6
Charges to other 24,395cr depts/ALMOs/EL 26,146cr 26,237cr 91cr 0 27,669cr 1,523cr 6 Net cost of service 3,933 of Service 3,115 3,118 3 0 3,466 351 11
2.1 A technical adjustment has been made which affects the comparison between the OE 2004/05 and the LE 2004/05 as follows:
The authority is required to comply fully with accounting standard FRS 17 Retirement Benefits. This means that the pension costs shown in service accounts are required to be the current service cost rather than the amounts actually paid out in relation to pensions during the year. An additional amendment to the calculation of current service costs for 2005/06 is the use market dependent rates for discounting pension liabilities rather than the government s actuary rate. This amendment to accounting practice has produced a significant increase in the current service costs charged to departments. The overall impact of the FRS 17 adjustment is to increase expenditure by 506k. There is no impact on Council Tax levels as the effect of the FRS 17 adjustment is reversed by a contribution from the Pensions Reserve.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3 Explanation of variations between the Original Estimate 2004/05 and the Original Estimate 2005/06 ( 351k)
3.1 The variation between the OE 2004/05 and the OE 2005/06 can be summarised as follows:
000 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2004/05 3115
Changes in prices 567 Other factors not affecting the level of service 943 Variations in charges for capital -77 Changes in service levels 347 Efficiency savings (cashable) -255 Budget realignment 349 Increase in charges to other departments, ALMOs & Education Leeds -1523 Net Cost of Service Original Estimate 2005/06 3466
3.2 Changes in prices
Provision of 670k has been made for the cost of the pay award agreed at 2.95% in 2005/06. 123k has also been included for the cost of the additional employers superannuation increases. An allowance of 166k has been made for general price increases.
Increases to fees and charges amount to 392k. 217k of this increase is due to the new fee structure arising from the new licensing act. A general 3% increase has been applied to other external fees and charges budgets.
3.3 Other factors not affecting the level of service
There will be no local elections during 2005/06 which results in reduced expenditure of 185k in 2005/06 only.
A 200k saving in members special responsibility allowance and superannuation has been provided for.
Grant income of 200k has been awarded for Centres of Excellence to be used to encourage good practice in procurement and implementation of the Gershon review. 100k of this grant is required to offset associated salaries and costs. However this is partially offset by other reductions in grant income in 2005/06: fallout of the Adult Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant ( 25k) and reduced IEG Grant ( 50k).
In the OE 2004/05 provision was included in the Council s Contingency Fund in respect of the costs of the Customer Services staffing restructure. 200k has been released in 2005/06 as full implementation of the structure has now taken place.
The 147k budget for the Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Assembly subscription will transfer from Strategic to Chief Executive s department to enable improved control and monitoring of future subscription charges.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com There has been an increase in IT recharges from Corporate Services amounting to 432k. This is largely a result of increases in notional capital charges arising from the Network Infrastructure Programme. In addition, there has been an increase in legal disbursement costs ( 270k), however this is fully recharged out to other departments.
As explained in paragraph 2.1 a technical adjustment has been made in respect of FRS17. The overall impact of this year on year is to increase expenditure by 384k.
Other general savings and transfers of IT leasing budgets to IT Services (as part of the Network Infrastructure Programme) accounts for 80k reduction in costs.
3.4 Variations in charges for capital
Capital charges have decreased by 77k. This is mainly due to IT leasing schemes and associated capital charges transferring to Corporate Services as part of the Network Infrastructure programme. These capital charges from 2005/06 form part of the overall recharge from IT Services.
3.5 Changes in service levels
During 2004/05 Customer Services implemented a new staffing structure to enable them to have the capacity and capability of delivering the Council s Customer First agenda and the electronic government agenda. In 2005/06 the full year effects of the restructure will materialise at an estimated additional cost of 275k.
In addition Members Services has implemented a revised staffing structure that will cost an additional 72k next year.
3.6 Charges to Other Departments, Education Leeds and ALMOs
Charges to other departments, ALMOs and Education Leeds have increased by 1,523k. Following a review of charges and the transfer of the Out of Hours Service to Customer Services from City Services, Customer Services recharges have increased by approximately 730k. The remainder is due to an increase in charges from Legal and the Corporate Procurement Unit.
3.7 Efficiency savings
Following the publication of the Gershon report on public sector efficiencies, in setting the budget the council is required to identify actions to improve efficiency and quantify the expected gains. Cashable gains represent the potential to release savings in cash for other areas of spend; non-cashable efficiencies relate to improved outputs or enhanced service quality for the same expenditure, efficiencies that achieve reductions in fees and charges to the public, and improvements to productive time (unless fewer staff are needed as a result). In terms of this department the following efficiency gains have been identified.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NATURE OF SAVING CASHABLE NON- TOTAL CASHABLE 000 000 000 1 Civic Newsletter: initiatives to reduce the net cost 125 125 2 International initiatives: review of charges and 25 25 sponsorship 3 Review of staffing structure in Executive Support 58 58 4 Review of subscriptions and general running costs 47 47 TOTAL SAVINGS 255 255
4 Budget Realignment
4.1 This budget supports the following Strategic outcomes:
(i) Transforming our services Additional funding has been allocated to the implementation of the Corporate Contact Centre. The overall aim being to have one single contact centre for the majority of Council Services. 349k will be available in 2005/06 towards funding new rental accommodation, which would enable a single site Contact Centre and the associated IT and Telephony revenue costs.
5 Risk Assessment 5.1 In determining the Chief Executive s Department budget, consideration is given to all the risks and these are managed within the department s overall risk management framework. Within this framework, a register of those items considered to carry the highest risk and therefore requiring careful and regular monitoring has been prepared.
5.2 An element of uncertainty still exists regarding the continued use of Customer Services by some of the ALMOs. The 2005/06 budget assumes 3.1m of income from the ALMOs and the Strategic Landlord function in the Housing Revenue Account.
5.3 The continued decline in local land charges has been provided for again within the Council s contingency fund ( 320k) and therefore does not show as a budget pressure within the Chief Executive s Department.
Briefing note prepared by: Julie Hobson Telephone: 74493
U:universe/estimate/budget05/briefing notes/Chief Execs Briefing Note 0506.doc
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CHIEF EXECUTIVE S DEPARTMENT
MAIN RESPONSIBILITIES:
Legal & Democratic Ø Provision of a comprehensive support service to all Members of the Council, facilitation of the formal decision making processes of the Council and organisation of elections. Ø The Registration Service is responsible for registering births, deaths and marriages. Ø Responsible for maintenance of the Council s Local Land Charge register and for co-ordination of the responses to search enquiries concerning the discharge of the Council's functions in relation to land. Ø Responsible for overseeing the Authority s procurement procedures and for ensuring that departments are empowered to procure works, supplies and services in the most efficient manner and in compliance with the Council s Standing Orders and European Procurement Directives. Ø Responsible for the provision of a comprehensive range of high-quality legal services to the Council, its decision-making bodies and departments. Ø Responsible for the administration and enforcement activities associated with public entertainment and vehicle licences.
Executive Support Ø Provide procedural, strategic and policy advice to Elected Members and Chief Officers on the development and management of the Council s corporate agenda, embodied in the Corporate Plan and the Council Plan. Ø To deliver an effective performance management system, ensure service planning and review are embedded and be champions of cultural change. Ø Co-ordinate international activity undertaken and promoted by the Council. Ø Provide a comprehensive media, public relations and corporate communications service to the Council, Elected Members and Departments. Ø To influence national, regional and sub-regional policies to support Leeds ambition of going up a league and to reinforce Leeds role as the regional capital. Ø Support departments, Elected Members and local partnership agencies to deliver strategies that promote and enhance equality of opportunity in service delivery and community engagement Ø To provide administrative, project and policy support to the Chief Executive, Deputy Chief Executive and Corporate Management Team.
Customer Services Ø To lead the front line service provided through the Council s fifteen One Stop Centres, the Corporate Contact Centre (including Switchboard), Welfare Rights Unit and Central Interpretation and Translation Unit. Ø To lead the programme of change across the Council arising from the Best Value Review of Access to Services and Implementing Electronic Government Statements. This includes changes focused on improving telephony, extending the range of enquiry points, having more transactions available on the website, generally improving customer satisfaction and efficiency of business processes.
Leeds Initiative The Leeds Initiative is the city's partnership body made up of the private, public, voluntary and community. The Initiative works to achieve the aspirations and priorities identified by the Vision for Leeds 2004 to 2020 the city s 16-year strategy for the economic, environmental, cultural and social wellbeing of the city and its communities. The Vision provides a shared plan, to which everyone is signed up and which is now influencing the plans, strategies and investment decisions of the council and partner organisations that will direct the city forward.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CHIEF EXECUTIVE S DEPARTMENT
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS:
Ø The revised fees structure arising from the new licensing act has resulted in 217k additional income to the authority.
Ø During 2004/05 a new staffing structure was implemented in Customer Services to enable them to have the capability and capacity to deliver the Council s Customer First agenda and the electronic government agenda. In 2005/06 an additional 275k has been provided to fund the full year effects of the restructure.
Ø Additional funding has been allocated to the implementation of the Corporate Contact Centre. The overall aim being to have one single contact centre for the majority of Council Services. 349k will be made available in 2005/06 towards funding new rental accommodation, which would enable a single site Contact Centre and associated IT and telephony revenue costs.
Ø The continued decline in local land charges has been provided for again within the Council s contingency fund.
Ø Deliver cashable efficiencies within Executive Support amounting to 255k
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES STREETSCENE
Main Responsibilities :
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Streetscene Services
The creation of integrated Streetscene services is critical to the achievement of Government targets and corporate priorities to improve the cleanliness of the street environment. Services include:
· Collection of refuse each week from all domestic properties across the Leeds Metropolitan Area (approx. 316,899 properties) · Collection of bulky household items on a four weekly cycle · Collection of dry, recyclable material from approximately 250,000 domestic properties · Collection of medical waste from domestic and commercial premises across Leeds Metropolitan Area · Provision of street sweeping services, both manual and mechanical, to 11,500 roads · Emptying of approximately 250,000 gullies city wide · Prevention and removal of fly tipping, fly posting, needles and graffiti · Management of public conveniences
Recycling and Waste
City Services has a vital role to play in the achievement of the corporate priority, 'All Neighbourhoods are Safe, Clean, Green and Well Maintained . The Department's commitment to developing alternative ways of dealing with waste generated in Leeds will be critical to meeting ambitious Government targets for increasing recycling and reducing the amount of waste going to landfill.
The division provides a recycling and waste disposal service and receive household and municipal waste from the public, Council departments and private companies. The division operates one waste transfer loading stations, 11 household waste sorting sites and manages 10 closed landfill sites at which it monitors emissions of leachate and methane. The division also manages over 340 drop-off sites across Leeds where materials such as paper, cans and glass can be deposited for recycling.
In 2003/04, the service handled over 367,000 tonnes of municipal waste, and is currently implementing stage two of the Integrated Waste Management Strategy in response to DEFRA's Waste Strategy 2000 document. Initiatives are focused on increasing recycling activity which includes a co-ordinated and targeted information and education campaign to promote recycling to the full cross section of people in Leeds.
HIGHWAYS SERVICES
Highways Maintenance currently maintain approximately 2,900km of highways and adjacent footway in Leeds, providing a 24 hours a day, 365 days a year emergency response service. Winter maintenance services include precautionary salting on main and key distributory roads, and removal of snow as required.
The division also manages and maintains over 92,000 street lighting columns, and around 105,000 lights, including signs and bollards, and again providing an all year round emergency response service.
Highways Planning is responsible for monitoring and assessing the condition of the network and for prioritising works accordingly. This section also monitors and controls the activities of utility companies working on the highways.
Traffic Management are responsible for the implementation of traffic regulation orders, and the delivery of local traffic schemes, such as traffic calming initiatives. The section also provides information on the guidance and criteria for pedestrian crossings and requests for new crossings.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES STREETSCENE
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
During 2005/2006 the full Streetscene programme will be rolled out to all areas. The programme, which benefits from improved co-ordination of street scene activities, will incorporate LEAP, anti- graffiti functions and improved street cleansing schedules. In addition responsibility for grass cutting will be incorporated into the Programme as the Department works towards the corporate priority of being Britain s cleanest city.
Despite the fall out of DEFRA funding ( 41k), the department will continue to support recycling activity in multi storey flats.
The budget now reflects the cost to the department of providing community skips to voluntary organisations such as furniture stores ( 32k).
In 2004/2005 City Services received DEFRA funding for the expansion of the kerbside collection of recycled materials to those properties which currently don t receive this service. Despite funding only being receivable for one year, the Department will fund this expansion of the scheme by absorbing additional properties into the current cost of collection for SORT material.
In addition in 2004/2005 DEFRA funded the purchase and placement of 1500 additional recycling litter bins, and the additional costs incurred in emptying these bins. These additional costs will be absorbed within the current cost of service provision in 2005/2006.
Expenditure on disposing of recyclable waste is expected to increase by 262k, and this largely reflects the increased cost associated with the innovative partnership to recycle street arisings rather than dispose of this material in landfill.
The increased cost ( 200k) for the disposal of Streetscene SORT materials reflects the fact that material collected is segregated into separate elements within the U.K. prior to be being forwarded on to the market.
Through the use of unsupported borrowing, a new engine for the generation of electricity will be purchased to replace the current engine at the Gamblethorpe closed landfill site. As a result of this the purchase the new engine, which will be more efficient and economic in the extraction of methane, and the subsequent generation of electricity for sale to the National Grid.
The cost ( 80k) to the department of providing LEAP (Local Environment Action Programme) to all wards across the City six times a year is now provided for within the budget.
The budgeted number of grits within the Winter Maintenance budget has increased to the number required in an average winter.
An additional 525k has been provided to support the capital financing costs associated with a further 8m of unsupported borrowing to deliver an enhanced highway maintenance programme. This increased investment will contribute towards addressing the current level of maintenance backlog to bring the network up to the required condition, and ensures that despite a reduction in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) settlement, expenditure on highway maintenance will continue to increase.
A regular bulky collection service ( 27k) will be provided to households through the consolidation of the service into SORT rounds.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES STREETSCENE
Performance statistics to be included
Total Tonnage of Household Waste arisings - Percentage recycled and composted
2003/04 actual - 14.54%
2004/05 target 22.7%
2005/06 target 24%
Percentage of relevant land and highways that is assessed as having combined deposits of litter and detritus across all 4 cleanliness categories.
2003/04 actual 32%
2004/05 target 27.5%
2005/06 target 26.5%
Condition of the principal road network - the percentage of the network with negative residual life
2003/04 actual 26.46%
2004/05 target 24%
2005/06 target 21%
The percentage of classified non-principal roads that are defective
2003/04 actual 11.67%
2004/05 target 9%
2005/06 target 8%
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES STREETSCENE
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES SUPPORT & FACILITIES
Main Responsibilities :
ENFORCEMENT
The Enforcement Division delivers some of the key services associated with improving the local environment. It is responsible for enforcement activities and policies associated with litter, fly-tipping, commercial waste, dog fouling, stray/abandoned/ dangerous dogs, domestic waste, flyposting, placards, overhanging vegetation, abandoned vehicles, A-boards and other miscellaneous offences. The service also supports agencies addressing graffiti, waste minimisation and untaxed vehicles. The Division is at the forefront of the City Council s zero tolerance approach to environmental crime.
Through the Best Value Service Improvement Plan on Environmental Improvement, the Division takes a prominent lead in coordinating enforcement policies and practices across the authority. This includes taking a steer and responding to Government policies, and implementing new legislation in order to take positive advantage of change.
Work is carried out in response to requests for service and proactively, through intelligence led initiatives and educative approaches. A high profile approach is taken including the use of notices, fixed penalty notices and prosecutions. Partnerships with the Police, trading standards, environment agency and others are fostered and supported to help deliver these aims.
The Division manages, develops and maintains most of the Council's on-street and off-street parking facilities. From March 2005, the Decriminalisation of Car Parking within Leeds will be in place. There is no change to the rules governing parking practices, but the Parking Services section will become responsible for the enforcement duties across the whole City. In summary, this means ensuring parking compliance occurs on car parks and on on-street car parking in paid parking zones; yellow line restrictions and residents only parking zones.
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
Civic and Community Buildings
The responsibility for managing the City's civic and community buildings has been brought together within City Services in order to ensure the effective and consistent utilisation and maintenance of these valuable assets.
The Civic Buildings section provides a full property management and maintenance service to all of the buildings for which it is responsible. The section provides and maintains the office accommodation required by client departments. The section is responsible for the allocation of space, maintenance, refurbishment and operation of approximately 600,000 square feet of occupied office accommodation in 10 City Centre locations, 12 One Stop Centres and Area Offices, plus 6 other district buildings.
The Civic Buildings section is also responsible for the provision of a city-wide mail delivery service to client departments. The Facilities Management section also embraces the provision of facilities management services to a significant number of community centres and other community buildings across the City.
Facilities
City Signs is a production unit, specialising in reflective materials, which manufactures traffic signs for Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees and Calderdale, together with modular signage, street nameplates and specialist commercial projects.
City Print is a print operation producing a range of products for client departments, including leaflets, brochures, invitations, menus and stationery.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES SUPPORT & FACILITIES
Reprographics provides a document copying service to client departments, including collating, binding, finishing and full colour copying.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Following the Decriminalisation of Parking Enforcement in March 2005, the department will take on responsibility for all parking enforcement across the City. The anticipated net cost of this service ( 1,016 Cr) is required to be ring fenced to the provision of highway services.
It is proposed to utilise unsupported borrowing to develop waste land on Kirkstall Road as a car park. After taking account of capital financing costs it is anticipated that this proposal would generate an operating surplus of 40k.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES COMMERCIAL SERVICES
Main Responsibilities :
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SERVICES
Property Maintenance Division provides building and specialist services to the Council s Arms Length Management Organisations (ALMOs) and to Council departments in relation to responsive and other property repairs. It also provides a service and installation function in specialist works and trades, including mechanical and engineering, lifts, asbestos, gas, flooring and major contracts. The Division also provides routine internal building cleaning services for client departments most notably for Housing, Learning and Leisure, Social Services and some external clients.
Property Maintenance also provides Security Services for client departments covering 24 hour central monitoring, 24 hour patrol and alarm response wardens, static guarding and alarm and CCTV installation.
PASSENGER TRANSPORT SERVICES
An integrated passenger transport function has been established within City Services to bring together all fleet management and maintenance services, passenger services and the school crossing patrol service.
Passenger Transport Services carry out key front line duties providing transport services for elderly day care centres, adult training centres, children in the care of the Social Services Department and children with statements of special education needs on behalf of Education Leeds.
The School Crossing Patrol service provides 180 crossing sites within the Leeds boundary to ensure that pedestrians cross safely. Crossing Patrols are now legally empowered to stop traffic and to cross any pedestrians, not just children.
Vehicle Management and Maintenance services manage the provision of vehicles and plant required by the Council's operational departments. This service is also responsible for the regulatory safety inspection of the fleet, together with the routine service and repair of over 1,000 vehicles. In addition, the team operates a fuel management service which provides fuelling facilities for all Council departments from various sites across the City.
CATERING
Catering services are provided to clients in Education and commercial outlets. The service runs its own frozen food sales and distribution operation. In Education, the service currently provides meals to 238 primary and special schools, 29 high schools and 28 nurseries. It also provides catering facilities for members of the general public in commercial outlets, and functions catering within the Civic Hall and other Council buildings.
CLEANING SERVICES
Comprehensive internal building cleaning services are also provided to Education establishments across the City.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CITY SERVICES COMMERCIAL SERVICES
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CORPORATE SERVICES
MAIN RESPONSIBILITIES:
Audit & Risk To provide an independent and objective assurance on the control environment established to help the council achieve its objectives. To develop, promote and implement good practice in risk management and project management to help the Council achieve its objectives. To co-ordinate the Council s response to an emergency, produce plans and meet statutory requirements. Also ensure that integrated plans are developed with all departments and relevant agencies. best practice in risk management and project centres of excellence to Financial Development / Financial Management To provide overall strategic financial management of the Council s finances. To maximise the Council s financial resources within levels of acceptable risk. To promote efficient and effective stewardship of assets and resources. To ensure compliance with statutory financial obligations
Revenues, Benefits & Student Support To provide an integrated and inclusive Benefits Service that is prompt, accurate, secure and sensitive to the needs of the Citizens of Leeds and other stakeholders. Determining the appropriate level of financial support for all H.E. students in Leeds. Maximising the collection of local taxation and other income from the residents and businesses in Leeds.
IT Services Maintain and develop the Council s ICT infrastructure to support changing business needs, and which enables all users to have access to the required information and systems in order to provide excellent services to the citizens of Leeds and other stakeholders. Support, develop and implement technical solutions covering hardware, software and telecoms which underpin all Council services. Support 10,000 telephone handsets over 530 Council sites, over 7000 networked devices over 350 Council sites, and over 11,000 PCs.
Human Resources Undertake modern recruitment and planning processes to ensure we have a workforce that meets the current and future needs of services and reflects the diversity of Leeds. Ensure that pay and reward packages are fair, sustainable and support the delivery of flexible services. Review and update the Council's employment terms and conditions in line with national agreements providing flexibility when feasible. Ensure employees are safe with health and welfare interests protected and attendance properly managed so that they can provide excellent services. Help managers properly manage attendance and significantly reduce absence. Develop the council and its workforce to have the capacity and capability to achieve excellent performance. Develop a culture of high performance and improvement and support all employees to maximise their contribution to council's aims.
Support Services (including Employee Administration Service) Provide an efficient support service that adds value to the department To pay all Council employees, provide pensions advice and administration and maintain employees records Develop the council and its workforce to have the capacity and capability to achieve excellent performance. Develop a culture of high performance and improvement and support all employees to maximise their contribution to council's aims.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CORPORATE SERVICES
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS:
Ø Homeworking and Workflow pilot schemes within the Benefit service which will attract external funding of 610k
Ø Lead and provide support for implementation of the Gershon agenda across the Council. Corporate Services will also take the lead on several cross cutting efficiency reviews.
Ø Continued development of the integrated Council Tax and Benefits computer system, including the delivery of savings amounting to 250k
Ø Complete the implementation of the Network Infrastructure Project
Ø Complete the decommissioning of the mainframe computer and realise savings of 655k
Ø Delivery of the ICT development programme which is essential to support key service initiatives such as the new corporate Contact Centre
Ø Continued development of risk management throughout the Council
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com STRATEGY AND POLICY
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Sustainable Development - Environmental Management, Policy and Awareness, Design, Landscape and Conservation Area/ Listed Building advice, Tree protection, Minerals, Waste and Contaminated Land.
Ø Transport Policy - Local Transport Plan; Environmental Assessment; Road Safety; and Policy Monitoring.
Ø Planing and Economic Policy - Unitary Development Plan; Local Development Framework; Economic Strategy; Planning Frameworks/Briefs; and Project Implementation.
Ø Urban Traffic Management Control - managing the signal control system for the benefit of all road users.
Ø Graphics and Communications - providing Graphic Design and Mapping services in support of departmental and corporate activity and developing Internet / Intranet communications.
Ø Supertram - providing the City Council's input on the transportation and town planing aspects of this major initiative.
.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø Additional resources have been included to enable the Department to implement Local Development Frameworks.
Ø The staffing budget has been increased to enable the Department to employ an additional planner to work on contaminated land issues.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ASSET MANAGEMENT
Main Responsibilities :
Ø The aim is to provide a seamless Asset Management Service, which drives continuous improvement in the Council s property portfolio.
Ø The Service assists client departments to deliver corporate objectives by;
- Assisting with development of large capital schemes - Co-ordination of Private Finance Initiatives across the Council - Providing professional property advice - Assisting in the implementation of specific asset management based projects.
Ø In addition to the above the Markets Division provides and manages the Retail Market facility in the City Centre and at various town centres across the Leeds District.
Ø As the Council is a major land and property owner in the City, the Asset Management Services plays a key role in helping to shape the physical development of Leeds along with other Services of the Authority.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø Over 2000 office based staff relocated in 2004/05. This will lead to the release of two office buildings in 2005/06.
Ø A major review of the Council s investment property portfolio is now well underway.
Ø Additional resources have been included in the Facilities Development Unit (FDU) to enable the Unit to provide the level of support required to departments delivering Private Finance Initiative schemes, across a range of services
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com DESIGN SERVICES
Main Responsibilities :
The Service provides a design consultancy service to support the Council s Capital Programme. Main responsibilities include:
Ø Design and specification of major and minor highway schemes; transportation projects; and major Council sponsored prestige projects Ø Bridge assessment and strengthening, together with the management of the Authoritys structures in accordance with national programmes and standards Ø Provision of a geotechnical and site surveying consultancy service including topographical and soil surveys. Ø Provide the full range of architectural professional design service to support the capital programme. Ø Undertake all the statutory responsibilities of the Council as the land drainage authority for the Leeds Metropolitan District.
.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø The service apart from the land drainage function and General Maintenance (Structures Revenue) function is fully rechargeable, with a large proportion of its income being generated through fees from the capital programme. For 2005/06 work is programmed to be undertaken on Briggate Phase 2; East Leeds Link; High Royds Menston; New Hunslet Primary School.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Planning Services - planning applications and appeals, putting strategies and policies into practice.
Ø Highways Development Services - addressing the highways implications of development and working to deliver the Local Transport Plan.
Ø Building Standards - providing building regulation and public safety services.
Ø Compliance Services - monitoring compliance with the Council's planning decisions and dealing positively with breaches of control.
Ø Development Enquiry Centre - providing customer focused one-stop services for the whole of the Development department, face to face, by phone and, increasingly, through electronic chanels.
Budget Highlights 2004/05 :
Ø The budget includes additional resources for the Planning Service as a result of the increased activity in the development market. It recognises the continuing need to ensure performance targets are met, to secure additional funding through the Planning Delivery Grant whilst maintaining service quality.
Ø The budget is further supported by increases in the level of Planning Delivery Grant, Building Regulation and Planning Application Fees reflecting the buoyant development in the city. Additional income has also been included in anticipation of the introduction of pre-application charges for major developments.
Ø Additional resources have been included to enable the Department to implement document imaging.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ECONOMIC SERVICES
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Economic Services is all about attracting people, jobs and investment to the City.
Ø Key themes for the service are;
- Urban renaissance and regeneration - Investment and development - Competitiveness of Leeds as a place, and of Leeds Businesses. - Leeds profile image.
Ø Economic Services comprises 5 service areas;
- Business & Enterprise Inward Investment & Marketing, Business Support and attracting funding. - City Centre Management - Civic Architect - Major Developments Major Developments, Area Regeneration/Neighbourhood Renewal - Tourism
Ø Economic Services works in partnership to provide quality services that meets the needs of customers and stakeholders. The services help to deliver the Vision for Leeds and the Council Plan.
Budget Highlights 2005/06:
Ø Additional resources have been included to enable the Department to provide enhanced business growth incentive schemes.
Ø Additional grant and expenditure of 79k is included for City Centre Management as a result of a successful bid to the European Commission for the City Image project.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com EDUCATION
Main Responsibilities :
SCHOOL BASED EDUCATION
Ø Securing the health, happiness, safety, success and high achievement for all children and young people. Ø Raising outcomes, achievements and standards. Ø Improving attendance and behaviour. Ø Developing the potential of all staff.
OTHER EDUCATION SERVICES
Ø Ensuring the highest standard of education for children in Leeds which builds on school improvement strategies within an inclusive environment. Ø Enhancing the capacity of schools by improving the quality of governance, leadership, management, teaching and learning so that schools become self-managing and autonomous. Ø Ensuring that Education Leeds makes effective use of all available resources and offers support to schools through the provision or procurement of high quality services. Ø Working in partnership to remove educational, social, cultural and economic barriers to learning and inclusive communities. Ø Developing models of school organisations and provision which make effective use of resources, promote school improvement through partnership, provide access and have innovative and collaborative learning pathways for pupils
Budget Effects 2005/06
The Education funding settlement has been increased nationally by 5.65%. The Leeds Education Formula Spending Share (EFSS) increase of 5.08%, 18.4m, is slightly below the national average due to demographic and socio-economic factors.
The 16.9m increase in the Schools FSS Block has been fully passported into the Schools Block budget and split 1.9m to meet required increases in the centrally retained elements of the schools block and 15.0m for the Individual Schools Budget (ISB). The increase in the ISB will need to fund a number of budget pressures including 10.6m for pay and price increases, 1.4m for workforce reform in primary schools, 1.8m for PFI, 0.4m for premises costs and 0.5m for the teaching assistants career structure. These pressures are offset by -1.8m due to demography and -1.4m for school closures and reorganisation savings. Proposals to allocate ISB budget growth of 3.4m have been consulted on with schools and the Schools Forum.
The provisional level of direct grant support from the Learning and Skills Council to schools for post- 16 provision for 2005/06 is 26.7m, an increase of 2.4m (10%). Generally grant funding to schools has been increased by 4% in cash terms.
The Client Administered budget has increased by 1.4m, 1.2m of which is due to the accounting treatment for pension costs under Financial Reporting Standard (FRS)17, which has no impact on Council Tax as the effect of the adjustment is reversed by a contribution to the new Pensions Reserve. A number of budgetary pressures, trends and service developments have been addressed, including 0.3m for pay, prices/maternity costs and 0.9m for BSF/PFI development costs offset by additional Standards Fund/other grant income of -0.7m and savings on Recoupment of -0.2m.
It is proposed to increase the Education Leeds contract for 2005/06 by 3.7m. This increase allows 1.4m for pay and price inflation, 0.4m of additional ICT costs, 0.4m for pressures on Home to School Transport, School Improvement/Intervention 0.4m, Pupil Referral Service 0.5m, 1.1m for additional retained Standards Fund schemes and 0.3m for BSF/PFI staffing costs. These pressures are offset by reduced spending of -0.3m on Primary and Secondary Partnerships, -0.1m for special needs educated in the independent sector, -0.1m for Leeds Learning network and -0.2m increased use of the Education Leeds operating surplus. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com EDUCATION
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com RECREATION
Main Responsibilities :
The Recreation Services of Parks and Countryside and Sport and Active Recreation support Council objectives by;
Providing directly and supporting the development of Recreation and sporting opportunities for all people to enjoy.
Ensuring an enjoyable and sustainable environment for all through the creation, management and enhancement of parks and greenspaces.
Encouraging people to be more healthy through greater involvement in physical activity.
Providing opportunities for self development and learning through involvement in sporting a d environmental activity.
Taking the strategic lead in the development of recreational and sporting opportunities in Leeds.
Helping to support the City's growing reputation as a great place to live, work and play.
Delivering targeted programmes to ensure those individuals at greatest risk are afforded the chances to be involved in recreation and sporting activities.
Setting clear priorities, supporting the development of staff and managing performance effectively.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
The 2005/06 budget provides for 500k for increased expenditure to improve the environment in urban parks, a 100k increase for improvements in allotments and public rights of way and a further 400k has been injected for the Parkswatch scheme. Also an additional 50k has been included for grounds maintenance costs, relating principally to Section 106 agreements and 160k retained in the budget for an additional grass cut during the year.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com RECREATION
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEARNING
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Youth Services To provide a range of programmes and projects across the city, for the priority age range of 13 to 19 year olds, designed to contribute to young people s social inclusion and lifelong learning. Programmes include detached work with young people at risk, diversionary crime schemes, health education projects, information services, employment and educational attainment initiatives, and outdoor activities. The service will also continue the development and implementation of the Connexions agenda with other departments and agencies.
Ø Education Client Management & Monitoring- Ø To ensure the delivery of the statutory education functions of the Council;
Ø To provide professional education advice to Members and officers within the Council and support the development of the Council s policy and strategy on educational matters;
Ø To monitor the contract with, and the performance of, Education Leeds.
Ø To be responsible for the Children and Young People s Strategic Partnership Development Team
Ø Early Years Services
Ø To provide high quality early education and childcare in 27 Early Years Centres and 8 Integrated Children s Centres. Approximately 1500 pre school places and 500 out of school places are available. The Service gives priority to children in need and to parents entering training and employment.
Ø To promote high quality, integrated services through the development of children centres in each of the wards of social disadvantage.
Ø To provide training, advice, support and development work on early education and childcare across all sectors through the Early ears Development Team.
Ø To convene the Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership (EYDCP) which is charged with improving the quality of early education and childcare across all sectors and increasing the number of childcare and out of school places for families. Also to provide with the EYDCP a comprehensive Childcare Information Service for parents across the City.
Ø Jobs and Skills
Ø Aims to assist local people to find and retain employment supported by the provision of high quality learning and skills, and to provide further education and work-based learning opportunities for all through adult and community learning programmes in partnership with employers and colleges. Ø Operates from six centres across Leeds which deliver the whole range of New Deal Programmes as well as Work Based Learning Programmes for adults and young people. In addition,, a growing number of projects complementary to the mainstream provision are also supported, from the EQUAL e-Employability Development Partnership to Job Route and the Outreach workers who support the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. Ø Enables the Council to meet its targets for the recruitment of workless people.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LEARNING
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Youth Service
Continuation of the Positive Action for Young People (Out of School Activities) scheme 544k. The service was allocated 475k from West Yorkshire Connexions and NRF for the Connexions Youth Initiative.
Early Years Services
The service has been allocated 4.82m capital funding and 1.6 m revenue funding between 2004/05 and 2005/06 to develop 11 children s centres, in addition to the 8 already in existence. This will create 716 new childcare places on top of the 720 places to be created through the neighbourhood nursery initiative programme. Also, the Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership has been allocated an additional 1.46m General Sure Start Grant to deliver the Children s Centre programme and to develop other childcare services across all sectors in Leeds.
Jobs and Skills
Continuation of 250k additional expenditure, fully funded, for expansion of Extended Neighbourhood Networks.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LIBRARIES, ARTS AND HERITAGE
Main Responsibilities :
The Libraries, Arts and Heritage Service aims to support the corporate and departmental objectives by;
Taking a key role in regeneration and inclusion
Ø Make Leeds a great place to live and visit by encouraging active participation for all in the cultural and creative life of the city
Ø Help people explore and communicate their history, sense of place, their roots and their sense of community
Taking a key role in Lifelong Learning Ø Support citizenship, equality and democracy
Ø Promote lifelong learning to encourage individuality, expression self development, achievement and to foster new creative talent
Pursuing Excellence Ø Ensure the customer is at the heart of everything we do Rigorously manage priorities, processes and performance (including training, improving communication, ICT, marketing) to exceed expectation
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
The additional revenue effects ( 50k) of capital investment in the libraries at Otley and Horsforth have been included. A further 50k has of Corporate Plan Priority work has been included for Leedscard. The 2005/06 budget provides for the reopening following refurbishment of Leeds Town Hall and a 10% increase in the Book Fund.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com LIBRARIES, ARTS AND HERITAGE
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING STRATEGIC LANDLORD
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Provision of housing services to 63,000 tenancies via the Arms Length Management Organisations.
Ø Administration of enquiries and applications by tenants under the Right to Buy legislation.
Ø Management of services to leaseholders.
Ø Consultation and involvement of tenants in all aspects of departmental services.
Ø Administration of enquiries and applications by tenants under the Right to Buy legislation.
Ø Responsible for overall management and strategy of Council housing in the city, including research and development.
Ø Housing Needs : - Management of a number of specific services to groups of tenants such as Heating, Central Alarm Service, Hostels, Sheltered Housing.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø The budget includes the allocation to the Arms Length Management Organisations, which took responsibility for managing the Council s stock of housing from February 2003. The revenue repairs budget, managed on behalf of the Council by the ALMOs, has been increased by 8% per property.
Ø Rents have increased by 4.55% on average, in line with Government guidelines, and equate to an average 2.15 per week over a 48-week period. Individual rents will increase by varying amounts, which is due to the Authority implementing the Government s 10-year rent restructuring policy, of which 2005/06 is the fourth year. Under this policy individual tenants are protected from large increases in rent by the Government s expectation that rents will not increase by inflation + 0.5% +/- 2 per week.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Main Responsibilities :
Ø The Environmental Health Service exists to improve the health, wellbeing, and environment for all communities in Leeds. This is achieved by activities in respect of regeneration, environmental management, housing conditions, and public health.
Ø Our contribution is by way of the following themes:
Ø Food related health issues; we address food safety in the city through a range of mechanisms including education, the inspection of food businesses, investigation of complaints about food, food premises and reports of food poisoning. We sample a range of foods and water supplies.
Ø Health, Safety, & Welfare (predominantly at work); we provide health and safety courses and enforce health and safety legislation in the service sector through inspections. We investigate accidents and complaints about health, welfare, and safety at work.
Ø Pollution control; we regulate premises likely to pollute the atmosphere, monitor air quality and old landfill sites, and investigate complaints about nuisance and pollution.
Ø Pest Control; we provide pest control services in homes and businesses, dealing with rats, mice, wasps, fleas, and other insect pests.
Ø Animal Welfare; we enforce animal health legislation in respect of welfare of livestock at markets and during transportation.
Ø Housing; we assist landlords, private tenants and owner-occupiers with environmental health concerns. We invest over 8 million per annum to tackle poor housing conditions, targeting inner city areas of poor housing to support the Council s regeneration strategy. We give priority to meeting the needs of disabled, elderly and vulnerable people, and improving unfit housing and poor energy efficient housing.
Ø Environmental impacts on health & nuisance problems; we provide advice and information on environmental problems such as noise, air pollution, rubbish, and housing disrepair, all of which could affect people s health.
Budget Highlights 2006/06 :
Ø New, and changes to existing, licensing legislation has necessitated the introduction of additional resources in anticipation of a vastly increased workload.
Ø The Chemical Advisory Service has been transferred to City Services.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING HOUSING NEEDS
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Advice on homelessness, including prevention; investigation of applications & provision of temporary accommodation and resettlement.
Ø Implementation of the Council's Homelessness Strategy.
Ø The settlement of refugees into the City.
Ø The provision of accommodation and support to Asylum Seekers through a Government contract.
Ø Provision of a 48-plot site for travellers at Cottingley, and dealing with illegal encampments in other parts of the city.
Ø The provision of 145 Sheltered Housing Schemes.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø The pressure of homelessness is expected to continue in this year. Whilst substantial efforts have contributed towards reducing the levels of homelessness, an amount in excess of 2.3m is budgeted to support this service. The service will ensure that recovery of associated Housing Benefit is maximised to reduce the overall cost of this service.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING REGENERATION
Main Responsibilities :
Area Management and Neighbourhood Renewal Teams.
Ø To provide an area management service which focuses on local priorities, improving services and involving communities.
Ø To co-ordinate activities in regeneration priority areas and put in place arrangements to guide comprehensive long term renewal in them.
Ø To support the development of area based partnerships.
Regeneration Projects.
Ø To co-ordinate and implement major projects to improve neighbourhoods and prospects for local people.
Regeneration Co-ordination (Partnerships, Resources and Strategy).
Ø To identify and manage resources for regeneration and service improvement priorities and to target resources to identified needs.
Ø To provide resources and support to the voluntary and community sector. To work with partners at local, city and regional level and support the work of strategic partnerships within the city and sub- region.
Ø To develop and promote community cohesion work within the community.
Ø To lead on strategy and policy work to develop the Neighbourhoods and Housing agenda.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Ø The Area Committees have responsibility for revenue and capital Wellbeing monies of 1.89m and 1.5m respectively.
REGENERATION PROGRAMMES
Ø Strategies have been prepared to re-organise and stabilise staff structures in the face of the ending of SRB programmes and budgets.
REGENERATION PROJECTS
Ø New teams are planned to deliver projects including the regeneration of East and South East Leeds (EASEL), the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) and Joint Service Centres and Low Demand Housing.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOOD AND HOUSING COMMUNITY SAFETY
Main Responsibilities :
Ø To secure sustainable reductions in crime and disorder and address the fear of crime in the city, through a number of specific programmes delivered under the Community Safety Partnership strategy, and through supporting the Partnership in its work.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Leeds Community Safety
Ø There are a number of developments, some of which are a continuation of programmes started in previous years. The 2005/06 budget continues to reflect the fact that a number of grants are payable to Leeds Community Safety Partnership (LCSP), and those grants are allocated by LCSP to numerous agencies including Council departments, to deliver the required programmes.
Ø The key schemes are listed below.
Safer and Stronger Communities Fund (Building Safer Communities)
Ø In 2004/05 the Home Office amalgamated both the Community Against Drugs and the Safer Communities Initiative into one initiative titled Building Safer Communities. In 2004/05 the total grant from the Home Office to LCSP was 1.306m, which included 906k in respect of Community Against Drugs initiatives and 400k in respect of Safer Community initiatives. From 2005/06 the BSC fund will be incorporated into the Safer and Stronger Communities Fund, but the amount going to LCSP is expected to remain the same. Decisions on the allocation to the Department are yet to be finalised. If the allocation remains as per 2004/05, it is estimated the department will be allocated 513k, of which 216k will be used to contribute towards the cost of Locality Community Safety Co-ordinators posts in specific geographical areas. The balance of monies will finance project work, for example, alleygating.
Anti-Social Behaviour Unit
Ø The city-wide initiative delivers the service from locally based teams and is now fully staffed at a cost to the department of 1.86m in 2005/06, largely funded through SRB and NRF. The increased activity as a result of the trailblazing pro-active work that has been undertaken has resulted in increased legal costs, estimated at 405k in 2005/06.
Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs)
Ø The city-wide initiative with the Police to increase the number of Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) across Leeds has been reflected in the 2005/06 budget at a gross cost of 822k, of which 151K will be funded through NRF.
Neighbourhood and Street Wardens
Ø Neighbourhood and Street Wardens Service gross expenditure in 2005/06 is 1,017k, of which 265k is representative of the Street Wardens.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NEIGHBOURHOOD AND HOUSING COMMUNITY SAFETY
Leeds Watch Local CCTV Initiative
Ø The Home Office funded scheme to establish CCTV in local centres was completed in 2003/04. The 2005/06 revenue costs of 1.019m reflect the recurring costs of monitoring and maintenance of the service. Included are costs associated with the city-centre, together with 90k in respect of the revenue costs of deploying two mobile service monitoring units that will operate city-wide, and the running costs of establishing a further ten permanent CCTV cameras in crime and disorder hotspots around the city. NRF contribute 215k towards the running costs of the Leeds Watch Local initiative.
Burglary Reduction Initiative
Ø Community Action and Support Against Crime (CASAC) are continuing to receive support to undertake security work to properties affected by repeat burglary. The department will provide 511k in total to support the scheme, which also includes supporting First Contact , which is a scheme designed to allow vulnerable people, who may fall victim to unscrupulous trades people, access to approved services. The funding for this service is met by NRF.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
Main Responsibilities :
ADULT SERVICES
For all adults aged between 18-65 years the Department provides support services where required for vulnerable groups such as adults with Mental Health problems, Learning Disabilities or Physical and Sensory Impairment by
Ø Assessing the care and support needs of adults and their carers Ø Providing support to enable people with special needs to live as independently and as safely as possible in their own homes and communities and to safeguard them from abuse and neglect Ø Providing choice in daily living through the promotion of self-managed care or the provision of personal assistant services, housing support, equipment and adaptations to promote independence, residential and day services, home-delivered meal services and housing support and warden services Ø Ensuring appropriate care for those most vulnerable people through the provision of residential and day care services Ø Providing assessments, services and support for carers.
OLDER PEOPLE SERVICES
For older people aged 65 years or over the Department provides a range of services suitable for this client group. These include
Ø Assessing the care and support needs of older people and their carers Ø Arranging and directly providing help for older people to live as independently and as safely as possible in their own homes and communities and to safeguard them from abuse and neglect Ø Promoting independence and self reliance in daily living through the promotion of self managed care or the provision of home care services, extra care housing support and equipment and adaptations Ø Managing the care of those older people eligible for statutory social services Ø Ensuring appropriate care for those most vulnerable older people through the provision and purchase of specialist nursing, residential and day care placements Ø Providing assessments, services and support for carers.
CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES
For children and their families the Department supports the most vulnerable young people in our city those in need, disabled, requiring protection, in trouble with the law, need to be cared for away from home, who are leaving care, or are homeless by
Ø Assessing the care and support needs of children in need and their families Ø Supporting families and children in their own homes Ø Providing a range of family support services, including family resource centres, to prevent the need for children to become looked after and to re-establish them with their families where this is appropriate Ø Arranging and supporting foster care and adoptions for children Ø Providing or arranging care in children s homes Ø Co-ordinating and managing the Child Protection responsibility in the City to assist children most at risk from harm and neglect Ø Supporting the Youth Offending Service
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
The Social Services budget for 2005/06 has increased by 18.3m compared with the 2004/05 budget and is based on the start of a challenging programme of service improvement and business reconfiguration across the Department. 4.8m reflects new funding to replace former government grants, whilst changes relating to pensions, central charges and capital charges amount to an increase of 2.5m.
Pressures continue to be experienced within the community care budget, with additional provision of 2.8m being included for residential and nursing care and 3.6m for domiciliary care. Additional provision of 1.0m has been made for the Joint Commissioning Service for People with Learning Disabilities. The Access and Systems Capacity Grant has increased by 1.7m and this has been used to part fund the increase in the community care budget. A reduction in costs of 1.0m is included for the reconfiguration of services for older people and a reduction of 0.8m reflects a review of meals service delivery. A 1.5m increase in the budget provision for direct payment will be funded from those services that these payments will replace. A reduction of 1.6m is included for a change in the level at which people are eligible for statutory services from the Department. Of this, 0.3m is being invested to support the development of services to which people can be signposted, including voluntary organisations and social enterprises.
Additional funding of 1.9m has been included within the children s services budget to reflect higher numbers of children looked after than budgeted for 2004/05, partly offset by 1.0m for planned reductions in numbers during 2005/06. In addition, provision of 0.6m has been made to start to move closer to nationally recommended payment rates for foster carers. Reduced costs of 0.4m have been included for a reconfiguration of children s services and less reliance on expensive outside placements. Specific grants for children s services have increased by 0.8m.
Additional provision of 4.6m has been included within the staffing budget to address the ongoing effects of spending pressures in 2004/05 and eliminate the turnover factor in residential services. Budget pressures within the transport budget of 1.3m have included for 2005/06, partly offset by 0.8m through a review of departmental transport policy. Cost reductions of 0.7m have been included for general running expenses.
Housing Benefit and Supporting People income has reduced by 0.8m to reflect potential changes relating to registration matters and contract reviews. A reduction in budgeted income of 1.0m from fees and charges to reflect the position in 2004/05 is partly offset by 0.5m from a review of charging policies. Government grants to support training have increased by 1.4m. Efficiency savings across the Department amounting to 5.3m have been identified and included within the 2005/06 budget.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CENTRAL ACCOUNTS : SUMMARY
Latest Latest Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Service 2004/05 2004/05 2005/06 Type Of Expenditure 2004/05 2004/05 2005/06 000s 000s 000s 000s 000s 000s
Strategic Accounts Employees Contingencies and Provisions 2,650 1,197 3,050 Pension Costs 4,494 18,642 19,552 Other Corporate Accounts -4,844 1,369 7,711 4,494 18,642 19,552 Net Cost of Service -2,194 2,566 10,761 Premises Rent & NNDR 1 1 1 Asset Management Revenue Account Other Premises Costs -83 -83 0 Asset Management Revenue Account -63,399 -71,968 -77,161 -82 -82 1 Net Cost of Service -63,399 -71,968 -77,161 Supplies & Services Professional Fees 6 6 6 Corporate & Democratic Core Contingency Fund 2,600 1,146 3,000 Democratic Representation & Management 10,375 10,375 10,038 Corporate Plan Priorities 1,400 305 0 Corporate Management 4,651 4,651 5,019 Hospitality -125 -125 -125 Contribution from HRA -1,231 -1,231 -1,291 Cross-Cutting Issues -1,500 -1,500 -2,638 Net Cost of Service 13,795 13,795 13,766 Miscellaneous 92 -409 67 Grants & Contributions 684 773 605 Non Distributable Costs 3,157 196 915 Non Distributable Costs 6,426 5,451 4,040 Net Cost of Service 6,426 5,451 4,040 Internal Charges Customer Services 0 0 306 Joint Committees Other Charges -46 -46 1,012 Trading Standards 1,115 1,115 1,159 Central IT -2,886 -2,886 -1,059 Archives and Archaeology 479 479 498 Charges for Surplus IT Systems 1,411 1,411 0 Grants to Other Bodies 490 490 510 Central Financial Services 1,049 1,049 811 Unfunded Pensions 414 414 431 Central Legal Charges -196 -196 313 Probation 24 24 25 Central Human Resources 240 240 384 Flood Defence 130 130 51 Corporate and Democratic Core 15,026 15,026 15,057 West Yorkshire Passenger Transport 21,283 21,195 22,135 14,598 14,598 16,824 Coroners Service 838 838 854 West Yorkshire Magistrates Court Committee 2,040 1,910 0 Agency Payments Net Cost of Service 26,813 26,595 25,663 Payments to External Agencies 27,184 27,096 26,869 27,184 27,096 26,869 Miscellaneous Accounts Leeds Bradford Airport 31 31 70 Appropriations Discontinued Services 1,201 324 1,004 Transfers to/from G.F. Reserve -2,300 -591 2,975 Miscellaneous 760 1,163 874 Transfers to/from Earmarked Reserves -4,855 -5,115 -3,741 Departmental Management & Support Services -821 -821 -765 Transfers to/from Pensions Reserve -5,015 -20,040 -20,040 Net Cost of Service 1,171 697 1,183 -12,170 -25,746 -20,806
Capital Total Net Cost of Service -17,388 -22,864 -21,748 Minimum Revenue Provision 18,127 22,247 24,705 Capital Charges to H.R.A. -24,318 -29,055 -33,620 Appropriations Capital Financing Charges -105,284 -110,176 -122,121 Transfers to/from Reserves -12,170 -25,746 -20,806 External Interest Paid 49,431 46,351 54,304 -12,170 -25,746 -20,806 -62,044 -70,633 -76,732
Total Expenditure -24,863 -35,929 -33,377 Net Revenue Charge -29,558 -48,610 -42,554
Internal Income Charges to Other Departments -20 -20 -100 HRA Contribution to C.D.C. -1,231 -1,231 -1,291 -1,251 -1,251 -1,391
Income - Grants Government Grants -186 -182 1,267 -186 -182 1,267
Income - Other Other Income -2,710 -10,268 -8,064 Interest / Dividends -548 -980 -989 -3,258 -11,248 -9,053
Total Income -4,695 -12,681 -9,177
Net Revenue Charge -29,558 -48,610 -42,554
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com CENTRAL ACCOUNTS
Main Responsibilities :
Ø Contingencies and provisions general contingency for uncertainties and provision in respect of European Initiatives.
Ø Items which do not specifically relate to any of the Council's other functional headings including continuing costs of discontinued operations, interest earned on revenue balances and general income sources not attributable to a specific service. Also included are subscriptions to regional associations and assemblies and specific grants to local organisations.
Ø The Council s contribution to a number of Joint Committees and other bodies established to provide a range of county wide services, including regional flood defence and the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority.
Ø The Asset Management Revenue Account converts the notional charges made for fixed assets in individual service accounts into the true capital financing costs of the Authority.
Ø Under the Best Value Accounting Code of Practice (BVACOP) certain defined overheads are charged to a Non Distributed Costs. In 2005/06, this account comprises the estimated present value of the total future costs of VER and added years pension decisions made during the year. In the 2004/05 budget, the costs associated with unused shares of IT facilities were also included.
Ø Under BVACOP the costs of both Corporate Management and Democratic Representation and Management cannot be treated as service expenditure and are accounted for centrally in a Corporate and Democratic Core account. For Leeds City Council the expenditure charged to this account includes the activities and costs which provide the infrastructure which allows services to be provided, the cost of providing information which is required for public accountability, and the cost of member activities.
Budget Highlights 2005/06 :
Ø The budget includes central contingencies. For 2005/06 the Contingency Fund has been set at 3m. Releases from contingency will be subject to authorisation in line with Financial Procedure Rules.
Ø Funding for Neighbourhood Renewal Fund schemes (NRF) to be provided via the Education Standards Fund amounting to 1.3m has been included in the Strategic budget.
Ø The budget for 2005/06 includes 1.1m for cross cutting efficiencies, to be allocated across departmental budgets at a later stage as part of a delivery action plan.
Ø A budget of 2m income anticipated from the Business Growth Initiative has been included for 2005/06.
Ø During the year it is expected that up to 1.5m expenditure classified as revenue within the budget, will in fact be more properly chargeable to capital schemes. The Miscellaneous budget therefore reflects this adjustment.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com TABLE 3
STAFFING REQUIREMENTS (FULL TIME EQUIVALENTS)
Total staff as at 31st DEPARTMENT March 2006
Development 898
City Services 3,782
Corporate Services 1,123
Learning and Leisure 13,586
Neighbourhood and Housing 1,237
Chief Executive's 740
Social Services 5,098
TOTAL 26,464
Notes:
1. Includes teachers:
Education (included in Learning and Leisure) 5,829 Social Services 19 5,848
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CITY BUDGET
Original % per Estimate of Band D 2005/06 Total Property
000s
EXPENDITURE
Employee Expenses 399,370 23 1,763 Premises Related Expenditure 60,635 3 268 Other Supplies and Services 212,283 12 937 Transport 28,832 2 127 Transfer Payments 502,557 29 2,219 Internal Charges 305,436 18 1,348 Capital Charges 45,768 3 202 Agency 177,710 10 785
TOTAL GROSS EXPENDITURE 1,732,591 100 7,649
INCOME
Grants 330,175 37 1,458 Internal Income 374,846 42 1,655 Rents 0 0 0 Income Charges 173,915 19 768 Interest 0 0 0 Other Income 24,216 3 107
TOTAL GROSS INCOME 903,152 100 3,987
COST OF CITY COUNCIL SERVICES 829,439 3,662
Contribution to/(from) FRS 17 Reserves (26,500) (117) Contribution to/(from) Other Earmarked Reserves (2,054) (9)
NET COST OF CITY COUNCIL SERVICES 800,885 3,536
Contribution to/(from) General Fund Reserves 2,975 13
NET REVENUE CHARGE 803,860 3,549
Notes: Number of Band D equivalent properties is 226,508
Total Individual School Budgets (ISB) has been analysed at a subjective level in the above table. This provisional spend is based on previous expenditure patterns but will be subject to final determination by individual schools.
(ii)
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com TABLE 1
STATEMENT OF REVISED ESTIMATE 2004/05 AND ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2005/06
2004/05 2005/06
DEPARTMENT ORIGINAL LATEST ORIGINAL ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE
000s 000s 000s
Development Design Services 598 871 701 Strategy & Policy 6,666 9,131 13,126 Planning & Development 2,399 2,488 2,322 Economic Services 3,498 3,412 5,110 Asset Management 883 1,230 309
City Services Commercial Services 515 583 492 Streetscene Services 34,531 37,461 37,468 Highways 40,258 40,570 40,742 Support and Facilities (2,579) (2,528) (4,023) Corporate Services Corporate Financial Services (10) 284 0 Revenue Services 0 168 0 Student Support 803 817 834 Leeds Benefits Service 0 79 0 Cost of Collection 5,064 5,064 4,949 Information Technology 1,325 1,822 0 Human Resources 0 (16) 0 Audit and Risk Management 126 205 333
Learning and Leisure Learning 35,017 34,277 37,993 Libraries, Arts And Heritage 28,858 28,895 29,367 Recreation 25,603 28,493 30,673 Education 387,076 392,439 414,671 Neighbourhood and Housing Community Safety 2,821 2,857 3,530 Regeneration 8,067 9,872 8,864 Housing Needs 2,989 2,703 3,662 Environmental Health 14,773 10,449 12,394 Housing Benefit (374) (374) 1,845 Chief Executive's Legal and Democratic Service (47) (298) (511) Executive Support 0 116 0 Customer Services 2,688 2,810 3,450 Leeds Initiative 474 491 526 Social Services 184,024 195,413 202,360 786,046 809,784 851,187
Central Accounts (17,388) (22,864) (21,748)
NET COST OF DEPARTMENTAL SPENDING 768,658 786,920 829,439
Earmarked Reserves: FRS17 (4,847) (24,088) (26,500) Other (3,322) (4,052) (2,054)
NET COST OF CITY COUNCIL SERVICES 760,489 758,780 800,885
Contribution to/(from) General Fund Reserves (2,300) (591) 2,975
NET REVENUE CHARGE 758,189 758,189 803,860
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: G. W. Fennell
Tel: 74235
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11th FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : COUNCIL TAX 2005/06
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive No Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The purpose of this report is to set out the background to the Council Tax to be levied in 2005/2006 in the Leeds Metropolitan area. Each householder pays a tax based on the capital value of the property at 1st April 1991. Properties have been placed in one of eight valuation bands by the Listing Officer of the Inland Revenue, as follows:
Value at 1st April 1991 Band A Not exceeding ’ 40,000 Band B Over ’ 40,000 but not exceeding ’ 52,000 Band C Over ’ 52,000 but not exceeding ’ 68,000 Band D Over ’ 68,000 but not exceeding ’ 88,000 Band E Over ’ 88,000 but not exceeding ’ 120,000 Band F Over ’ 120,000 but not exceeding ’ 160,000 Band G Over ’ 160,000 but not exceeding ’ 320,000 Band H Exceeding ’ 320,000
When the consultation paper relating to the Council Tax was first issued by the Government in April 1991, it was estimated that the average property value in England was about ’ 80,000. Such a property would be in Band D and as a result, many of the calculations are carried out by reference to Band D. For example, when the level of Council Tax is calculated, a Band D Tax is calculated initially and the taxes for the other bands are then calculated as proportions of that. (For further details see the tables in 4.3.1. and 4.3.2. below). Amounts of tax are calculated in the
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com first instance for households with two or more adults; single adult households will receive a 25% discount.
Section 30 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 imposes upon the City Council the duty to set the Council Tax within its area. The proposed Council Taxes for a two- adult household are shown below. The figures shown are for the Leeds element of Council Tax. The Council Tax elements for the Police and Fire & Civil Defence authorities are not yet known. The taxes for 2004/05 are shown for comparison.
2004/05 2005/06 ’ ’ Band A 594.53 619.83 Band B 693.62 723.13 Band C 792.71 826.44 Band D 891.80 929.74 Band E 1089.98 1,136.35 Band F 1288.16 1,342.96 Band G 1486.33 1,549.57 Band H 1783.60 1,859.48
This is an increase in the Leeds element of 4.25%. Both the Fire & Civil Defence Authority and the Police Authority meet on 18th February 2005 to decide their budgets and Council Taxes.
1.2. The City Council has its budgeted net expenditure requirement met by a payment from the Leeds Collection Fund. The Collection Fund is a separate account from the City Council“s General Fund and was set up in accordance with S89 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988. The Collection Fund is a receptacle just for Council Tax and amounts of Poll Tax (Community Charge) that continue to be collected. Revenue Support Grant (RSG) and Non-Domestic Rates (NNDR) distributed from the national pool are paid not just to Leeds City Council, but also to the Police and Fire Authorities and are paid into their general funds. The Collection Fund pays out the demands and precepts made upon it by the City Council and the Police and Fire Authorities; these demands and precepts are net of RSG and NNDR.
1.3. Leeds City Council is a ”billing authority–. This means that the Council is responsible for maintaining the Collection Fund, sending out Council Tax bills and setting the Council Tax. Leeds City Council and the Police and Fire Authorities each calculate their own element of Council Tax and the billing authority then formally sets the overall tax by adding these elements together.
1.4. This report details the demands and precepts to be made on the Collection Fund, sets out how the Council Tax is calculated and makes recommendations regarding the calculation of the Leeds“ element of the Council Tax and parish precepts.
2. REVENUE SUPPORT GRANT SETTLEMENT 2005/06 - NATIONAL POSITION
2.1. The Secretary of State published the final figures for the 2005/06 Local Authority Grant Settlement for England on 27th January 2005. The following table shows the overall level of Local Government expenditure provided for in the 2005/06 settlement compared with the 2004/05 settlement (as adjusted). As can be seen, the Government has increased the total amount which it considers Local Government
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com should need to spend (Total Assumed Spending or TAS) by 5.9% and Total Formula Spending (TFS) by 5.4%. Aggregate External Finance (AEF), the total amount of external support for local authority budgets, has risen by 6.3%. The ”cash– difference between TAS and AEF has to be met from Council Tax.
2.2. Settlement Settlement Variance 2004/05 2005/06 (Adjusted) ’ m ’ m ’ m % Total Assumed Spending (TAS) 75,159 79,598 4,439 5.9 Less Specific and Special Grants 14,279 15,418 1,139 8.0 Total Formula Spending (TFS) 60,880 64,180 3,300 5.4 Aggregate External Finance (AEF) NNDR 15,000 18,000 3,000 20.0 Total Cash Grants 41,594 42,144 550 1.3 Total AEF 56,594 60,144 3,550 6.3 Rate of External Support 75.3% 75.6%
Total Cash Grants Analysed as: Specific and Special Grants 14,279 15,418 1,139 8.0 RSG 27,315 26,726 -589 -2.2 41,594 42,144 550 1.3
The above table shows that the level of exchequer support has marginally increased in percentage terms from 75.3% in 2004/05 to 75.6% in 2005/06. The total of National Non-Domestic Rates (NNDR) has increased by ’ 3bn (20%) compared with the 2004/05 adjusted settlement and exchequer grant has increased by ’ 550m (1.3%).
2.3. The method of distributing Revenue Support Grant (RSG) is based on Formula Spending Share (FSS).
a) FSS is calculated for every authority and RSG is distributed so that, if all authorities were to spend at their FSS, they would receive sufficient RSG to enable them to levy the same Council Tax for each property band. Leeds City Council“s own FSS includes an unspecified amount for their share of the Passenger Transport Authority (PTA).
b) The intention of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is that RSG settlements will be fixed before 1st April of each year and there will usually be no retrospective adjustments. However the legislation does allow for an adjustment if changes are significant. This is the case for 2003/04 (as notified in the Amending Report) where the Government has had to amend some population figures derived from the 2001 Census. Leeds will have to repay ’ 1.267m as a result.
2.4. The NNDR multiplier for 2005/06 has been provisionally set by the Government at 42.2p in the pound. This is a reduction of 3.4p from the 2004/05 level of 45.6p, following revaluation of business premises but it is intended to raise the same amount nationally as previously, allowing for inflation.
2.5. The Assumed National Council Tax (ANCT) which is used in the calculation of RSG is ’ 967 (excluding the Police and Fire authority precepts) in 2005/06.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3. REVENUE SUPPORT GRANT SETTLEMENT 2005/06 - LOCAL POSITION
The Revenue Support Grant Settlement for 2005/06 shows the following for the three Authorities that provide services in the Leeds area:-
3.1. Formula Spending Share
The percentage changes in Formula Spending Share from 2004/05 FSS (as adjusted) are:
Leeds City Council 5.0% West Yorkshire Police Authority 4.1% West Yorkshire Fire Authority 3.8%
These FSSs compare with the budgets set as follows: 2005/2006 VARIATION FSS BUDGET FROM FSS Per Band D Per Band D Per Band D On Property Property Property Cash ’ m ’ ’ m ’ ’ %
Leeds 810.7 3,579 803.9 3,549 -30 -0.8 Police * 70.5 311 n/a n/a n/a n/a Fire * 30.0 132 n/a n/a n/a n/a
TOTAL 911.2 4,022 n/a n/a n/a n/a * The Police and Fire FSSs have been apportioned to show the total FSS for the Leeds area. Their budget figures are not yet available; the Fire and Civil Defence Authority and the Police Authority both meet on 18th February to decide what budgets to set.
3.2. Revenue Support Grant
The following shows Revenue Support Grant given in 2005/06 compared with unadjusted RSG for 2004/05: RSG VARIATION 2004/2005 2005/2006 Per Band D Per Band D Per Band D On Property Property Property Cash ’ m ’ ’ m ’ ’ %
Leeds 360.1 1,623 354.1 1,563 -60 -1.7 Police * 34.1 154 35.2 155 1 3.2 Fire * 13.3 60 12.5 55 -5 -6.0
TOTAL 407.5 1,837 401.8 1,773 -64 -1.4
* The Police and Fire figures have been apportioned to show the total for the Leeds area.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3. National Non-Domestic Rates
The following table shows NNDR in 2005/06 compared with unadjusted NNDR for 2004/05: NNDR VARIATION 2004/2005 2005/2006 Per Band D Per Band D Per Band D On Property Property Property Cash ’ m ’ ’ m ’ ’ %
Leeds 200.2 902 238.3 1,052 150 19.1 Police * 10.0 45 12.0 53 8 20.0 Fire * 7.1 32 8.5 38 6 19.7
TOTAL 217.3 979 258.8 1,143 164 19.1
* The Police and Fire amounts have again been apportioned to show the total for the Leeds area.
3.4 Floors and Ceilings
In 2001/02 the Government introduced a system of ”floors and ceilings– to guarantee councils with education and social service responsibilities, subsequently extended to all authorities, a minimum increase in their combined adjusted totals of RSG and NNDR. The system for 2005/06 only operates with floors and Leeds is above the floor. For authorities in this position their grant is scaled back to help pay for those authorities below the floor. Leeds“ RSG has been reduced by ’ 554k for this purpose.
4. CALCULATION & SETTING OF COUNCIL TAX
4.1. As explained in Paragraph 1.3. above, Leeds City Council and the Police and Fire authorities are each responsible for calculating their own element of Council Tax and the City Council is then responsible for formally setting the overall level of Council Tax by adding these elements together. This section of the report sets out how Leeds City Council“s own element is calculated.
4.2. Steps in the Calculation of Leeds“ Element of Council Tax
The various steps in this process are as follows:
i) Calculate the ”budget requirement–. This is the sum of Leeds City Council“s net budget (as reported on separately on this agenda) and Parish Precepts.
ii) Deduct from the budget requirement RSG and NNDR. Also deduct any estimated surplus on the Collection Fund (or add any deficits). This gives the amount to be raised by the Leeds element of Council Tax.
iii) Divide the above by the tax base (as agreed by Council on 12th January 2005) to give a Band D Tax that includes amounts for parishes.
iv) Calculate separately the Band D Taxes for non-parished areas (by removing parish precepts) and for each parish. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com v) Calculate the taxes for each property band for non-parished areas and for parishes.
Notes vi) For the 2005/06 Council Tax, there is an estimated surplus on the Collection Fund, which is apportioned as follows: ’“000 Leeds City Council 790 Police 121 Fire 49 960
4.3. Levels of Tax
4.3.1. The following table sets out the main steps of the calculation described in 4.2. above:
2004/2005 2005/2006 Per Band D Per Band D TOTAL Equivalent TOTAL Equivalent ’ ’ p ’ ’ p Leeds City Council Revenue Estimates 1 758,189,720 3,416.37 803,860,000 3,548.92 Add: Parish Precepts 1,090,076 4.91 1,164,160 5.14 Budget Requirement 759,279,796 3,421.28 805,024,160 3,554.06 Less: Leeds RSG 360,116,403 1,622.67 354,131,703 1,563.44 Leeds NNDR 200,156,820 901.90 238,345,962 1,052.26 199,006,573 896.71 212,546,495 938.36 Less: Collection Fund Surpluses 0 0.00 789,775 3.48
TO BE RAISED FROM LEEDS ELEMENT OF COUNCIL TAX 199,006,573 896.71 211,756,720 934.88 (Including Parishes) Less: Parish Precepts 1,090,076 4.91 1,164,160 5.14 TO BE RAISED FROM LEEDS ELEMENT OF COUNCIL TAX 197,916,497 891.80 210,592,560 929.74 (Excluding Parishes) Add: Police Precept 22,650,493 102.06 n/a n/a Fire Precept 9,235,598 41.62 n/a n/a TOTAL BAND D TAX (Non Parished Areas) 229,802,588 1,035.48 n/a n/a 1 Leeds City Council 2005/06 Revenue Estimates includes ’ 1,267,133 for an adjustment to RSG for 2003/04
The 2005/06 precepts for the Police and Fire Authorities will be decided at their budget meetings which will take place on 18th February 2005. There are two parishes that still have to confirm their precepts in writing.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com NOTE The taxbase for 2005/06, as agreed by Council on 12th January 2005, expressed as the number of Band D equivalent properties is 226,508.
4.3.2. The table below shows what the Leeds element of the tax will then be for each Band and how many properties fall into each Band:
Proportion Tax for 2 Tax for 1 Number of Proportion Cumulative Band of Band Adult Adult Properties of Total Proportion D Tax Household Household in Band Properties ’ p ’ p No. % %
A 6 / 9 619.83 464.87 130,726 41.1 41.1 B 7 / 9 723.13 542.34 64,923 20.4 61.5 C 8 / 9 826.44 619.83 60,314 18.9 80.4 D 1 929.74 697.30 28,152 8.8 89.2 E 11 / 9 1,136.35 852.26 18,416 5.8 95.0 F 13 / 9 1,342.96 1,007.22 9,056 2.8 97.8 G 15 / 9 1,549.57 1,162.17 6,257 2.0 99.8 H 18 / 9 1,859.48 1,394.61 603 0.2 100.0
Total 318,447 100.0
The above figures exclude the effect of the precepts to be issued by the Police and Fire Authorities.
4.3.3. Parishes
The table in 4.3.2. above gives the level of tax for areas where there are no parish councils. For people living in parished areas, the amounts will be those detailed in Recommendation 6.2, where known. Amounts of parish precepts for 2004/05 and 2005/06 are shown in Appendix I. There are two parishes that still have to confirm their precepts in writing.
5. DEMANDS ON THE COLLECTION FUND
5.1 The amounts to be transferred or paid from the Collection Fund in respect of precepts to Leeds City Council and West Yorkshire Police and Fire Authorities are calculated in each case by multiplying the taxbase by the basic amount of Band D Tax. In addition, payments or transfers have to be made in respect of the Collection Fund surplus (see 4.2. above).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The amounts for 2005/06 are therefore as follows: Basic Band D Tax Tax Base ’ p No. ’
Leeds City Council 1 934.88 226,508 211,756,720
Leeds City Council n/a n/a 789,775 (re Collection Fund Surplus)
West Yorkshire Police Authority n/a 226,508 n/a
West Yorkshire Police Authority n/a n/a 120,957 (re Collection Fund Surplus)
West Yorkshire Fire and Civil Defence Authority n/a 226,508 n/a
West Yorkshire Fire and Civil Defence Authority n/a n/a 49,319 (re Collection Fund Surplus)
1 Includes parishes *The figures for the Fire Authority and the Police Authority are not yet available.
The transfers and payments have to be made in accordance with an agreed schedule and this is attached at Appendix II.
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1. That it be noted that at the meeting on 12th January 2005, Council agreed the following amounts for the year 2005/06, in accordance with regulations made under Sections 33(5) and 34(4) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:-
a) 226,508 being the amount calculated by the Council, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended) as its Council Tax base for the year.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com b) Parish Tax Base Number Aberford and District 722 Allerton Bywater 1,108 Arthington 287 Austhorpe 26 Bardsey cum Rigton 1,122 Barwick in Elmet and Scholes 1,997 Boston Spa 1,821 Bramham cum Oglethorpe 706 Bramhope and Carlton 1,777 Clifford 721 Collingham with Linton 1,632 Driglington 1,765 Gildersome 1,946 Great and Little Preston 464 Harewood 1,814 Horsforth 6,707 East Keswick 595 Kippax 3,044 Ledsham 93 Ledston 159 Micklefield 518 Morley 9,292 Otley 4,775 Pool in Wharfedale 952 Scarcroft 664 Shadwell 949 Swillington 1,071 Thorner 728 Thorp Arch 364 Walton 112 Wetherby 4,423 Wothersome 9
being the amounts calculated by the Council in accordance with Regulation 6 of the Regulations, as the amounts of its Council Tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.
6.2. That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2005/06 in accordance with Sections 32 and 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:-
a) ’ 1,736,730,160 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(2)(a) to (e) of the Act.
b) ’ 931,706,000 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(3)(a) to (c) of the Act.
c) ’ 805,024,160 being the amount by which the aggregate at 6.2(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 6.2(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com d) ’ 593,267,440 being the aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates will be payable for the year into its general fund in respect of redistributed Non-Domestic Rates and Revenue Support Grant, increased by the amount which the Council estimates will be transferred from its Collection Fund into its General Fund under Section 97(3) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and reduced by the amount which the Council estimates will be transferred from its Collection Fund to its General Fund pursuant to the Collection Fund (Community Charges) (England) Directions 1994.
e) ’ 934.875236 being the amount at 6.2.(c) above, less the amount at 6.2.(d) above, all divided by the amount at 6.1.(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year.
f) ’ 1,164,160 being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act.
g) ’ 929.74 being the amount at 6.2.(e) above, less the result given by dividing the amount at 6.2.(f) above by the amount at 6.1.(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com h) Parish Band D ’ p
Aberford and District 938.60 Allerton Bywater 940.57 Arthington 936.71 Bardsey cum Rigton 949.35 Barwick in Elmet and Scholes 948.77 Boston Spa 946.21 Bramham cum Oglethorpe 947.45 Bramhope and Carlton 964.07 Clifford 952.62 Collingham with Linton 959.76 Drighlington 939.08 Gildersome 939.74 Great and Little Preston 941.59 Harewood 934.15 Horsforth 942.74 East Keswick 949.91 Kippax 942.56 Ledsham 951.25 Ledston 945.46 Micklefield 981.19 Morley 947.68 Otley 979.16 Pool in Wharfedale 957.05 Scarcroft 943.29 Shadwell 949.76 Swillington 945.92 Thorner 955.84 Thorp Arch 947.01 Walton 965.45 Wetherby 973.31
being the amounts given by adding to the amount at 6.2.(g) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council“s area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at 6.1.(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com i) Band A Band B Band C Band D Band E Band F Band G Band H ’ p ’ p ’ p ’ p ’ p ’ p ’ p ’ p
LEEDS EXCEPT PARTS 619.83 723.13 826.44 929.74 1,136.35 1,342.96 1,549.57 1,859.48 BELOW:
Parish of:
Aberford and District 625.73 730.02 834.31 938.60 1,147.18 1,355.76 1,564.33 1,877.20 Allerton Bywater 627.05 731.55 836.06 940.57 1,149.59 1,358.60 1,567.62 1,881.14 Arthington 624.47 728.55 832.63 936.71 1,144.87 1,353.03 1,561.18 1,873.42 Bardsey cum Rigton 632.90 738.38 843.87 949.35 1,160.32 1,371.28 1,582.25 1,898.70 Barwick in Elmet and 632.51 737.93 843.35 948.77 1,159.61 1,370.45 1,581.28 1,897.54 Scholes Boston Spa 630.81 735.94 841.08 946.21 1,156.48 1,366.75 1,577.02 1,892.42 Bramham cum Oglethorpe 631.63 736.91 842.18 947.45 1,157.99 1,368.54 1,579.08 1,894.90 Bramhope and Carlton 642.71 749.83 856.95 964.07 1,178.31 1,392.55 1,606.78 1,928.14 Clifford 635.08 740.93 846.77 952.62 1,164.31 1,376.01 1,587.70 1,905.24 Collingham with Linton 639.84 746.48 853.12 959.76 1,173.04 1,386.32 1,599.60 1,919.52 Drighlington 626.05 730.40 834.74 939.08 1,147.76 1,356.45 1,565.13 1,878.16 Gildersome 626.49 730.91 835.32 939.74 1,148.57 1,357.40 1,566.23 1,879.48 Great and Little Preston 627.73 732.35 836.97 941.59 1,150.83 1,360.07 1,569.32 1,883.18 Harewood 622.77 726.56 830.36 934.15 1,141.74 1,349.33 1,556.92 1,868.30 Horsforth 628.49 733.24 837.99 942.74 1,152.24 1,361.74 1,571.23 1,885.48 East Keswick 633.27 738.82 844.36 949.91 1,161.00 1,372.09 1,583.18 1,899.82 Kippax 628.37 733.10 837.83 942.56 1,152.02 1,361.48 1,570.93 1,885.12 Ledsham 634.17 739.86 845.56 951.25 1,162.64 1,374.03 1,585.42 1,902.50 Ledston 630.31 735.36 840.41 945.46 1,155.56 1,365.66 1,575.77 1,890.92 Micklefield 654.13 763.15 872.17 981.19 1,199.23 1,417.27 1,635.32 1,962.38 Morley 631.79 737.08 842.38 947.68 1,158.28 1,368.87 1,579.47 1,895.36 Otley 652.77 761.57 870.36 979.16 1,196.75 1,414.34 1,631.93 1,958.32 Pool in Wharfedale 638.03 744.37 850.71 957.05 1,169.73 1,382.41 1,595.08 1,914.10 Scarcroft 628.86 733.67 838.48 943.29 1,152.91 1,362.53 1,572.15 1,886.58 Shadwell 633.17 738.70 844.23 949.76 1,160.82 1,371.88 1,582.93 1,899.52 Swillington 630.61 735.72 840.82 945.92 1,156.12 1,366.33 1,576.53 1,891.84 Thorner 637.23 743.43 849.64 955.84 1,168.25 1,380.66 1,593.07 1,911.68 Thorp Arch 631.34 736.56 841.79 947.01 1,157.46 1,367.90 1,578.35 1,894.02 Walton 643.63 750.91 858.18 965.45 1,179.99 1,394.54 1,609.08 1,930.90 Wetherby 648.87 757.02 865.16 973.31 1,189.60 1,405.89 1,622.18 1,946.62
being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at 6.2(g) and 6.2(h) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in Valuation Band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.
j) That it be noted that once the Police and Fire have been decided and notified to Leeds City Council, they will be added to the above figures to give the overall levels of Council Tax.
6.3 That the schedule of instalments for 2005/06 for payments to the principal authorities out of the Collection Fund be determined as set out in Appendix II of this report.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 7. FINAL APPROVAL
7.1 The recommendations contained within Section 6 of this report are subject to approval by full Council at their meeting on 23rd February 2005.
______
Background Papers
Local Government Finance Act 1992. Local Government Finance 2005/06 RSG Settlement Information, ODPM, January 2005. Business Rates Information Letter 08/2004, ODPM, 01st December 2004. Leeds City Council Draft Management Control Document 2005/06.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX I
PARISH PRECEPTS & COUNCIL TAX BAND D LEVIES 2005/06
2004/2005 2005/2006 Parish Parish Parish Parish PARISH Precept Band D Precept Band D Council Tax Council Tax ’ ’ p ’ ’ p
Aberford and District 5,400 7.50 6,400 8.86 Allerton Bywater 12,000 10.80 12,000 10.83 Arthington 2,000 6.92 2,000 6.97 Austhorpe 0 0.00 0 0.00 Bardsey cum Rigton 16,000 14.12 22,000 19.61 Barwick in Elmet and Scholes 30,000 14.71 38,000 19.03 Boston Spa 30,000 16.56 30,000 16.47 Bramham cum Oglethorpe 12,000 16.74 12,500 17.71 Bramhope and Carlton 46,000 26.06 61,000 34.33 Clifford 16,500 23.50 16,500 22.88 Collingham with Linton 46,500 28.28 49,000 30.02 Drighlington 16,490 10.00 16,490 9.34 Gildersome 18,520 10.00 19,460 10.00 Great and Little Preston 5,200 11.28 5,500 11.85 Harewood 8,000 4.37 8,000 4.41 Horsforth 83,400 12.42 87,200 13.00 East Keswick 9,000 15.31 12,000 20.17 Kippax 35,484 12.00 39,032 12.82 Ledsham 2,000 22.47 2,000 21.51 Ledston 2,300 14.47 2,500 15.72 Micklefield 24,650 48.81 26,650 51.45 Morley 166,661 17.91 166,661 17.94 Otley 235,959 49.07 235,959 49.42 Pool in Wharfedale 24,550 25.28 26,000 27.31 Scarcroft 8,000 11.96 9,000 13.55 Shadwell 18,000 18.85 19,000 20.02 Swillington 16,500 15.51 17,325 16.18 Thorner 16,500 22.42 19,000 26.10 Thorp Arch 5,852 19.70 6,285 17.27 Walton 3,500 30.97 4,000 35.71 Wetherby 173,110 38.14 192,698 43.57 Wothersome 0 0.00 0 0.00
TOTAL 1,090,076 1,164,160
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX II
LEEDS COLLECTION FUND
SCHEDULE OF INSTALMENTS OF PAYMENTS OR TRANSFERS TO PRINCIPAL AUTHORITIES 2005/06
15th April 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
16th May 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th June 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th July 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
16th August 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th September 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
17th October 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th November 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th December 2005 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
16th January 2006 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th February 2006 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
15th March 2006 Transfer to Leeds City Council Payment to West Yorkshire Police Authority Payment to West Yorkshire Fire & Civil Defence Authority
The amount of each instalment will be the amount of the billing authority“s undischarged liability to each principal authority, divided by the number of instalments remaining to be paid or transferred.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6 (c)
Originator: Julia Bradbury
Tel: 75986
REPORT OF The Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Neighbourhoods and Housing REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUDGET 2005/2006
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In X Board (details contained in the report) Decision
1. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
1.1. This report sets out:-
· the Latest Estimate for 2004/2005 and the Original Estimate for 2005/06 and comments on the major issues which have influenced the Budget.
· the principles for allocating budgets to the ALMOs, via their Management Fees.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1. The 2005/06 Original Estimate has been prepared at outturn prices which means that allowances for inflation have been included in the budget submission.
2.2. This report includes the ongoing financial arrangements in respect of the Arms Length Management Organisations (”ALMO“s–) which took responsibility for managing the Council“s stock of housing from February 2003. Further disaggregation of budgets from the Strategic HRA to the ALMO“s have taken place during the year and these are reflected in the estimates.
2.3. In accordance with the Council“s Policy and Budget Framework, decisions as to the Council“s budget and Housing Rent increases are reserved to Council. As such the purpose of this report is to propose a budget to Council, and thus the decisions recommended by this report are not eligible for call in.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3. HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT - PROPOSED BUDGET
3.1. Appendix 1 shows the projected Housing Revenue Account Summary for the 2004/05 Original Estimate, Latest Estimate 2004/05 and the 2005/06 Original Estimate.
4. VARIATION ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2004/2005 TO LATEST ESTIMATE 2005/2006
4.1. The original estimate 2004/05 budgeted for a net contribution to working balances of ’ 428k, however there is now projected to be a call on working balances of ’ 2,198k. This can be contained within the HRA available working balances.
4.2. The main reasons for the variation are:
a) Following a review of bad debt provisions in light of the current profile & level of tenant arrears, it has been necessary to increase the provision by ’ 800k in the current year. The level of the bad debt provision is determined by the profile of arrears at the year end and the application of a nationally accepted formula which ensures a consistent approach across local government nationally. The ALMOs receive performance incentive payments based upon the level of arrears in each ALMO at 31 December and it is proposed to more formally tie this to the level of the bad debt provision when a mechanism has been established which is fair, transparent and not subject to significant volatility either within or between years.
b) It has been necessary, in accordance with health & safety legislation, to undertake detailed survey work on estates shops to determine the extent of asbestos at a cost of ’ 150k. Potentially, depending upon the results of these surveys, there may be extensive repair and removal work, which could continue for the foreseeable future.
c) Additional costs for producing information for Choice Based Lettings have been ’ 125k. The Choice Based Lettings service commenced in February 2003 with a city wide roll out in January 2004. It is intended that the budget for choice based lettings will be devolved directly to ALMOs during 2005/2006 when agreement can be reached, although this has not been reflected in the budget.
d) There has been an increased contribution to ALMOs through their management fees of ’ 716k, of this ’ 430k is to reflect a timing delay in the achievement of anticipated telephony contact savings. The remaining balance represents an in year variation in recharges. In addition, costs of ’ 246k for the network infrastructure improvement programme have been provided for.
e) The closure of Brett Gardens hostel has led to net closure costs of ’ 300k in 04/05.
f) It had been previously assumed that it would be possible to capitalise repairs costs of ’ 200k, however a fuller & more detailed review has revealed that the nature & extent of the repairs undertaken has meant that this has not proven to be possible. Repairs (and other costs) will be kept under constant review to ensure that they are properly attributed to revenue or capital in accordance with agreed criteria.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com2 5. VARIATION ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2004/05 TO ORIGINAL ESTIMATE 2005/2006
5.1. The budget for 05/06 has been constructed based on the achievement of working balances of ’ 2.0 million at 31 March 2006, which represents 3ꏗ % of the non-ALMO costs. This is considered to be an acceptable level of balances following the transfer of services and responsibilities to the ALMOs. The transfer of services also includes a transfer of risk and the ALMOs are able to retain their own working balances.
5.2. There has been an increased call on balances of ’ 617k compared with the 2004/2005 original estimate, for which the main reasons for the variation, in addition to those in 04/05, have been:
a) The negative subsidy we are required to pay back to the Government has decreased by ’ 8.5 million, which reflects a ’ 2.1 million gain from falling property numbers, ’ 3.6 million in respect of increases in unit allowances and the balance of ’ 2.8 million mainly reflecting changes in capital charges as a consequence of increased borrowing, which is offset by an increase of ’ 1.9 million in actual capital charges.
In addition ALMOS are expected to receive ’ 21.1 million in additional resources in 2005/2006 to support borrowing of ’ 358 million over seven years to bring all Leeds City Council homes up to the minimum decency standard. This is anticipated to lead to net resources of ’ 14.3 million held directly by the ALMOs in 2005/2006. This will reduce in subsequent years as the full effect of capital charges are felt.
Both housing subsidy and associated capital charges are expected to grow year on year as the requirement to make a repayment of 2% of debt has been abolished for the time being (at least whilst additional resources are directed at achieving minimum decency standards). Subsidy gains of ’ 2.1 million included in the increase in allowances in 2005/2006 were derived from a change in the crime series used by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) to determine management and maintenance allowances per property. These series are under review for 2006/2007. Changes in the housing subsidy regime represent a significant medium term risk to the HRA with the potential for significant year on year gains or losses.
b) There has been an increased management fee to ALMOs of ’ 4,650k in total which reflects in part new costs disaggregated and like for like growth equivalent to 3.2%. Further details are shown in section 6.
c) A pay award of 2.95% has been provided in line with the national settlement, which together with other inflationary increases means additional costs of ’ 816k.
d) Increases in net rentals are expected to generate an additional ’ 1.6 million, details of which are given below in section 5.4
e) The closure of St Michael's & Prospect hostels will save approximately ’ 1.1 m to the Supporting people fund, however the cost of implementing the closure is anticipated to be ’ 638k.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com3 f) Changes in the regulations governing right to buy receipts have impacted on the costs we are allowed to offset against the income with a budgeted net cost of ’ 389k. Further work is ongoing to ensure costs are appropriately allocated to successful right to buy enquiries (the costs of which we are allowed to offset) as opposed to enquiries that do not lead to a successful sale (the costs of which we are not allowed to offset).
g) A valuation of property at the year end is expected to cost an additional ’ 100k as we are required to fully value our assets every five years. Additional costs of ’ 200k are budgeted for in relation to a full stock condition survey for Beeston Hill & Holbeck offset by the dis-aggregation of PFI costs with the effect that these costs will be picked up by Leeds South Homes. Additional costs of Giro bank charges of ’ 370k are expected, although this will be offset by charges to ALMOs. This reflects a change in the way rentals are collected (i.e. no longer is cash accepted at housing offices) with the savings from this initiative being seen directly by the ALMOs. Finance & HR staff have been devolved directly to ALMOs resulting in a reduction in the salary budget of ’ 516k, although this has been offset by a corresponding reduction in income from the ALMOs.
h) Disrepair claims are now falling and we have been able to reduce the provision by ’ 300k. In the light of this, a thorough review of staffing levels and other costs will be undertaken during the year. Transitional protection arrangements in respect of sheltered tenancies continue to reduce with a budgeted saving in 05/06 of ’ 196k.
i) The increase in the bad debt provision following its review is anticipated to be required also in 2005/06 and this represents a cost equivalent to 2% of rental income. As explained earlier, ALMO's receive performance incentives based on their ability to minimise void levels and reductions in tenant arrears. It is proposed to more formally tie this to the level of the bad debt provision when a mechanism has been established with is fair, transparent and not subject to significant volatility either within or between years.
j) It is proposed to use ’ 5 million of Major Repairs Allowance (MRA) balances to temporarily reduce debt and thus capital charges during the year with an anticipated saving to the HRA of ’ 66k.
5.3. A programme of efficiency savings will be undertaken focusing on the strategic HRA function with a view to saving ’ 500k. This will comprise the review of allocation of:
· charges to right to buy sales as described above;
· reviewing staffing structures, in particular a review of the required staffing levels in the team that deals with disrepair claims in light of the reducing claim volumes; and
· a thorough review of income (especially service charges and income from mobile phone aerials).
Rentals
5.4. Rental income from housing stock is budgeted to increase by ’ 6.5 million offset by a reduction in rental income of ’ 4.9 million in respect of reductions in property numbers, mainly due to anticipated right to buy sales.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com4 5.5. This reflects changes in individual rents following the application of the fourth year of the Government“s rent restructuring policy, the basis of which is partly determined by the value of properties & the number of bedrooms in each property. Individual tenants are protected from large increases in rent in that the formula only allows rents to rise by inflation + a half % (3.6%) +/- ’ 2.00 per week. The application of this formula means that average rents will rise by 4.55%, and represents an average rent increase of ’ 2.15 over 48 weeks, although effects on individual tenants will vary according to the restructuring formulae.
5.6. The comparative figures are:
2004/05 2005/06 Actual Rent (average) ’ 47.30 ’ 49.45 +4.55% +’ 2.15
5.7. Rentals from garages (currently ’ 4.20 per week) fall outside the rent restructuring rules and normally rise in line with average rental increases. It is proposed to increase garage rents by 9.5% to ’ 4.60 per week as the rents are currently below average.
Service Charges
5.8. Service charges, which fall within the constraints of rent restructuring, are to be reviewed with a view to ensuring that charges are fair and transparent to tenants. It is proposed to conduct a detailed review to ensure that costs are properly allocated to service charges and recovered in full where applicable.
5.9. It is the intention of the Government“s rent restructuring policy that service charges will be disaggregated by the end of the ten year implementation programme (2010/2011) and that rental income will reflect purely management & maintenance of properties.
6. 2005/06 ALMO MANAGEMENT FEES
6.1. The Management Fees to the ALMOs are divided into three elements: one for repairs; one for management costs; and a new category for grounds maintenance. The formula for allocating repairs & management budgets to the ALMOs was established in 2003/2004 and the new allocation of grounds maintenance is allocated based on land area.
6.2. The total repairs budget for the ALMOs takes account of the percentage increase given by the Government for repairs, adjusted for the reduction in stock. The ALMOs management costs are allocated in accordance with a formula, which follows the same factors, which the Government use to allocate resources to Local Authorities and thus, in effect, treats each ALMO as if it were a mini HRA. The formula allocates resources to each area based on the numbers of properties, and factors, which acknowledge the additional costs associated with flats, and the extent of crime and social deprivation in an area.
6.3. The application of these factors within Leeds allocates resources via the formula which differ from resources previously allocated, on the basis of historic costs. The
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com5 Council is looking to minimise the impact on individual ALMOs by adjusting for gains and losses over a 4 year period.
6.4. Discussions have been held with ALMO Chief Officers and the budgets as shown in appendix 1 have been agreed in principle with individual ALMOs. The net effect (on a like for like basis) is, on average, growth of 4%, although this masks differences between ALMOs as a result of changes in stock numbers, stock profiles and dampening.
Dis-aggregation
6.5. The programme of devolving costs from the strategic HRA to the ALMOs has continued with further dis-aggregations of the costs of grounds maintenance (’ 953k) & footpath repairs (’ 227k) to be undertaken from 1 April 2005.
6.6. In addition, procurement costs in relation to PFI have also been devolved in relation to specific schemes at Little London and Beeston Hill & Holbeck (’ 568k).
6.7. Further discussions in dis-aggregating Choice Based Lettings, disrepair and Paralegal services are underway with the intention of these budgets being devolved to ALMOs during 2005/2006.
Totals delegated to ALMOs
6.8. Overall, including the Major Repairs Allowance & additional revenue support following the achievement of 2 star status by the ALMOs, approximately 77% of total income (excluding negative subsidy & capital charges) is devolved directly to ALMOs. Excluding both MRA & the additional revenue support over 67% of costs are devolved.
7. RISKS
The following section sets out the significant risks which, should they materialise would affect the budget. These will be reviewed throughout the year as to likelihood and action taken to mitigate any impact.
· In year changes to subsidy regulations.
· Property numbers may not fall sufficiently quickly to allow average property numbers to be used & thus the housing subsidy claim could be based on data as at 1 April. The budget assumes a gain of ’ 2.1 million through changes in property numbers.
· ALMOs are not able to fully validate the base data used in the subsidy claim.
· ALMOs may not renew SLAs and/or establish their own provision with either Neighbourhoods & Housing and/or other departments leaving the Council to bear residual costs.
8. RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1. Executive Board is asked to recommend to the Council the adoption of the resolutions below -
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com6 (a) that the budget, including the application of rent restructuring representing an average rent increase of 4.55%, be approved
(b) that the charges for garage rents be increased to ’ 4.60 per week.
(c) that a review of service charges be undertaken during the year
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com7 APPENDIX 1
2004/ 2005 2004/ 2005 2005/ 2006 OE TO LE OE TO OE ORIGINAL LATEST ORIGINAL VARIANCE VARIANCE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE
’ '000's ’ '000's ’ '000's ’ '000's ’ '000's
EXPENDITURE Staffing costs 12,367 12,800 12,584 433 217 Premises 4,471 5,167 3,863 696 (608) Other running costs (*) 13,863 16,052 20,206 2,189 6,343 ALMO Management fees 67,199 67,423 71,850 224 4,651 Provision for bad debt 2,000 2,800 2,800 800 800 Provision for disrepair 1,900 1,900 1,600 0 (300) Capital Charges 20,749 22,030 22,763 1,281 2,014 Housing Subsidy 38,459 35,507 29,945 (2,952) (8,514) TOTAL EXPENDITURE 161,008 163,679 165,611 2,671 4,603
INCOME Rent (140,510) (140,656) (142,100) (146) (1,590) Other income (10,118) (10,258) (10,192) (140) (74) Recharges (*) (10,808) (10,567) (13,130) 241 (2,322) TOTAL INCOME (161,436) (161,481) (165,422) (45) (3,986)
NET (INCOME)/EXPENDITURE (428) 2,198 189 2,626 617
* includes internal departmental recharges RESERVES
Balances brought forward (1,572) (4,387) (2,189)
Transfer (to)/from reserves (428) 2,198 189
Balances carried forward (2,000) (2,189) (2,000)
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com8 Ù ÛÒÜ×Ù Ì Ó ÒÑ Üò æ䀖
æ » ½ª½·¾¸® » ç ñ¸Ô ± ¾Ý
º¼ç ô ÷Ò ÷ô Þö
Û ÐÑÌÛ Ú ÌØ ÚÝ Ð ×ÝÒÐØ ØÒßÔß×ÒÔÈ ÌØØÒ×ÐÛ ÛÐÑÌÛ Ú ÚÌ ÐËÐ×ÊÚÒÞÐ Ü Ì ÔÛ æ æÔÚÐ ï 컸 ï Ø ¾® « ¿ § « î ðëëÍ Ö Ê Ü ÇÐ× Ú ï ÚÛ Ð Ô Ö ÊÛ Ó ÙÔßÔúÐÙÐßÚ ÑÌÈ Ò × Ó ´ Ö ÚÛ ÔÚÐúÓ Ö ÚÔÚÐÙÐßÚÖ
н¾¬±É« § ½¼ § « º Ô °°¾¬±¾ ï Ö ·¾¬³°³¬ Ò ² ·½³¬§ ±³É¨º ØÉ«ï
¬¸²·½Ó ± ½·® » ½¸½É ³ ® Ü · ¿ ½É¾´ ¼Ð °® ø¼
Ъ¾¬¿ ±³¹¾ » н³ò ³® ½¾ °É « × § ½½ Ò ¨ » ß É ± ¾ ½³ò ³® ½¾ °É « × § ½½ Ò ¨ Ü É § « æ ¾ ¬ ³º ³É ¨ ¨ è Ó ø ¸ » Ó ® Üܷо¸½® ·É ò î ô íò î ì ¾·Ð ò î ÷ï
ì© Ò ¨±« É¿ ¬±³É¨
Ì î Ì î º² ® ø» ¾¸½®· ®« ¸²º» ¾É§» ¹ ± ¾·¾ªÜ ·¸ «§·Ó ¸½® · ½É ª® Ô» ·Ð ´ ¹ ø» ® Խɽ® ·É ɸ ® §¸ §·Ð» ø¾» ¸Ì ® « ¸² Ù® Ó ¾¼ß ® Ô» ·Ü ·¸ðÓ ¸ô©©ìíݲ»´¹¸²¯®§·Ó ½¼ ½É » ק½» Ð ¸® ²¾Ô » ª¾» Ð ¸® ¸² ¯ ²¾» ¸» Рڷɸ½¸§¸ ® « °§´ ¼½Ó ͽ·¾·Ó ¾·Ð ðÓÓ®§·¸¾·Ó¹¨¯Ú°Íðï°» §Ð·¸½¾¼ ¯ ® Ð «® » ¯ ¾ø½¸¾¼Í½·¾·Ó ½· Ù® Ó ¾¼ð§¸²® » ½¸½Éî
Ì î ô î º² °» §Ð·¸½¾¼¯ ®Ð » ק½» É ¸²¾¸«§¼¼¯ ® §·Ó ½¼É¸Ó » ¸¾½· ¼½Ü ½¸É ® · ¸² ¼Ô¼¾·Ð ¸¹ø ® « ´® »»®Ý½·ª ´ «® » ¸² ɸ¾» ¸ ® « ¾Ó ² «½·¾·Ó ½¾¼ ¹¾» ¸®ª¸²» Ý ½¸² ¾ ·§Ü ´» ® «°» §Ð·¸½¾¼ ½·Ð½Ó ¾¸® » Éî ð·¹½·¹¾» » Խɽ® · ® « ¸²É ¼½Ü ½¸É Ü §É¸É½Ü ½¼¾ » ¼¹ ´ É ¸ ´ ¹ ¯ ® § · Ó ½¼î Ú· ® » л ¸® Ó ® Ü ø¼¹ ݽ¸² ¸²½É¼ª¾¼» ק½» Ü·¸» Ó ® Üܷо¸½® ·É ò î ô íò î ì ¾·Ð ò î ÷ ® « ¸²½É » ø® » ¸¾» ·® ¸ ¼½ª½´ ¼ «® » Ó ¾¼¼ ½· î
Ì î ì î º ² ¯ ® Ð ® « °» ¾Ó ¸½Ó » ק½» É ¸²¾¸É¸» ¾¸ª¹ ɸ¾¸Ü ·¸É ¾» ø» ø¾» Ð «® » ¾øø» ® Ô¾¼´ ¹ ¸² ¯ ® §·Ó ½¼ ¾ ¸ ¼ ¾ É ¸ ¸Ý ½Ó ¾ ¹ ¾ » î º ² °® ¼½Ó ¹ ¾·Ð ñ¸» ¾¸ª¹ ɸ¾¸Ü ·¸ «® » ô ©©÷ëô ©©Þ Ý ¾É ¾øø» ® ÔÐ ´ ¹ ¸² ¬ è Ó §¸½Ô é ® ¾» Ð ® · Ì ì¸ Í´ » §¾» ¹ ô ©©÷ ¾·Ð ´ ¹ «§¼¼ ¯ ® §·Ó ½¼ ® · ô Þ ¸ ± ¾ » Ó ² ô©©÷ ¾·Ð ¾ » Ô½Ý ® « ¸² ɸ» ¾¸ª¹ «® » ô©©÷ë©ÞíݾÉÓ®·É½Ð» Ð ´¹¸²¬ è Ó§¸½Ô鮾» Ð ®· Ì Ò ¸²ê ®ÔÜ´» ô©©÷î
Ì î ÷î º²½É » ø® » ¸ É¸É ® §¸í «® » ¾øø» ® Ô¾¼ ´ ¹ ± Ü ´» Éí¸² º» ¾É§» ¹ ± ¾·¾ªÜ ·¸ ñ¸» ¾¸ª¹ «® » ô©©Þëô ©©µ í¾·Ð ¸² ·Ý ¾««® » о´ ¼ ´® » » ® ݽ·ª ¼½Ü ½¸É §·Ð» ¸² ø» §Ð·¸½¾¼«» ¾Ü Ý ® » Ñ ¾·Ð ø» ® Ô½ÐÉ ± Ü ´ » É Ý½¸² ¾ » Ô½Ý ® « ¸² ɸ» ¾¸ª¹ ¾·Ð ® ø» ¾¸½® ·É ½· ô ©©÷ëô©©Þî
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ð© Û ¾¹ ³¾ñ É°Ö ±« § ±¾ò îðëë»伎ðëëÍ
ðììñëìÚ î ·Î Ò Ô Ò Ç Í×Ñ × Ú Ü Û ÞÌî ðììñë ìó êðììéë ìø ¿î ¾ ´ » ï ÷¸ » ¾ ³ ìñ ° ï ±®¬³ } é }è Ôï³Ûï´³¾³÷Ò±¬» êêç øñ÷ » ©Þ ± ®· · ®Þ ²¹º ¬®·¸Ý ©¿°´²¸°Ð³·®º ·°óó©ØÎßÜ øñ éç » ©Þ ± ®· · ®Þ ²¹º ¬®·¸Ý ©¿°´²¸°Ð³·®º ·°óó©Ø» ®¹ Î ß Ü ÚÚ øí ¾ ©¼ ¸· ©½©ó´¸²®¹ ®ª¸ª Ý °· º ©½ ¸® ß ©«©¹ ø© × ò¹ Ðë } ÷ó Î ß Ü ñ ï è÷ó ¿ ðð¸ ß ©ª©· «©½ ´· ®´®· ¸²®¹ ®¬°´²¸°Ð · ©©²´¸ª ì ì ß ©½ø©½Ú×ò¹·©°ª©½ ñЩ«©Ð ®¬ß ©«©¹ø©±°Ð°¹ ©ª ï ð ó óÓ Ô ï ³Û ï ´ ³¾ ³Ó÷ ½ ¾ ¬û· øìÚ í÷í
¿ °´²¸°Ð ¯ ²¹ °¹ ²¹º ß©Óø²· ©ó ©¹ ¸×¨°ö²óøó» ©¸¾©¼ ¸ñ øêø íñì
Ô ¿ ®ó ´· ²ª©½ °ª ¬®ÐЮު } é } è Ê®¹ º ¸©· ó ¼ ®··®Þ²¹º ¯²ö©½ çèì øøÓ Í °· ²°¼ Ð © øÚ íó Ì Ý®·¸ ¸©·ó±®··®Þ²¹º ðìì ç÷ Û®¸°Ð û ö¸©· ¹°Ð±®··®Þ²¹ º øìÚ íñí Ê©ªª ò¹ «©ª¸ó ©¹ ¸ª í ¿ Óì¸ » ©¸û ö¸©· ¹ °Ð ¾ ©¼ ¸ øìÚ í÷í
§ ½ ©¼ ¸¬ø¹½©½ ¼ ªÝ ®·¸¸©·ó °¹½ «°·²°¼ Щ · °¸© Ю°¹ ª ûð ÷íô
ô î Ì î º² ¾´® Ô¸¾´ ¼ ɲ® Ý É ¸²¾¸·¸Ð´ ¸½É è øÓ ¸Ð ¸® » ½É ¸® }öÌ öÜЧ»½·ª ô©©÷ë©Þíɼ½ª²¸¼¹ ²½ª²» ¸²¾· Ý ¾É ® » ½ª½·¾¼¼¹ ¾·¸½Ó ½ø¾¸Ð ¼¾É¸ Í´ » §¾» ¹î º² ´ ® » » ® Ý ½·ª » ק½» Ü ·¸ «® » ¸² Ó ¾ø½¸¾¼ø» ® ª» ¾ÜܽɼÉÉ ¸²¾· ¸² ¾Ü ® §·¸ ® » ½ª½·¾¼¼¹ ¾·¸½Ó ½ø¾¸Ð ¾¸ ¸² ɸ¾» ¸ ® « ¸² ¹¾» ¾·Ð ½É ® ««É¸´ ¹ ¾ ɽª·½«½Ó ¾·¸» Ð§Ó ¸½®·½·» Ô·§´¾¼¾·Ó Éî º²½É ²¾É ¾» ½É· ´ Ó ¾§É ¸² ¯ ® §·Ó ½¼ ²¾É ½·Ó §» » Ð } ìµ Ü ½· ø» Ü ½§Ü É «® ¼¼® Ý ½· ª ¸² » ɸ» §Ó ¸§» ½·ª ® « д ¸ Ý ²½Ó ² ½É ® §¸¼½·Ð ½· ø¾» ¾ª» ¾ø² ô î ÷ ´ ¼® Ý î º² ½·Ó » ¾É «» ® Ü } ö©ÞÜ ¸® }öÌöÜ Ü¾½·¼¹»¼¾¸É¸® ¾Ðн¸½® ·¾¼ §·É§øø® » ¸Ð ´ ® » » ® Ý ½·ª » ק½» Ð ´ ¹ ¸² ¯ ¾ø½¸¾¼ °» ® ª» ¾Ü Ü ½· ô ©©÷ë©Þ ¸® «½·¾·Ó ® Ô» ø» ®ª» ¾Üܽ·ªî º²½É ²¾É ´ · ¾ÉÉ§Ü Ð ¸® ´ «½·¾·Ó Ð ´¹Ó ¾ø½¸¾¼» Ó ½ø¸É ¨««Ó ¸½Ô¼¹» ø¾½Ðï½·ô ©©µ ë©Ò î
² ¬»®®Î »¿ î »®Î ð ììóë ì éëé ÉÔÞîëó í ð § ®¿ éë é î »Î ¬ Î é îëìé ÷
û îëé
ø »
¬ îë é ¿ î ò ëìé ò ëé ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë ë î ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ë ë ë î î è è ê ê í í í ï ï ñ ñ ç ç ñ ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìï ìñ ìñ ìñ ìñ ìñ ìñ ìï ñ î í é ê ï ë ç î í ç è ï ë ñ î í é è ï ñ ç ñ ç ñ ç ï ç ï ñ ï ñ é ñ ç ñ ç ï ç ï ¿¬»
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ò íÞí ¿»Î¬¸Î ®» ³Î· ²¼Î«½¼¹®¼´Î « » ²¼¹Î °» ¸ ³Î ±Ò³¸ Î « ²¼ ª Ò¾ Î · § Î ³ ¼« ²» ¹½ ³³Î ¼ ¸ °ì é íë û Í í Û Ò · Î º ¹ Ò ¼ Ò · ²» ¸ » ¼¸ ²¹²±¸ Î ô½ ³¸ ®Î ³d Í ³²» Î § Î ôҳΠ¸ ®Î Î ¼« Òô ¸ ®Î ô²¼¼¹²°ì Î ³µ Ò¸ ®Î ³» ¼¸ ²¹²±¸ Î ¸ ®¸ ¸ ®Î ±Î© ß²°° §Î éíëûÍ ¼ÎΫ°Î»» ¸ Ò»ì ¸ ®Î »²¸ ½¸ ²Ò¼ ²» ô²¼Î °ì § °¼¹Î «í Ô» ³Î ±Ò³¸ Î « ²¼ ª Ò¾ Î · §Î³µ¸ ®Î ³²» © Òô ¿» Î ¬ ¸ Î ²¼¹³Î » ²¼´ § Î ì Ò¼« éíëûÍ ²» · ²¼²· ° » ²¼ô°¸ ²Ò¼ ±±Î³» ¸ Ò § Î ²¼ ¹®Î ¹©µ °» Ò ®²´® °Î ¾ Î °» Òô ±Î ³» Ò¼° «Î§ ¸ °Î¾Î» ²¼«²¾²«½°» ®²´®°ì » μ» ²¸ ²¾Î ¸ Ò §»Î ³¸ Î ²¼¹³Î» λ ¼« ¸ ®Î³Î ²» ´³Òß²¼´ ôÎΰ²¼´ ¸ ®¸ ®Ò½ » Î ¾ °½ Î » · ì ô°°íøÒ¼´ ¸ Î ³· ³¸ Î » вíÎ íÉ÷ ø¿Ì®¾ Î ¹Ò¼¸ ²¼½ Î « ¸ Ò ô°°«½ ³²¼´ ¸ ®Î ì Î ³ ¼« ®¾ Î » Î ¸ ¸ °Î « ²¼ ¸ ®Î ³¼´Î éíûÍ ¸ Ò éíëûÍ í Ý®²» ²» ²· ±³Ò¾ Î « ô³Ò· ¸ ®Î ôҳΠ¹» ¸ ²¼ ª Ò¾ Î · § Î ³¼« ®» Î ¼§ °Î « ¸ ®Î × Ò½¼¹²°¸ Ò°Ò¹© ²¼ » ½§» ¸ ¼¸ ²° °Ò¼´¸ γ· §Ò³³Òß²¼´§Î¸ ßÎμ ¸ ®Î » Î ³¸ Î » » «Î ¸ ²°Î « ²¼ ¸ § °Î ò § Î °Òß í
ò íéí ݮΠ½ ±ß ³« · Ò¾ Î · Î ¼¸ ²¼ É÷ ø¿ ³¸ Î » ²¼ ¸ ®Î ô²³» ¸ ®°ô Òô ¸ ®Î ì Î ³ô¹²°²¸ ¸ Î « ¸ ®Î ³Î » ¸ ³½ ¹¸ ½ ³Î Òô °Ò¼´ ¸ Î ³· É÷ ø¿ °Ò¼» » » ®Òß ¼ ²¼ ¸ § °Î éíï¼²¸ ²°°ì } Þ û · ß » §Îμ±³Î· ¸ ½³Î°ì ³Î±²«µ ³Î»½°¸ ²¼´²¼ «²»¹Ò½ ¼¸ Òô } êíÞ· íÔ¸ ¸ ®²» ±Ò²¼¸ É÷ ø¿ ¼« ¼Î ß § Ò³³Òß ²¼´ Òô } êò û· ®« §Îμ¸ ©Î¼ ½±¸ ³¸ λ ³¼´²¼´ ô³Ò· éíèûÍ ¸ Ò éíð¨Í íݮΠª Ò¾ Î · § Î ³ ³Î±Ò³¸ ²¼«²¹¸ Ϋ¸ ®¸ ô½ ³¸ ®Î ³ «Î § ¸ ³Î » ¸ ³½ ¹¸ ½ ³²¼´ Î ç Î ³¹²» Î ß » ²¼ ±³Ò´³Î »»µ ¸ ®²» ®» ¼Òß § Πμ ¹Ò¼¹°½ «Î « ß ®Î ³Î § ì } ê¨Þ· Òô É÷ ø¿ °Ò¼» ³¼´²¼´ ô³Ò· Ó íò ûÍ ¸ Ò Ó íðëûÍ ß Î ³Î ±³Î · ¸ ½ ³Î °ì ³Î ±²« ¼« ³Î ±°¹Î « ß²¸ ®É÷ ø¿ ¼« Ú ³©Î ¸ øÒ¼» ³¼´²¼´ ô³Ò· éíÞÓ Í ¸ Ò éíëûÍ íñ ½ ³¸ ®Î ³· ҳΠ¼ ««²¸ ²Ò¼°} ê꨷ °Ò¼´ ¸ Î ³· É÷ ø¿ ®» § Î Î ¼ ¸ ©Î ¼ ¸ éíûÍ ¼« éíûûÍ µ®Î ¼¹Î ±³Ò¾ ²«²¼´ ¸ ®Î × Ò½ ¼¹²° ß²¸ ®°Ò¼´¸ Î ³· » ¸ § ²°²¸ ì í
ò íû í Ý ® Î ³Î ¾ Î ¼½Î §½«´Î¸ »Î¸ ²¼ñ Χ ³½³ì ò ¨¨é »»½· Ϋ ¸ ®¸ » ¾²¼´» Òô } êíû· ß Ò½ °« §Î «Î°²¾Î³Î«¸ ®³Ò½´®³Î» ¹®Î«½ °²¼´ ¼« ²· ±³Ò¾ Ϋ § °¼¹Î» í÷²¸ ® «Î§ ¸ § β¼´ °Òßγ¸ ®¼ ¼¸ ²¹²±¸ Ϋ «½ ³²¼´ ò ¨¨éÙ¨ûµ °Ò¼´ ¸ Î ³· § Ò³³Ò ß ²¼ ´ § Î ²¼ ´ ¸ © μ ¸ ³¸ λ °Òßγ ¸ ®¼ ¼¸ ²¹²±¸ Ϋ¼«¸ ®Î ³Î »¹®Î«½°²¼´ Îçγ¹²» Î ½¼«Î³¸ ©Î¼¸ ®²» ì γµ ¸ ®²» ®» §Îμ²· ±³Ò¾Î« ½±Ò¼í ï¸ ²» ¼ ¸ ²¹ ²± ¸ Î « ¸ ®¸ ô½ ³¸ ®Î ³ } Þíëû· Òô » ¾ ²¼´» ®¾ Î § Î Î ¼ ¹®²Î ¾ Î « ²¼ Î ¼Î ³° ñ ½ ¼« °Ò¼Î § ³²¼´²¼´ ¸ ®Î ¸ Ò¸ ° ¸ Ò }ûíòû· íÝ®²» ²» Ҿγ¼«§Ò¾Î ¸ ®Î ô²¼¼¹²¼´Òô¼ ««²¸ ²Ò¼° } ò ¨· Òô ½ ¼» ½±±Ò³¸ Ϋ § Ò³³Òß²¼´ ¸ ®Î ³Î ¾ Î ¼½ Î ¹Ò» ¸ Òô ß ®²¹® ²» ±±³Òç ²· ¸ Î °ì } ê· íݮΠô½ °°ì Î ³ Î ôôÎ ¹¸ Òô ¸ ®Î }ê¨Þ· ³Î » ¸ ³½ ¹¸ ½ ³²¼´ ®» » Î ¹½ ³Î « ²¼¸ Î ³Î » ¸ » ¾ ²¼´» Òô } ò · ±Î ³¼¼½ · Ò¾ Î ³¸ ®Î °²ôÎ Òô °Ò¼» ³Î ±²« вíÎ íôÒ³ ¸ ®Î ¼Î ç ¸ ê¨ ì γ» ÌíÔô½°° ³Î ±Ò³¸ µ²¼¹°½«²¼´ ³²»©»»Î»»· μ¸ ²» ¾²°§ °Îí
Ú§ ® ½¾ ð
Ñ« ¾²§ ±¿ « ¾Û ¾·§ î²¾¨±º ß¾ñ Ü É««Éñ ³¨ò ¿ ¬»ß ³±«²ø » ® ¬»²·§»Ñ ¹·§´§ø ¬Î ¿§½Ð«² ñ ·ß± §² ± Ì ¿ ¬»ß ³± «²ø » Çß·± ø »ß·ß½» ÷}± Ó ¿ ¬»ß ¬»ß ø »¬»ß ÷¿ §½Ð«²ø »Ó ÷}± Ó ÷× ß¬·½Ó ¬»ß ðñìïìñï òñë ñ òð ìòòìð ð û ë ññø ïë òû ø ÷ ñë ïð é òìïìñï ðûëñ ðû ïëçûø òè ìû ìñï òû ë ñ òçìçìðç ûëðñø ïëòûø ÷ñëèñé òð ìêìñï òñë ñ ðû ïëêñø òð ìêìñï òñë ñ òñìíìñí û ë ññø ïë ð û ø ÷ ñë ñòé ðèìèìñï íñë ñ öñ ïë çû ø òû ìòñìñï òñë ñ òñìð ìòû ïë è û ø ïë çû ø ïë òê çìòñìñï öñë ñ ò ïë íû ø òû ìòñìñï òíë û ðûìçìòû ïë è û ø ïë çû ø íë û í òû ìòñìñï ðñëñ öñ ïë çñø òû ìòñìñï ððëñ òíìíìòû ïë è û ø ïë çû ø û ë è ñ ðûìòñìñï òû ë ñ ûñ ïëöè ø ðûìòñìñï òû ë ñ òçìòìòû ïë è ñø û ë òñø û ë û ñ ðûìòñìñï òû ë ñ ûñ ïëïñø ðûìòñìñï òû ë ñ ðíìçìòï ïë è ñø û ë òû ø û ë öñ ðíìòñìñï öñë ñ ò ïë û ñø è ìòòìñï ñë ò öñìíìñè ïë êû ø û ë ð ñø ñë ñð è ìòòìñï òû ë ñ ûñ ïëöïø è ìòòìñï òû ë ñ ïìòìòï ïë è û ø û ë ð ñø ïë êï ð ð ìòòìñï ðñëñ öñ ïë íñø è ìòòìñï òñë ñ çìð ìòð ïë è û ø û ë ð ñø öë ïð òìòð ìñï öñë ñ ðûc ïëûûø òìòðìñï ðñëñ ðê ïëûûø ðïìòð ìñï öñë ñ ðûc ïëûñø ðïìòð ìñï ðñëñ öñ ïë û ñø íèòê é èì ê èì èð #ê #
Ì ¸»´ ± ¿²® ´²·¬® ¬§¬²±±º¨¬¼ç ¨¿ ·ôïð° ² ® ç ð𠺲 ·´ ·´½ª § ¬© ± º ¾ »® ²® ¿½§ ¬¿® ¬´² ©² ¬±²í±¨¿· §» ± ®ç·§ ¿ ¬® ª ·² ´ § » ·² § © ·º Ý º² ·´ § »·² ¨§ ·¾ »·ï¬¨¼·ª ¬´ç § » « ¿ø® ª ¬± ª ² ® ¬§ »· ² ªª½§ § » ®¾·²§¿··½²º§» ± ¿²® ³§»¬´¬´§·Ô ç ² ÑÞ ÷Þ ò
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ò Í ¬®¿» ®¹ § º ±î¿ð ëëñêðëëì
ðììñëì³ ðììóë ìé ðììé ëìè ðììè ëìï ÒÔÒÇÍ×Ñ × Ú Ü Û ÞÌî ðììñë ìó êðììøë ìç ¿î ¾ ´ » ï Ó¸ } ê } è } ê } ê Ô ï ³Û ï ´ ³¾ ³÷ Ò ± ¬» èñô í÷í ôçìøô ôçôèñ » ©Þ±®··®Þ²¹º ¬®·¸Ý ©¿°´²¸°Ð³·®º ·°óó©ØÎßÜ éï ÷ðì øé èø » ©Þ±®··®Þ²¹º ¬®·¸Ý ©¿°´²¸°Ð³·®º ·°óó©Ø» ®¹ Î ß Ü èø éé ðì ñð ¾ ©¼ ¸· ©½©ó´¸²®¹ ®ª¸ª Ý°·º©½¸®ß©«©¹ñ© ÷ ððí ¿ ðó¸ ÷ ðèí ÷ ðéí ß©½ñ©½ø×÷¹·©°ª©½ ÚЩ«©Ð ®¬ß ©«©¹ñ©±°Ð°¹ ©ª ³ó ÷÷ ÷ é í è Ô ï ³Û ï ´ ³¾ ³Ó÷ ½ ¾ ¬û· øôø ÷ ìí÷ ôçôèñ ôçðèé è
¿°´²¸°Ð¯²¹°¹²¹º ß©Óñ²·©ó©¹¸×¨ ° ö ² ó ñ ó » © ¸ ¾ © ¼ ¸Ú øñì ÷ ÷ìð ôçôøô ôçðïé
Ô¿®ó´·²ª©½ °ª ¬®ÐЮު } ê } è } ê } ê Ê®¹ º ¸©· ó ¼ ®··®Þ²¹º ¯²ö©½ èèó øí÷ ï³ì øôø Í °· ²°¼ Ð © ø³ ÷Óì ôó³ ô³³ Ì Ý®·¸ ¸©·ó±®··®Þ²¹º ïô ÷ø÷ ôïø ðìð Û®¸°Ð û ö¸©· ¹°Ð±®··®Þ²¹ º øñø ÷ ìí÷ ôçôèñ ôçðèé Ê©ªª ÷¹ «©ª¸ó ©¹ ¸ª ÷ óìí ê û û » ©¸û ö¸©· ¹ °Ð ¾ ©¼ ¸ øôø ÷ ìí÷ ôçôèñ ôçðèé
§½©¼¸¬ñ¹½©½ ¼ ªÝ ®·¸¸©·ó °¹½ «°·²°¼ Щ · °¸© Ю°¹ ª ôø Ò ðçô ðïÒ ðïÒ
±¬»æÌ ¸Ýæ¿ °·´»°Ú ² ´½°½¹ ´½Î ¯ æ«®´æê æ½» ÷¿ ² ¯ í ´¨ »Ýæê °¾´ê ®ê »Ýæ¿ ¬®½¹ ´Ú ¹ °½ ©¬¬º ò¬ ¹ °·´»°Ú ·®·¬¨æ¨
ò ïÌï ¿¾´ »± ò ¾´ª ± ¸© ª ¬¸²© ¾²¨± ²± ® ²± ¼¨¾» ·±´²°¸±®½± §²± · ²ª ¼°¸± ´ é } Ìî ³ « °¨ ²© ± §ª º¼¸± ª ð ³ëëñê ³ ëë¹ï ¿©±¼±°¸}¹ë« ªð«¾²º¼°¨¯ ·±´²°¨²©±é±¾¼ª 𬩠°§© }ò ë« °¸²ª ´± 𰨾¨§±· 𼪠« « ¾²º¼°¨¯ °¨± ¸²« ± ¨²¸ï ¿©±¼±ðª¼± ²©± ²ª²¾»´ª¼¼ª ¬ °¨ ¯ ¼± Ø º °¼± « ±¨²°¨²©± é±¾¼°¸ }³ë³ « ï ¿© ± »¾¼¯ ± ¸²± »± « ±¨²ª 𠲩 °¸¨±¬´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¼±Øº°¼±« ±¨²¼±»¾²±¸²ª ÎßÔ ÔÓÑô¸Ù ²©± ´¾»¾¨§± ½¼±·ª « °¨¾¨²»é ¼± »¾²± ¸ ²ª ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯°¨¼±¸½± §² ª 𠲩 ± Ú ± ¨± ¼¾» Ûº¨· §¾½°²¾» ½¼ª ¯ ¼¾««±ï
òï³ïÞ§ª¨ª « °§ Ûª ¼± §¾¸²¸ ± ® ½± §² ²© ± 쾸± ß ¾²± ²ª ¼± « ¾°¨ ¾¼ª º¨· ûïî ñµ ¬ °²© ²© ± ¨± ® ² « ª ± « ±¨²Ù°¨³ëëñê ë¹Ù»°Ë± »é ²ª ´ ± ·ª ¬ ¨¬ ¾¼·ïÔ¸ « ± ¨²°ª¨±·°¨½¾¼¾¯¼¾½© ³ ïò ¾´ ª ± ²© ± Õ ø ± §ª ¨ª « é °¸ 𰨱 »é ´ ¾»¾¨§± ·ïÞ§ª¨ª « °§ ¼± §ª ± ¼é ¾½½± ¾¼¸ ²ª ´ ± ¸º¸²¾°¨±·Ù ²©±©ªº¸°¨¯ « ¾¼Ë± ²°¸ ¸± ²²»°¨¯ ·ª ¬ ¨ ¾¨· °¨ð»¾²°ª ¨ ¼± « ¾°¨¸ ¸²¾´ »± ïÓª¨¯²±¼« ¼¾²±¸ÐÉ÷Óìݾ¼± ±®½±§²±· ²ª ¼°¸±ð¼ª« ²©±°¼§º¼¼±¨²»ª¬¸¾¸ó±¨²¼¾»Úª±¼¨«±¨²´ª¼¼ª ¬ °¨ ¯ °¸ 𪠼± § ¾ ¸ ² ²ª °¨ § ¼± ¾ ¸ ± ï Óª¨¯ ²± ¼« É ÷ Óì ¼¾²± ¸ ¾¼± 𪠼± §¾¸²²ª ´ ± °¨ ²© ± ¼± ¯ °ª¨ªðûïîñµÜñµ¾»²©ªº¯© ¾¨é ¸°¯¨¸ ª 𬱠¾Ë± ¨°¨¯ ± §ª ¨ª « °§ ¾§²°°²é « ¾é ¼± ¸º»²°¨ ¼¾²± ¸ ´±»ª ¬ûïîñµï
ò ïò ï ÷ °²© ¾ðº¨·°¨¯ ¼± غ°¼± « ±¨²ª ð}³ë³ « ²© ± Í°¼±§²ª¼ªð󪼽ª ¼¾²± ö ± ¼°§± ¸ ¬ °»» §ª ¨²°¨º± ²ª « ª ¨°²ª ¼²© ± ½¼± ¾°»°¨¯ °¨²± ¼± ¸²¼¾²± ¸ ¾¨· ²© ± « ¾¼Ë± ²ðª ¼± §¾¸²¸Ù°¨ ª ¼·± ¼²ª °¨ðª ¼« ´ ª ¼¼ª ¬ °¨¯ ·± §°¸°ª¨¸²©¼ªº¯ © ª º² ²© ± é ±¾¼ïÔ»¸ª ¬°²© 쾸± ß¾²± 𪠼±§¾¸² ²ª ´± »ª ¬±¼²© ¾¨²© ± 𪠼±§¾¸² ª 𻪠¨¯±¼²±¼« É ÷Óì¼¾²±¸°²°¸½¼ª ½ª ¸±·²ª « ¾®°« °¸± ¸© ª ¼²²±¼« ¾¨· ¾¼°¾´ »± ¼¾²± ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¬ °²© °¨ ²© ± »°« °²¸ ½¼ª ½ª ¸± · °¨ ¸± §²°ª¨ û ´±»ª¬Ù»ª§Ë°¨¯ °¨ »ª ¨¯± ¼²± ¼« ð°®± ·¼¾²± ·±´²°ð»ª ¨¯± ¼²± ¼« ¼¾²± ¸ð¾»»´±»ª ¬ûïîñµª ¼°ð쾸± ß¾²± °¸ðª ¼±§¾¸²²ª ¼°¸± ¾´ª ± »ª¨¯±¼ ²±¼« ¼¾²±¸ï½½ª ¼²º¨°²°± ¸ ¬ °»» §ª ¨²°¨º± ²ª ´ ± ¸ªº¯©²²ª ¼±·º§± °¨²±¼±¸²§ª¸²¸´é ²©± §ª¨±¼¸°ª¨ ¾¨· ¼± ܸ²¼º§²º¼°¨¯ ª 𲩠± ± ® °¸²°¨¯ ·±´²½ª ¼²ðª »°ª ¾»²© ª º¯ © °¨ ²© °¸ §º¼¼± ¨²§»°« ¾²± ª ð ´ª ²© »ª ¬¸©ª¼²¾¨· »ª ¨¯ ܲ± ¼« °¨²± ¼± ¸² ¼¾²± ¸Ù ¸§ª ½± 𪠼 ¼± ¸§© ± ·º»°¨¯ °¸ »°« °²±·ï¿© °¸°¸ »°Ë±»é ²ª ´± ²©± §¾¸± ¾»¸ª °¨²©± «±·°º« ²±¼« ¾¸ ¸©ª¼²²±¼« ¼¾²±¸Ð°ï±ï쾸± ß¾²±Ý °¸ ±®½± §²± · ²ª ´ ± ¼¾¨¯ ± ´ ª º¨· ´±²¬±±¨ ûïñµ¾¨· ñµ ¬°²© »ª¨¯±¼²±¼« ¼¾²±¸ ¸°«°» ¾ ¼» é ¸ ª Ù ´ ± § ¾º¸± ª 𲩱 ±§ª¨ª«°§¼±¾¸ª ¨¸© °¯© »°¯© ²±·°¨ò ï³ ¾´ª ±ïΪ ¬±±¼°ð»ª ¨¯± ¼²± ¼« ¼¾²± ¸ ¼°¸± ¾¸¸© ª ¼² ²± ¼« ¼¾²± ¸ð¾»»²© °¸« ¾é ½¼ª °·± ²©±óªº¨§°» ¬ °²© ¾ ¨ ª ½ ½ ª ¼²º ¨ °²é ²ª ¼±½¾é »ª ¨¯
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ·¾²±·É ÷Ó쬰²© ¾·°¸§ªº¨²¾¨· ¼±½»¾§± °²¬°²© ¸©ª¼²²±¼« «ª¨± é ¾²²© ± ¸¾« ± ª ¼ ´ ± ²²± ¼ ¼¾²± ¸ï
ÞÍ © î¿¿î · ²Ô § ³ ² ²®ô ±î ¿ ð ë ë ñ êð ëëì é ðëëìêë¼»Ôèðëë¼êëÎ
ûïÌ ¿©± 󪺨§°» °¸¼±Øº°¼±·²ª ¸±²¾¼°ª º¸»°« °²¸ 𪠼 ³ ëëñê ë¹Ù ³ ëë¹ê ëî ¾¨· ³ ëëî ê ë× °¨ ¾§§ª ¼·¾¨§± ¬°²© ²© ± Óª §¾» Úª ± ¼¨« ±¨²Ô§²³ëëò Ù © ¾°¨¯ ¼±¯¾¼· 𪠼ó æ É ÛÔô¸½¼º·±¨²°¾» §ª·± ï ¿© ± ¸± »°« °²¸ °¨§»º·°¨¯ ½¼º·± ¨²°¾» °¨·°§¾²ª ¼¸ ¾¼± ·± ²¾°»± · °¨ Ô½½±¨·°® Ôï ¿© ± »°« °²¸ ¸½± §°ð°§ ²ª ¿¼± ¾¸º¼é Ñ ¾¨¾¯ ± « ± ¨²¾¼± ¾¸ 𪠻»ª ¬ ¸ç
ûï³ æ ¨ ¼± ¸½± §² ª ð ± ® ²± ¼¨¾» ·±´²Ù°²°¸¼±§ª ««±¨·± · ²© ¾² ²© ± ó ª º¨§°» ¾½½¼ª ± ¸ ²©±ðª»»ª¬°¨¯ ¾º²© ª ¼°¸± · »°« °²¸ 𪠼 °²¸ ²ª ²¾» ± ® ²± ¼¨¾» ·± ´ ² ¯ ¼ª ¸¸ ª ð °¨± ¸²« ± ¨²¸ 𪠼 ²© ± ¨± ® ² ò 𰨾¨§°¾» é ± ¾¼¸Ù ¾¨· ¾½½¼ª ± ¸ ²© ± °¨§¼± ¾¸± °¨ ²©± ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ »°« °²¸ 𪠼 ³ëëûê ëñï¿© ± ¸± »°« °²¸ ¾¼± ¼± غ°¼±·²ª °·±¨²°ðé ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¸± ½¾¼¾²± 𼪠« ª ²© ± ¼ »ª ¨¯ ²± ¼« »°¾´ °»°²°± ¸ ¸º§© ¾¸ 𰨾¨§± »± ¾¸± ¸ï¿© ± ó ª º¨§°» °¸ ²© ± ¼± 𪠼± ¾¸Ë± · ²ª ¾½½¼ª ± ²© ± ¸± »°« °²¸ ¾¨· ²ª ·± »± ¯ ¾²± ¾º²© ª ¼°²é ²ª ²©±Í°¼±§²ª¼ªð󪼽ª¼¾²±ö±¼°§±¸Ù¬°²©°¨²©±ª±¼¾»» »°« °²ðª ¼¾¨é °¨·°°·º¾» é ± ¾¼Ù ²ª ± ðð± §² « ª ± « ±¨²´±²¬±±¨²© ± ¸±½¾¼¾²±»é ¾¯¼±±·»°« °²¸ðª ¼´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¾¨· ª ²© ± ¼ »ª ¨¯ ²± ¼« » °¾ ´ °»°²°± ¸ïÔ¨é ¸º§© §© ¾¨¯± ¸¬°»» ´ ± ¼±½ª ¼²±·²ª ²© ± ó ª º¨§°» ¾ ² ²© ± ¨ ± ® ² ¾ ¾ °» ¾ ´ » ± « ± ± ²°¨ ¯ 𪠻 » ª ¬ °¨¯ ²© ± §© ¾¨¯ ± ï
½ ¹ æ î ¹ Ôè¹ èß « ¸®´î¿²ô ¹ è ³ ² ²®ô »ô ±îÌÌî·ôß
« ¸®´î¿²ô¹è ³² ²® ðëëÞêëñ ðëëñêëì ðëëì êë¼ ðëë¼êëÎ } } } } ìª ¼¼ª ¬ °¨¯ ¶×¹ ÌÙÌ×ñ ÌÙ³¹× ÌÙò¹ë ²©±¼Óª¨¯¿±¼« Ó°¾´ °»°²°± ¸ Ìë Ìë Ìë Ìë çî®» Ì ïïì Ñé Ñïñ Ñé ð ¼Î Ñé ò ¼ë
ûïò ¿© ± ó ª º¨§°» °¸ ¾ » ¸ ª ¾ ¸Ë± · ²ª ¾½½¼ª ± ¾¨ ª½±¼¾²°ª¨¾»´ªº¨·¾¼é 𪠼 ± ® ²± ¼¨¾» ·± ´ ² 𪠼 ²© ± ¸¾« ± ½± ¼°ª·ï¿©±ª½±¼¾²°ª¨¾» ´ ªº¨·¾¼é °¸ ¨ª ¼« ¾»»é »ª ¬ ± ¼ ²© ¾¨ ²© ± ¾º²© ª ¼°¸± · »°« °² ¾¨· ¼± ð»± §²¸ ²© ± « ª ¸² »°Ë± »é Ù ½¼º·± ¨² ´º²¨ª ²²© ± ¬ª ¼¸²§¾¸± ¸§±¨¾¼°ª ¬ °²©ªº²²©± ¾··°²°ª ¨¾» ©±¾·¼ªª« °¨§»º·±·¬°²© °¨²©± ¾º²© ª ¼°¸± · »°« °² ²ª ¾»»ª ¬ 𪠼 ± ® ¾« ½»± 𪠼 º¨º¸º¾» §¾¸© « ª ± « ±¨²¸ï¿©± ª½±¼¾²°ª¨¾»´ªº¨·¾¼é°¸¾«¾¨¾¯± « ±¨²²ª ª »ðª ¼°¨é ±¾¼« ª ¨°²ª ¼°¨¯´é ²©± Í°¼±§²ª¼ªð󪼽ª¼¾²±ö±¼°§±¸ï¿©±ª½±¼¾²°ª¨¾»´ªº¨·¾¼é « ¾é ´ ± ´ ¼± ¾§©±·²±« ½ª ¼¾¼°»é ª ¨ ª §§¾¸°ª ¨¸ ·º± ²ª ¾¼°¾²°ª¨¸°¨§¾¸©ð»ª¬ïΪ¬±±¼Ù¾¸º¸²¾°¨± · ª ¼ ¼±¯º»¾¼²¼±¨· ¾´ ª ± ²©± ª½± ¼¾²°ª ¨¾» ´ ªº¨·¾¼é « ¾é ²¼°¯¯± ¼¾ ¨± ± · ²ª ¼± °± ¬ ´ ª ²© ²© ± ª ½± ¼¾²°ª¨¾» ´ ªº¨·¾¼é¾¨·²©± ¾º²©ª¼°¸±·»°« °²ïÔ¸ ¬ °²© ²©±¾º²©ª¼°¸±·»°« °²²© ± ª ½± ¼¾²°ª ¨¾» ´ ª º¨·¾¼é °¸ ¼±Øº°¼±·²ª °·±¨²°ðé ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¸± ½¾¼¾²± 𼪠« ª ²©±¼»ª¨¯ ²± ¼« »°¾´ °»°²°± ¸ï ¿©± 󪺨§°» °¸ ²© ± ¼± 𪠼± ¾¸Ë±·²ª ¾½½¼ª ± ²© ± ¸± »°« °²¸ ¾¨· ²ª ·± »± ¯ ¾²± ¾º²© ª ¼°²é ²ª ²©±Í°¼±§²ª¼ªð󪼽ª ¼¾²± ö ± ¼°§± ¸Ù¬ °²© °¨ ²©± ª±¼¾»»»°« °² 𪠼¾¨é °¨·°°·º¾» é ± ¾¼Ù ²ª ± ðð± §²« ª ± « ± ¨²´ ± ²¬ ± ± ¨ ²© ± ¸±½¾¼¾²±»é ¾¯ ¼± ± · »°« °²¸ 𪠼´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¾¨· ª ²© ± ¼»ª ¨¯ ²± ¼« »°¾´ °»°²°± ¸ïÔ¨é ¸º§© §© ¾¨¯ ± ¸ ¬°»» ´ ± ¼± ½ª ¼²± ·²ª ²© ± ó ª º¨§°» ¾ ² ²© ± ¨± ® ²¾¾°»¾´ »± « ±±²°¨¯ 𪠻»ª ¬°¨¯ ²© ± §© ¾¨¯± ï
½¹ æ î ¹ Ôè¹ èß °Ó¹ ¿» ®²îÔ» Ì©î¸Ôè» ¿º » ô ±îÌÌî· ô ß
° Ó¹ ¿» ®²îÔ» Ì©î¸Ôè» ¿º ðëëÞêëñ ðëëñêëì ðëëì êë¼ ðëë¼êëÎ } } } } ìª ¼¼ª ¬ °¨¯ ¶ûë ÌÙÌëë ÌÙÌ× ò ÌÙ³ î ñ ²© ± ¼Óª ¨¯ ¿± ¼« Ó°¾´ °»°²°± ¸ Ìë Ìë Ìë Ìë çî®» Ì ïñë Ñé ÑÑë Ñé Ñïò Ñé ð Îñ
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ñÍ ç¿¹ » ô ¸¿º ×» Ô» § ¹ ¹ Ô®ËÔè²æ » ®î¿ô
ñïÌ ¿©±ð°¼¸²½¼º·± ¨²°¾» °¨·°§¾²ª ¼ °¨ ¼± ¸½± §² ª ð ²¼± ¾¸º¼é « ¾¨¾¯ ± « ± ¨² °¸ ²© ¾² ²©±óªº¨§°» © ¾¸ ¾·ª½²±·²©±óæÉÛÔóª·± ª ð É ¼¾§²°§± 𪠼 ¿¼± ¾¸º¼é Ñ ¾¨¾¯ ± « ± ¨² °¨ ²©±Éº´»°§ö±¼°§±¸ï ¿©°¸¬¾¸¾·ª ½²±·´é ²© ± ó ªº¨§°» ¾²²© ± Þ® ± §º²°± ìª ¾¼· « ± ± ²°¨¯ ª¨²©± Ìò ¸ Ñ ¾¼§© ³ ëëò ï
ñï³ ¿©±óªº¨§°» °¸ ¼±Øº°¼±·²ª ¸±²¾¨ º½½± ¼ »°« °² ª¨°²¸ð°®±·°¨²±¼±¸²¼¾²± ±®½ª ¸º¼± ¸ 𪠼 ²©± §º¼¼±¨²é±¾¼¾¨· ¨± ® ²ò 𰨾¨§°¾» é ± ¾¼¸ï¿© °¸ »°« °²¼± ½¼± ¸± ¨²¸ ²© ± « ¾® °« º« ½¼ª ½ª ¼²°ª ¨ ª ð ·±´²²©±óªº¨§°» ¬ °» » © ¾ ± ¾ ² ¾ ¨ é ¯ ° ± ¨ ²°« ± ·º¼°¨¯ ²© ± ½± ¼°ª·¾²ð°®±·°¨²±¼±¸²¼¾²±¸ï¿© ± ½º¼½ª ¸± ª 𠲩 ± »°« °²°¸ ²ª ½¼ª °·± ¸§ª½± 𪠼²© ± ó ª º¨§°» ²ª ²¾Ë± ¾·¾¨²¾¯ ± ª ð ð¾»»°¨¯ °¨²± ¼± ¸² ¼¾²± ¸ ´ é ±¨¸º¼°¨¯¾« °¨°« º« »±±»ª ð¾¼°¾´»± ¼¾²± ·±´²ï Î ª ¬ ± ± ¼ ¸ ± ²²°¨ ¯ ¾ » °« °² » ± ¸¸ ²©¾¨ Ìëëµ §¾¨ ¼± ¸²¼°§² ²© ± ó ª º¨§°»ô¸ ¾´ °»°²é ²ª ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¾·¾¨§± ª 𨱱·¬© ±¨»ª ¨¯²±¼« ð°®±· °¨²±¼±¸²¼¾²±¸¾¼± ¾²²©±°¼»ª¬½ª°¨²ï ì ± § ¾ º ¸ ± » °« °²¸ ¾ ¼± ¸ ± ² 𪠼 ò é ± ¾ ¼ ½± ¼°ª·²©± ½¼º·±¨²°¾» §ª·± ¾»»ª ¬ ¸ ó ªº¨§°»ô¸ ²ª ´ª ¼¼ª ¬ °¨ ¾ · ¾¨§± ª 𨱠± ·Ù ²©±¼±ðª¼±²ª ½¼ª°·±²©±óªº¨§°»¬°²© « ¾® °« º« ð»± ® °´ °» °²é °² °¸ ¼± § ª ««±¨·±·²©¾²¾»°«°²ªðÌÌñµ´±¸±² 𪼱¾§© é ±¾¼ï
½¹ æ î ¹ Ôè¹ èß ¨ÓÓ¹ ¿Ì² ²® î Ô ±²û¹ è ²Ô®¹ ¿¹ô®¿»®¹ ¹ûÓîô¸¿¹ô ±î¿ðëëÞêëñéðëëñêëìé ðëëì êë¼ » Ôè ðëë¼êëÎ î±ÑÑñª
ñïò ¿© ± ó ª º¨§°» °¸ ¼± غ°¼± · ²ª ¸± ² ¾¨ º½½± ¼ »°« °² ª ¨ °²¸ ¾¼°¾´ »± °¨²± ¼± ¸² ¼¾²± ± ® ½ª ¸º¼± ¸ 𪠼 §º¼¼± ¨²é ± ¾¼ ¾¨· ¨± ® ²ò 𰨾¨§°¾» é ± ¾¼¸ï¿© °¸ »°« °²¼± ½¼± ¸± ¨²¸ ²©±«¾®°«º« ½¼ª½ª¼²°ª¨ªð ·±´² ²© ± ó ª º¨§°» ¬ °»» ©¾±¾²¾¨é ¯°±¨²°« ± ·º¼°¨¯²© ± ½±¼°ª ·¾²¾¼°¾´»± °¨²±¼±¸²¼¾²±¸¾¨· ±®½ª ¸± · ²ª °¨²± ¼± ¸²¼¾²± ¼°¸± ¸ï¿© °¸ °¸ ¸°« °» ¾ ¼ ²ª ²© ± ¾ ¼°¾ ´ » ± °¨ ²± ¼± ¸ ² ¼¾ ²± ½ ¼ª ½ ª ¼²°ª ¨ ¸ ± ² 𪠼 ³ëëò ê ëû ¬ © °§© ¼± ½¼± ¸± ¨²¸ ²© ± ¸º« ª ð °¨²± ¼± ¸² ½¾°· ª¨¸©ª¼²²±¼« ª ¼ ¾ ¼°¾´ »± ¼¾²± ·± ´ ²Ù ± ® ½ ¼± ¸ ¸ ± · ¾ ¸ ¾ ½ ± ¼§ ±¨²¾¯± ª 𲩱󪺨§°» ô¸ ²ª ²¾ » °¨ ²± ¼± ¸ ² ½ ¾ é « ± ¨ ²¸ ï ¿ © ± » °« °² 𪠼 ³ ë ë û ê ë ñ ª¨¬¾¼·¸¼±½¼±¸±¨²¸²© ± ½¼ª½ª¼²°ª¨ ªð¸©ª¼²²±¼« ¾¨·¾¼°¾´»±¼¾²±·±´²±®½¼±¸¸±· ¾¸¾ ½± ¼§± ¨²¾¯ ± ª 𲪠²¾» ·±´²ïö ©ª¼² ²±¼« ¾¨·¾¼°¾´ »± °¨²± ¼± ¸²¼¾²± ¸ ¾¼± »°Ë± »é ²ª ð¾»» ¨± ® ²é ± ¾¼ ¾¨· ¾¼± »°Ë± »é ²ª ´ ± »ª ¬ ± ¼ ²©¾¨»ª¨¯±¼²±¼« ¼¾²±¸Ð¸±±¸²¼¾²±¯é 𪼳ëëûêëñ´±»ª¬ÝÙæ²°¸ ²©±¼±ðª¼±¼±§ª««±¨·±·²© ¾²¾»°« °²ª ðû뵪 ð·±´²´± ¸±² 𪠼±¾§© é ±¾¼ï
½¹ æ î ¹ Ôè¹ èß ¨ÓÓ¹ ¿ ̲ ²® îÔ ¾» ¿²» Ð̹ ²Ô®¹ ¿¹ ô ® ¿» ®¹ ¹ ûÓîô ¸¿¹ô ±î¿ðëëÞêëñé ðëëñêëì é ðëëìêë¼ »Ôèðëë¼êëÎî±Þëª
ñïû ¿©± 󪺨§°» °¸¼±Øº°¼± · ²ª ¸± ² º½½± ¼ ¾¨· »ª ¬ ± ¼ »°« °²¸ 𪠼 ²© ± « ¾²º¼°²é ¸²¼º§²º¼± ª ð °²¸ ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¸ï ¿© °¸ °¸ ·± ¸°¯¨± · ²ª »°« °²²© ± ¼°¸Ë ª ð ± ® ½ª ¸º¼± ²ª © °¯© °¨²± ¼± ¸²¼¾²± ¸ ´ é ¼± ¸²¼°§²°¨¯ ²© ± »± ± »ª ð« ¾²º¼°¨¯ ·± ´ ²°¨ ¾¨é ¯ °± ¨ é ± ¾¼ï¿© ± »°« °²¸ ¼±½¼±¸±¨²²© ± ¾« ªº¨²ª ð ½¼ª ± §²± · ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯²© ¾²°¸ð°®±·¼¾²± « ¾²º¼°¨¯°¨±¾§© ½± ¼°ª · ¾¸ ¾ ½± ¼§±¨²¾¯± ª 𲪠²¾» ½¼ª ± §²± · ´ ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ²© ¾²°¸ð°®± ·¼¾²± ¾¨· ¾¼± ½¼ª ½ª ¸±· ¾¸ðª »»ª ¬¸ç
¨ÓÓ¹ ¿Ì² ²® ³î·¹¿Ì² ²® Õ¨·±¼Ì³«ª¨²©¸ òëµ ëµ Ì³«ª¨²©¸¾¨· ¬ °²© °¨ ³ û « ª ¨²© ¸ ò ëµ ëµ ³ û « ª¨²©¸¾¨· ¬ °²© °¨ ñ é ±¾¼¸ ûëµ ëµ ñé ±¾¼¸¾¨·¬°²© °¨Ìëé ± ¾¼¸ ñëµ ëµ Ìë é ± ¾¼¸¾¨· ¾´ ª ± ¶ ëµ ³ ñµ
½¹ æ î ¹ Ôè¹ èß ¨ÓÓ¹ ¿» Ôè ³ î· ¹ ¿Ì² ²®ô îÔ ±²û¹ è ¿» ®¹ » ®¸¿²®º ô ®¿¸æ ®¸¿¹ » ô » Ðî¾¹ Í
ì ɸÐÌ²æ µ î ¿ú ô ³î»Ô©î»¿è
¹ïÌï¿©±É÷Óì°¸¾¯ª±¼¨«±¨²¾¯±¨§é ²© ¾² ½¼ª °·± ¸ ª¨±ªð ²©±§©±¾½±¸²¸ªº¼§±¸ªð»ª¨¯ Ü ²± ¼« 𺨷¸ ²ª »ª §¾» ¾º²© ª ¼°²°± ¸ï É ¼°ª ¼²ª ²©±°¨²¼ª·º§²°ª ¨ ª 𠲩 ± É ¼º·± ¨²°¾» ó ª·± ²© ± É ÷ Óì « ¾·± »ª ¾¨¸ ¾¾°» ¾´ »± ²ª »ª §¾» ¾º²©ª¼°²°±¸ª¨¾ غª²¾´¾¸°¸ï÷°²© ±ð𱧲𼪫 ²©± Ì ¸ Ô½¼°» ³ëëû٠غª ²¾ © ¾¸ ´ ± ± ¨ ¾´ ª »°¸© ±· ¾¨· »ª §¾» ¾º²© ª ¼°²°± ¸ §¾¨ ·¼¾¬ ·ª ¬ ¨ ²© ± °¼ ´ª ¼¼ª ¬°¨¯ ¼±Øº°¼±« ±¨²ð¼ª « ²©±É÷ÓìÙ¬°²© ª º²»°« °²Ù½¼ª °·°¨¯ ²©±é ¾¼± ¾·©±¼°¨¯ ²ª ²© ± ó ª ·± Ù ¨ª ²
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com » µµ·²¹¬ ±¾ ® ¾©©¾ó±¾ ¾¹´¼µ¹¿½¹¿ ½©µ¹¾ ± ²¹ ½ » µï ±²¾¹ ëëøç÷°¸ ©¾ò²® ²±²¾¹ ¸ µ©²¾¿ç²«µ«±½ï·¼²¹ ¬ ½ ® º ¿¬ µ± ¿µé²ï ²±°«
¼Í ËÔ¾¹ ô ® ¹ Ô®¬®¿» ®¹ § º ³ ² ²®ô
Ì« ë« Ýòµ ù¾ º ¹ï²¼¨ » µ§±µ©¹½¼¿µ® ± ²» ©µ¿º ﵿ ® ª ±òµ ½Ð½²¼½ ® ²¼²± ª ¾ é ©µ Ð µ ¹ º µ ® ½ ¼½¹ï µ» « Ýò µ Ý©µ½» º ©ª Û¾ ¼²ï ª ½ ¼¼¾ ó » é¾ © ± ò µ µ § ± µ ©¹ ½ ¼²» ½ ± ²¾¹ ¾é±òµ» µ ® ½¼½¹ï µ» » ò ¾ º ¼¿ ±ò ²» ¸ ©¾ е ï ¾ » ± µééµï ±²Ðµ« Ýò ²» ï ¾º¼¿ ®µ º¹¿µ©±½·µ¹ ® ª ±òµù¾ º ¹ï²¼¾ ©® ª Ú§±µ©¹½¼³º ¹¿î½¹½¬ µ©» ¾¹±òµ ù¾º¹ï²¼¨ » ® µò½¼é« Ýò©¾ º¬ò¾º±ðììñôðììøÜ ±òµÍ²©µï±¾ ©¾ éù¾ ©¸¾©½±µ¯µ©Ð²ïµ» ò½» ·µ¸ ± ±òµ ²¹±µ©µ» ± ¾ º ±¼¾¾·º¹¿µ© ©µÐ²µó ® º ± ò ½» ï ¾ ¹ï ¼º ¿µ¿ ±ò½± ±òµî½©·µ± ¸ ¾ » ²±²¾ ¹²» » º ïò ±ò½± ±òµ µ§±µ©¹½¼²» ²¹¬ ¾ é® ½¼½¹ï µ» ó ½» ¹¾ ± ½¸ ¸ ©¾ ¸ ©²½±µ òµ¹ïµ²¹Ðµ» ±îµ¹± ¾ é» º ©¸ ¼º » ® ½¼½¹ïµ» ±µ¹¿ ±¾ ®µ ¼²î²±µ¿±¾ï½»ò鼾󽹿¼²×º ²¿²±ª î ½¹½¬ µî µ¹±« ɹ Í µï µî ® µ©Ü ò¾ óµÐµ©±òµ ÛÔ Þí ²¹±µ©µ» ± ©½±µé¾ ©ðø´ û 쪵½©» éµ¼¼ ± ¾ ñ « ø ê ½ ¼¾ ó ¸ ¾ ²¹ ± ²¹ ± ò µ ª µ½© » ¾ 齩ܱò µ©µé¾ ©µ } ûìî¾é ½¿¿²±²¾ ¹½¼®¾©©¾ó²¹¬ó½» ±½·µ¹±¾ ¸©µéº¹¿ ½î½±º©²¹¬ ¼¾ ½¹ ²¹ ðììøôìè ½¹¿ ¼µ¹± ¾ º ± ½± ©½±µ» ²¹ µ§ï µ»» ¾éñ«ßê ±¾î½±ïò±òµî½±º©²±ª¿½±µ ¾é±ò½±¼¾½¹«
Ì«ð« Ô²±ò µééµï±é©¾î±òµë¬ Ѹ©²¼ðììñܱ¾ ï ¾ ²¹ï ²¿µ ó ²±ò ±ò µ ²¹±©¾ ¿º ï ±²¾¹ ¾é ±òµ ¸ ©º¿µ¹±²½¼ï ¾ ¿µÜ ±òµÓ ÍÛÙ ²» » ºµ¿ ¼µ¬ ²» ¼½±²¾ ¹ ½¹¿ ¬ º ²¿½¹ï µ ¾ ¹ ±ò µ ²» » º µ ¾ éÞ¾ ï ½¼æ ¾ е©¹î µ¹± ɹе» ±î µ¹±» « Ýò ²» ¼µ¬ ²» ¼½±²¾ ¹ ½¼¼¾ ó » ù ¾ º ¹ï ²¼» ó ²±ò µ§±µ©¹½¼¿µ® ± ±¾ ò¾ ¼¿²¹Ðµ» ±îµ¹±» é¾ ©î¾ ©µ±ò½¹ûèñ ¿½ª » « ³º ©±ò µ© 驵µ¿¾ î » ½©µ ½¼¼¾ ó µ¿ ó ò ²ï ò ¬ ²Ðµ ù ¾ º ¹ï ²¼¨ » ¬ ©µ ½ ± µ © é¼µ § ²® ²¼²± ª ½ ¹ ¿ ò µ¹ï µ ½ïïµ»» ±¾ò²¬òµ©©µ±º©¹»Ü¸©¾Ð²¿µ¿±ò½±½¹ª ²¹Ðµ» ±î µ¹± » ±©½±µ¬ ª ²» ï ¾ ¹» ²» ±µ¹± ó ²±ò ±ò µ ¹µó ¸ ©º ¿µ¹±²½¼é©½î µó ¾ ©·« Ýòµ ¸ ©º ¿µ¹±²½¼ï¾ ¿µ©µ×º ²©µ» ±ò½±ù¾ º ¹ï²¼» » µ ± ¼²î ²± » ¾¹²¹Ðµ» ±îµ¹±» é¾ ©¸µ©²¾¿» ¼¾¹¬µ©±ò½¹û è ñ¿½ª» « ɱ ²» ± ò µ ©µ é¾ ©µ ¸ ©¾¸¾»µ¿Ë
½¹æî ¹Ôè¹èß ¨ÓÓ¹ ¿Ì² ²® î Ô ô ¸ ô ²Ô ¾ ¹ ô ®¹ è ±î ¿ Ó ¹ ¿²î è ô Ìî Ô § ¹ ¿ ®´ » Ô ò ì Þ è » º ô ß
ç î ®» Ì Ó ¿ ²Ô æ ²Ó » Ì ô ¸ ²Ô ¾¹ô®¹è±î¿ ðëëÞêëñ ðëëñêëì ðëëì êë¼ ðëë¼êëÎ » Ó¹¿²îèÌîÔ§ ¹ ¿®´» Ô ò ì Þ è» ºô } } } } Î ¸ ¸ µ©¼²î ²± ëì ëì ëì ëì
ÎÍ ½ ¹ æ î ¹ Ôè» ®²îÔô
Ýò½±±òµÚ§µïº ±²Ðµí¾½©¿Ë
ß«ë« Ñ ¸ ¸ ©¾Ðµ±òµ²¹²±²½¼±©µ½» º ©ª » ±©½±µ¬ ª é¾ © ðììøôðììè ½» » µ± ¾ º ± ²¹ ¯µï ±²¾ ¹ û ½¹¿ ¹¾ ±µ ±ò µ ©µÐ²µó ¾ é ±ò µ ðììñôðììø » ±©½±µ¬ ª ½¹¿ ¾¸ µ©½±²¾¹» » µ±¾º±²¹¯µï±²¾¹ ð«
ß«ð µï¾îîµ¹¿ ±¾ ù ¾ º¹ï²¼ ± ò µ » µ ± ± ²¹¬ ¾ é ® ¾ ©©¾ ó ²¹¬ ¼²î ²±» é¾ © ðììøôðììè ±¾ ðììÌôìß ½¹¿ ©µÐ²» ²¾ ¹ ¾ é ±ò µ ½º ±ò¾ ©²» µ¿¼²î ²± ½¹¿ ¾ ¸ µ©½±²¾ ¹½¼® ¾ º¹¿½©ªé¾©ðììñôìø ½» » µ± ¾ º ± ²¹ ¯µï ±²¾ ¹ ñ«
ß« û « µï ¾ îîµ¹¿ ±¾ ù ¾ º¹ï²¼ ± òµ » µ±±²¹¬ ¾ é ±©µ½» º ©ª î ½¹½¬µîµ¹±¼²î²±» 龩ðììñôðììø ±¾ ðììÌôìß ½» » µ± ¾ º ± ²¹ ¯µï ±²¾ ¹ ø«
ß« ñ µï ¾ îîµ¹¿ ±¾ ù ¾ º ¹ï ²¼±òµ» µ±±²¹¬ ¾ 鲹е» ±î µ¹± ¼²î ²± » é¾ © ð ì ì ñ ôð ì ì ø ± ¾ ð ì ì Ì ôì ß ½ » » µ ± ¾ º ± ²¹ ¯ µ ï ± ²¾¹ Ì«
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com »¼¼Ý ·¬§± ·«²½´¬ó Ð ®¿²¼½§¬×ó ´×§«¿Ý ðììñëìê Ð ðììéëì °»»²¼·¨ °
±òÐ ÎËÜÛ̱×ßÔÝ ß±ÛßÑÔ×îË ðììñëìê ðììêëìé ðììéëìè ðììèëìø ï÷ÈÐ ÌÚ×ËÔÑ× ÓËîÞ ÙÜÛÍÌ× Ô±Û ËÌ±× ¿Ì××ß±Í ËÌÎîË׿
ˬ·ºò ò² Óº½¬½¹º½ Ñò»·» ·ò ±ª· ˪«ª½®ª ¿·³ª¬° ÷ ±²Ø Îßë òïèûé òïòêé òïêçé òïççé ð Îßë èêïîêé ðíïçîé ðìïìçé ð·ïî·é
ß°´¬¹· ò½ Ñò®½¹º¨ ׬ú Ø íò®»º½ ˪½·» } Ð Î } Ð Î } Ð Î } Ð Î ¼ ½Ø®»¿«¿ ½Ø ®²´Ø®½¬ ¨Þ øê¾¼ØÜ ô° ³¿» ØØ´÷¸ ¾±²¨¿ è¸ ìïîê ððïûò ìèïè· ðûïîì ñ ½Ø®»¿«¿ ½Ø ¹²´«½Ø© »¿Ø¨ ³¿» µ¿¿º íïíí íïíí íïíí íïíí
ê ±¿¨ ø²»»²µ½Ø© ØÜ ¨¹¿ ®³½¨¬ ¯½ØØ®½Ø© »¿Ñ´½»¿÷¿Ø¨ ¾±²¨¿ ð¸ ÕÌ ÕÌ ÕÌ ÕÌ
Ì»·º°¬·ª ò² ·ò·¬¨ ¹¬´º·¬¨ ªú´ª½¯º·®³ª é ±²Ø Îßë è·ì°èûè èçû°òûî èûû°ûòí ûû°ìèû è Îßë èèò°ççè èòì°ííí èðî°ííí èð·°ííí ÔÕÔëñ ðòû°û·ð ìðè°òûî ìèê°ûòí ðèð°ìèû
Ѭ´º·¬¨ Óº½¬½¹º½ ˪¸®º³ª°ª½· כּ ¬· ¼÷ Þ¬³¹ùÈ } çììì }çììì }çììì }çììì ø ±²Ø Îßë òòí°ìêò òîç°ûðê òîò°í·û çèò°êíè Ç Îßë ìûî°çðì òí·°îíð òîç°ð·û çêí°·ðì ÔÕÔëñ îìî°îîû è°èíè°êðî è°èîè°ðîç è°ðûç°èð·
±òÐ ÎËÜÛ̱×ßÔÝ ß±ÛßÑÔ×îË ðììñëìê ðììêëìé ðììéëìè ðììèëìø ïðÈÐ ×ËÌÔ¿Ü˾ ÞÔ±ÔÍÌÞÌ±× ÎËÜÛ̱×ßÔÝ ß±ÛßÑÔ×îË¿ } çììì }çììì }çììì }çììì
÷ì Ô®·ùò³º»ª¯ ¨º°º· ²ò³ ªú·ª³½¬¨ ¯ªó· § ¼²»»²µ½Ø© îûç°ííí è°èûò°ííí è°ðçû°ííí è°ìçí°ííí ²¨¹¿» ¬²Ø© ¨¿»÷ ¬½¼½¬½¨½¿« èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí ÔÕÔëñ îîç°ííí è°èîò°ííí è°ðêû°ííí è°ìêí°ííí
÷÷ î´ª³¬·ºò½¬¨ óò®½¯¬³© § ¼²»»²µ½Ø© î·í°ííí è°èíí°ííí è°èûì°ííí è°ðêò°ííí ²¨¹¿» ¬²Ø© ¨¿»÷ ¬½¼½¬½¨½¿« èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí ÔÕÔëñ îòí°ííí è°èèí°ííí è°èîì°ííí è°ðûò°ííí
÷ñÜ´´ª³ ¨º°º· ²ò³ ²ºúª¯ º½·ª³ª»· ³¬·ª ªú´ò»®³ª ±¿¨ ³»½Ø®½³¬ »¿ ¯½Þ¿Ü »¨¿ ¼²»»²µ½Ø© ª ½Øæ¿«¨÷¿Ø¨« Õßó§ èèòé èèòé èèòé èèòé
÷êÜ´´ª³ ¨º°º· ²ò³ «¬³º¬ó¨ª ³¬·ª ªú´ò»®³ª ±¿¨ ³»½Ø®½³¬ »¿ 滽¼¬¿ »¨¿ ¼²»»²µ½Ø© ª ½Øæ¿«¨÷¿Ø¨« Õßó§ ·íé ·íé ·íé ·íé
÷èÜ´´ª³ ¨º°º· ²ò³ ·ò·¬¨ ´³º½¹º´¬¨ »®°» º½«ª»·ª¯ ²ò³ ò«ª³ ¼éñ ¯¬©» èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí èí°ííí ¾³¿» ÷¨´»½¨ ܨ¿¸
÷éÞ¬·®³º·© »·³®¹·®³ª ò² ²ºúª¯ ³¬·ª óò³³òôº½ ¯®³º½ ðììñëìê ´³³¿» ¬½÷½¨ ¬²µ¿» ¬½÷½¨ ´ØÜ¿» èð ÷²Ø¨¹« ìíé í èð ÷²Ø¨¹« ØÜ µ½¨¹½Ø ð· ÷²Ø¨¹« ìíé í ð· ÷²Ø¨¹« ØÜ µ½¨¹½Ø ò ¿»« ·íé í ò ¿»« ØÜ µ½¨¹½Ø èí ¿»« òíé í èí ¿»« ØÜ ¼²æ¿ îíé ðòé
±ò·ª»Ð
÷ ×ùª ¹ò¯ª ³ª¸®º³ª» ·ù¬· ·ùª Ñò®½¹º¨ º¯ª½·º²ºª» ·ùª ¹¬´º·¬¨ ²º½¬½¹º½ ¹ò»·» ¬³º»º½ ²³ò° ®½»®´´ò³·ª¯ óò³³òôº½ ªú´³ª»»ª¯ ¬» ·ùª ¬°ò®½· ò² 󬽯 Û ´³ò´ª³·©Ð
ð ß½ ò³¯ª³ ·ò ª½»®³ª ·ù¬· ò«ª³ ·ùª °ª¯º®° ·ª³° ½ª· óò³³òôº½ ôº¨¨ ò½¨© óª ²ò³ ¬ ¹¬´º·¬¨ ´®³´ò»ªµ ·ùª Ñò®½¹º¨ »ùò®¨¯ ª½»®³ª ·ù¬· ½ª· ªú·ª³½¬¨ óò³³òôº½ ¯òª» ½ò· ªú¹ªª¯ ·ùª ·ò·¬¨ ¹¬´º·¬¨ ²º½¬½¹º½ ³ª¸®º³ª°ª½· º½ ·ùª ´³ª¹ª¯º½ ©ª¬³ ´¨®» ª»·º°¬·ª» ò² ¬½© ¬¯¯º·ºò½¬¨ ¹¬´º·¬¨ ²º½¬½¹º½ ³ª¸®º³ª°ª½· ²ò³ ·ùª ¹®³³ª½· ¬½¯ ½ªú· ·ôò ²º½¬½¹º¬¨ ©ª¬³»Ð ×ùº» º» ¬ ª© º½¯º¹¬·ò³ ò² ´³®¯ª½¹ªÐ ×ùº» º» ¯ª°ò½»·³¬·ª¯ 󪹬®»ª ·ùª ¬®·ùò³º»ª¯ ¨º°º· ²ò³ ªú·ª³½¬¨ ¯ªó· ù¬» 󪪽 »ª· ¨òôª³ ·ù¬½ ·ùª ¹¬´º·¬¨ ²º½¬½¹º½ ³ª¸®º³ª°ª½· º½ ª¬¹ù ²º½¬½¹º¬¨ ©ª¬³Ð
¼ γ®¯ª½·º¬¨ º½¯º¹¬·ò³ ÷𠳪¨¬·ª» ·ò ¬¹·®¬¨ ªú·ª³½¬¨ ¯ªó· ¬· ¼÷»· Þ¬³¹ù ¬½¯ ôº¨¨ óª ³ª´ò³·ª¯ º½ ·ùª ׳ª¬»®³© Þ¬½¬ª°ª½· Ô½½®¬¨ ˪´ò³·Ð γ®¯ª½·º¬¨ º½¯º¹¬·ò³ ÷¼ ³ª¨¬·ª» ·ò ·ùª ¬¯ò´·ºò½ ò² ·ùª ÑßÎÓÔ Ñò¯ª ò² γ¬¹·º¹ª ò½ ׳ª¬»®³© Þ¬½¬ª°ª½· ¬» ò®·¨º½ª¯ º½ ´¬³¬³¬´ù êÐ÷ ò² ·ùº» ³ª´ò³·Ð
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: Coral Main
Tel: 51570
REPORT OF: DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT TO: EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11 FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : LEEDS RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK AND SERVICE CONTINUITY PLANNING POLICY
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive x Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
Summary:
Leeds City Council will realise a number of benefits from implementing formal and consistent risk management arrangements that will lead to improved service delivery. In addition, the authority is required through CPA and recent legislation to undertake Risk Management and Service Continuity Planning (SCP) across its strategic and operational functions.
To this end, the Risk Management Unit has developed a Risk Management Framework and SCP Policy. These documents outline the Council‘s objectives in undertaking both risk management and SCP, how these objectives will be achieved and the roles and responsibilities necessary to support the arrangements.
Executive Board is requested to approve the Risk Management Policy and Strategy and SCP Policy. The Board is also requested to endorse and support the implementation of the Leeds Risk Management Framework and SCP Policy.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek the endorsement and support from Executive Board to implement the Leeds Risk Management Framework and Service Continuity Planning (SCP) Policy across all strategic and operational activities of the authority.
2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.1 In recent months, new statutory requirements of local authorities have come into force for both risk management and SCP. As a result, the Council is required to review its risk management arrangements and publish an annual statement as to their efficacy as part of the Statement on Internal Control. With regard to SCP, the Civil Contingencies Act (2004) imposes a duty on the Council to have in place business continuity plans and provide advice and assistance on business continuity management to local businesses.
2.2 In order to achieve the many benefits resulting from formal and consistent risk management arrangements, to meet statutory and regulatory requirements and to improve the Council‘s CPA score for …Risk Identification and Management‘, the Risk Management Unit (RMU) was established to develop and implement a corporate framework for risk management and SCP. The RMU has now produced the draft Leeds Risk Management Framework comprising a Risk Management Policy, Strategy and Toolkit (Appendix 1) and Service Continuity Policy (Appendix 2). As a consultation exercise, all documentation has been circulated to directors, Education Leeds and the ALMOs for comment and amended as appropriate. Further, the Risk Management Policy and Strategy have been subject to a formal benchmarking exercise with those of the other Core Cities Group.
3. MAIN ISSUES
Benefits
3.1 The successful implementation of the Leeds Risk Management Framework and related work on SCP will enable the Council to realise a number of benefits. These include:
· Enhanced capitalisation of opportunities and mitigation of threats aiding achievement of strategic and operational objectives. · Risk management alerts service managers, the Council‘s Corporate Management Team and elected members to key service risks. Early identification and mitigation of threats and hazards reduces the chance of negative consequences impacting upon the authority later on, while early identification of opportunities allows the Council to fully capitalise on them. · Risk management enhances the planning process by helping to ensure that decisions are made by thinking through all the implications and their impact on other areas. This leads to fully justified and accountable decision-making and better project management. · The Council will be more risk-aware rather than risk-averse, helping it to better exploit opportunities and mitigate threats.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Risk management allows for the appropriate allocation of resources in line with corporate, departmental and operational objectives and their associated risks. This helps to minimise waste and support best value. · By engaging officers to think about their own control environments, the Framework will help to reduce error and fraud. · Implementation will aid the Council in complying with statutory and regulatory requirements of risk management and service continuity planning (see below). 3.2 Ultimately, robust risk management arrangements lead to more efficient service delivery, thereby benefiting both internal and external stakeholders and enhancing the reputation of the authority.
CPA and Statutory Requirements
3.3 Given the recent change in the Council‘s external auditors and growing importance of the corporate governance agenda, it is anticipated that this year‘s CPA and external audit reviews of risk management and SCP will be more rigorous than those in previous years. However, it would seem likely that the Council will struggle to achieve a favourable assessment and meet the statutory requirements as it lacks an embedded corporate approach to risk management and SCP across departments. This lack of consistency was reflected in District Audit‘s 81 recommendations in their 2002 review of risk management arrangements and the Council‘s score of …2‘ in the area of …Risk Identification and Management‘ for the past two years under CPA.
4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FRAMEWORK
4.1 The RMU recognises that effective training and communication are key to implementing the Framework across the authority. The Unit therefore intends to undertake the following:
· Develop an e-learning package for both Risk Management and SCP; · Liaise with Corporate Human Resources to explore the opportunity to include risk management in induction packs; · Hold specific training for: ¨ Project managers ¨ Departmental risk co-ordinators ¨ Corporate Risk Management Group members ¨ Those with SCP responsibilities ¨ Policy, Planning and Performance Managers in order to incorporate risk management into Service Plans ¨ Others as appropriate or upon request; · Undertake CMT and elected member briefings on risk management and SCP; and · Maintain the RMU Intranet site to ensure it contains: ¨ Downloadable templates and guidance documentation ¨ Contact details for the RMU, Corporate Risk Management Group, departmental risk co-ordinators and other key staff ¨ Useful internal and external links ¨ Quarterly newsletter
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4.2 In addition, the RMU will utilise other opportunities to promote risk management and SCP: for example through the Council‘s Grapevine magasine, Team Talk Initiative, HR and Service Development newsletter, Closer Working: Better Services updates, RMU lunchtime briefings and departmental induction days.
4.3 To further facilitate the process of embedding risk management throughout the authority, the RMU is conducting an option appraisal of risk management software.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Members are requested to:
§ Approve the Risk Management Policy and Strategy and SCP Policy; and
§ Endorse and support the implementation of the Leeds Risk Management Framework and Service Continuity Planning Policy.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
LEEDS RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
DRAFT
RISK MANAGEMENT UNIT
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 0113 (39) 51570 / 1 / 2 / 3
Page 1 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page no. 1 FOREWORD BY PAUL ROGERSON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE 4
2 INTRODUCTION 5
3 RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY 7
4 RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 11
INTRODUCTION BY ALAN T. GAY, DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES 11 OVERVIEW 11 SCOPE 12 RISK MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES 12 BENEFITS OF RISK MANAGEMENT 13 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR RISK MANAGEMENT 13 Corporate Governance & Risk Management 13 Audit Commission 15 Service Continuity Planning 15 LEEDS CITY COUNCIL☃S RISK MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY 16 Risk Management Steps 16 Specific Arrangements 17 RISK APPETITE 17 RESPONSIBILITIES 18 LRM Framework Responsibilities 18 Supporting Arrangements 21 ACTION PLAN 21 REVIEW AND VERSION CONTROL 22 5 RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS 24
RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS 25 ESTABLISH OBJECTIVES 25 IDENTIFY 25 ANALYSE 25 EVALUATE 26 PRIORITISE 26 TREAT 27 AGREE 27 RECORD AND REPORT 28 MONITOR 28 CONTINGENCIES 28 6. CONTACT INFORMATION 30
7. GLOSSARY OF TERMS 31
APPENDIX A: CORPORATE RISK MANAGEMENT GROUP - TERMS OF REFERENCE 36
1 PURPOSE 36 2 MEMBERSHIP 36 3 CONDUCT AND FREQUENCY OF MEETINGS 37 APPENDIX B: VERSION CONTROL 38
Page 2 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
FOREWORD & INTRODUCTION
Page 3 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
1 Foreword by Paul Rogerson, Chief Executive
I am delighted to write a foreword to the Leeds Risk Management Framework. This combined document is intended to provide you with details of the formal arrangements now in place to enable you and your staff to manage risk more effectively.
We are regularly exposed to risk, whether by way of threats to service provision or from the potential of lost opportunities. This exposure has increased as a wider range of services has been procured externally, resource bases have diminished, and it has become the norm for our performance to be judged on the achievement of identified outcomes.
Thus, there is a clear need for the creation and implementation of a new framework to manage risk which will be central to successful planning, meet the demands of good corporate governance and establish confidence within the Council‘s major stakeholders.
Senior colleagues across the Council are committed to embedding the principles of effective risk management within the culture of the organisation. However, this exercise needs to be a living process rather than one of form-filling and ticking boxes. Managing risk effectively will take time, but the launch of this Framework is an important step along the road.
I commend these guidelines to you and would encourage staff to become even more adept at risk management as an important business tool aimed at achieving best practice in all aspects of their work.
Page 4 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
2 Introduction
2.1 Risk management is the process by which threats and opportunities impacting upon the Council‘s objectives are identified, evaluated and treated in order to enhance our service delivery. It will help Leeds City Council meet the huge range of threats and opportunities it faces: for example, the growing threat of prosecution for corporate manslaughter; the potential resource savings arising from an innovative partnership versus the impact on the authority‘s reputation should this partnership fail; the efficiencies resulting from a well-run project against the budget, time, quality and other consequences resulting from an ill-managed or poorly selected one; service continuity planning; new government targets; CPA and so on. In all of these areas, risk management can and should play an integral part.
2.2 Risk management is not a new process. Indeed it is something that managers do every day often at a subconscious level. However, until the introduction of the Leeds Risk Management (LRM) Framework, Leeds City Council has lacked consistent, formal and auditable risk management procedures. The Framework has been designed to fill this gap and to help make risk management an integral part of existing business functions and service planning, clearly linked to the aims and objectives of each department and to those of the Council as a whole.
2.3 The LRM Framework comprises three sections alongside this Overview: a Risk Management Policy, Strategy and Toolkit.
LRM Framework The RM Toolkit contains a range of The RM Strategy Toolkit useful templates, examples, glossary outlines the Council‘s Strategy plan of action over of terms and contact the next 3 years to details meet the objectives Policy set out in the Policy
The RM Policy establishes our objectives and approach to managing risks
2.4 The Risk Management Unit (RMU) is responsible for maintaining and issuing the LRM Framework. Amendments and updates will be released via the RMU‘s Intranet page and e-mail alerts will be used to notify appropriate staff.
Page 5 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
Page 6 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
3 Risk Management Policy
Background
3.1 Leeds City Council is committed to establishing a framework and culture that ensures effective risk management is an integral part of all of the authority‘s activities. Effective risk management contributes to the successful achievement of the Council‘s corporate objectives and supports its strategic direction through informed decision-making.
3.2 This Policy establishes the context for the effective management of risks through maximising opportunities and minimising threats.
3.3 Risk management forms part of the Council‘s internal control and corporate governance arrangements. Guidance published by CIPFA/SOLACE1 and the Langlands Commission2 supports the Audit Commission‘s focus on risk management through the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA).3 The Council also has statutory and regulatory responsibilities for risk management. 4
Risk Management Objectives
3.4 The Council‘s principal objectives for managing risks are as follows:
· to aid achievement of its strategic objectives; · to protect the Council‘s reputation and other assets; and · to comply with statutory and regulatory obligations and adhere to best practice.
Risk Management Approach
3.5 In this Policy, risks are defined as anything which may impact upon the Council‘s ability to achieve its objectives. The authority therefore recognises two types of risks:
1 …Corporate Governance in Local Government: A Keystone for Community Governance‘, Guidance Note, CIPFA/SOLACE (2001) 2 £The Good Governance Standard for Public Services‘, The Independent Commission on Good Governance in Public Services (2004) 3 To attain a score of …4‘ under CPA for Risk Management and Internal Control, the Council will need to demonstrate it has formal and effective structures and processes in place to manage its risks. 4 Regulation 4 of the 2003 Accounts and Audit Regulations states that, …The relevant body shall be responsible for ensuring that“ the body has a sound system of internal control which facilitates the effective exercise of that body‘s functions and which includes arrangements for the management of risk.‘ In order to meet these requirements, organisations must perform a review at least once a year and publish a statement on the effectiveness of its internal control arrangements (SI 2003 No. 533: Local Government, England: Accounts and Audit Regulations 2003, p.7). The Civil Contingencies Act aims to deliver a single, consistent framework for civil protection in the UK through several key duties, including risk management and business continuity. The Act received Royal assent on 18 November 2004, but, at the time of writing, the regulations which will give effect to its provisions are subject to a public consultation scheduled for completion in March 2005. The legislation will come into force - i.e. have legal effect - from October 2005 (excepting Business Continuity Planning promotion, for which there is a further 6 months allowed). Page 7 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
· Threats which could lead to a failure to achieve these objectives; and · Opportunities which, if recognised and exploited, could aid in achieving them.
3.6 Risk management is defined as the effective management of threats and opportunities in order to enhance the delivery of Council services. Good risk management practices enable the Council to make better decisions, enhance its ability to achieve its objectives and demonstrate its published commitment to …Open, Responsive and Accountable Government‘.5
3.7 Systematic processes for risk management are set out in the Council‘s …Risk Management Strategy‘. The Strategy clarifies the benefits of risk management, roles and responsibilities and the different ways to manage risks, while the Toolkit contains templates, worked through examples and a full glossary of terms. Together with the Policy, these documents form the Leeds Risk Management (LRM) Framework.
3.8 As an integral part of the Framework, it is our policy to:
· formally identify risks; · measure risks in terms of both probability and impact; · map risks to internal controls; · manage risks in accordance with the Council‘s risk appetite; · involve members in determining key risks and responses; · prepare, review and update risk registers corporately and within departments; · raise awareness of the need for risk management with all staff managing the delivery of Council services; · implement a consistent approach to risk management across departments; and · compare our risk management arrangements with peer authorities.
Responsibilities for Managing and Owning Risk
3.9 Ultimate responsibility for the authority‘s risk management arrangements lies with the Council itself. However, in practical terms, these responsibilities are discharged through the Council‘s Executive arrangements as follows: Stage One
LRM LRM Risk LRM Framework Framework management Framework produced approved rolled out implemented
5 Corporate Plan 2002-5, …Closing the Gap‘, Core Value 5, p. 7 Page 8 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Stage Two Annual Assurance Report to Ongoing assurance Report statements CMT & Exec. review of RM statements reviewed reviewed Board arrangements produced
Key Director of Corporate Services & RMU Directors
Corporate Management Director of Corporate Team & Executive Board Services, RMU, CRMG and Audit
3.10 Directors will be responsible for submitting an annual assurance statement on the management of key risks in their department6 to the Director of Corporate Services. These will then be reviewed by the Risk Management Unit and results reported to the Executive Board.
3.11 As part of his/her responsibility for ensuring effective risk management structures, processes and procedures are in place, the Director of Corporate Services will subject this Policy to an annual review.
3.12 A Corporate Risk Management Group will be established to challenge the Policy and other risk management arrangements and to provide advice and support to staff and members. It will also help monitor, co-ordinate and recommend on matters relating to risk management.
3.13 The corporate Risk Management Unit, located in the Audit and Risk Division of the Corporate Services Department, has a key role in maintaining and putting into practice a corporate Risk Management Strategy. To this end, it is developing a portfolio of corporate risk management resources to enable departments to implement and embed risk management within their areas and disseminating good practice and consistency.
6 Such assurance statements will help to meet the Council‘s statutory responsibility to produce an annual Statement on Internal Control. See footnote 4 above.
Page 9 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
Page 10 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versiohttp://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
4 Risk Management Strategy
Introduction by Alan T. Gay, Director of Corporate Services
4.1 The strength of a Council‘s risk management arrangements undoubtedly lies in the rigour of the processes, methodology and tools behind it. This Strategy clearly signposts the key steps in achieving a robust process that will comply with corporate requirements without adding unnecessary tiers of bureaucracy.
4.2 That said, there is always room to learn, improve and expand our risk management capacity. Corporate Services‘ Risk Management Unit and the Corporate Risk Management Group will work to ensure that managing risk is a natural and indispensable component of good management built on up to date best practice.
4.3 I am confident that the Leeds Risk Management Framework will prove to be a valuable resource in helping improve service delivery and will allow us to demonstrate that we are fully considering both the positive and negative aspects of risk for the benefit of our stakeholders.
Overview
4.4 Risk management is good management. It enables staff, elected members and the authority‘s partners to better achieve objectives for the benefit of the public and other stakeholders. It is an ongoing, continuous process that encompasses all potential threats and opportunities without being restricted to traditional Health & Safety hazards or IT failures.
4.5 Risk management forms part of the Council‘s wider corporate governance and internal control framework. The effective treatment of risks should therefore be an integral part of all policy-making and decision-making, including:
· Strategic and operational management; · Project management1; · Service improvement planning and performance monitoring; and · Service continuity planning.
4.6 Risk management supports the achievement of the authority‘s over-arching mission: …to bring the benefits of a prosperous, vibrant and attractive city to all the people of Leeds.‘ Through its application within the corporate policy planning and performance management framework, it aids the Council in effectively and transparently demonstrating its core values and objectives as outlined in the Corporate Plan for 2005-08.
1 A working group is currently developing a new Project Management Framework for use across all projects in which Risk Management plays an important part. Page 11 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Scope
4.7 This Strategy outlines:
· The reasons for undertaking formal and consistent risk management; · The Council‘s risk management objectives; · An overview of the Council‘s risk management methodology; · Roles and responsibilities for all aspects of the risk management framework; · A 3-year action plan for rolling out risk management across the Council.
4.8 The Risk Management Strategy should be read in conjunction with the Council‘s Risk Management Policy and Toolkit which collectively constitute the Leeds Risk Management (LRM) Framework. The LRM Framework explains in full the Council‘s risk management methodology and contains worked through examples and templates for departments to use when implementing their own risk management arrangements. It also contains contact details for the Risk Management Unit (RMU) which acts as a source of guidance on risk management and, within this, service continuity planning.
Risk Management Objectives
4.9 The Council‘s principal objectives for managing risks are as follows:
· to aid achievement of its strategic objectives; · to protect the Council‘s reputation and other assets; and · to comply with statutory and regulatory obligations and adhere to best practice.
4.10 These objectives will be achieved by:
· Producing and disseminating Risk Management and Service Continuity Planning Policies, Strategies and Toolkits; · Establishing clear roles and responsibilities for risk management and service continuity planning across the Council; · Rolling out risk management training and communication; · Developing corporate and departmental risk registers in which all key risks which could impact upon the achievement of objectives are identified, evaluated, treated, reported and monitored on an ongoing basis; · Actively engaging elected members in the Council‘s risk management processes; and · Ensuring risk management is addressed within high-risk projects.
Page 12 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Benefits of Risk Management
4.11 Risk management will benefit the Council in a number of important and tangible ways:
· It alerts service managers, the Council‘s Corporate Management Team and elected members to key service risks. Early identification and mitigation of threats and hazards reduces the chance of negative consequences impacting upon the authority later on, while early identification of opportunities allows us to fully capitalise on them. · Risk management enhances the planning process by helping to ensure that decisions are made by thinking through all the implications and their impact on other areas. This leads to fully justified and accountable decision-making and better project management. · It enables the Council to be more risk-aware rather than risk-averse, helping it to better exploit opportunities and mitigate threats. · It allows for the appropriate allocation of resources in line with corporate, departmental and operational objectives and their associated risks. This helps to minimise waste and support best value. · By engaging staff to think about their own control environments, it helps to reduce error and fraud. · It aids the Council in complying with statutory and regulatory requirements of risk management and service continuity planning (see below). · Ultimately, it leads to more efficient service delivery, thereby benefiting our stakeholders and enhancing the reputation of the authority.
Statutory and Regulatory Requirements for Risk Management
4.12 Although there are very real benefits from embedding risk management throughout the organisation voluntarily, the Council also has a duty to implement this due to the requirements of corporate governance, the Audit Commission and service continuity planning.
Corporate Governance & Risk Management
4.13 In 2001 CIPFA and SOLACE produced …Corporate Governance in Local Government: A Keystone for Community Governance‘, which clearly stated the need for local authorities to …establish and maintain a systematic strategy, framework and processes for managing risk‘ in order to help demonstrate the cornerstones of …accountability‘, …effectiveness‘, …integrity‘, …openness and inclusivity‘ and being kept …up to date‘. The guidance document also recommended the publication of a statement communicating governance issues to stakeholders with the aim of enhancing public confidence in local government. The 2004 Langlands Commission has since reinforced this with their joint OPM and CIPFA document …The Good Governance Standard for Public Services‘ which establishes a code of Page 13 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
governance for all organisations that work for the public and use public money. They note that …Good governance means taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk‘, which requires …making sure that an effective risk management system is in operation‘.2
4.14 These recommendations have statutory backing through Regulation 4 of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2003, which require that from 1 April 2003:
· …The relevant body shall be responsible for ensuring that the financial management of the body is adequate and effective and that the body has a sound system of internal control which facilitates the effective exercise of that body‘s functions and which includes arrangements for the management of risk. · …The relevant body shall conduct a review at least once in a year of the effectiveness of its system of internal control and shall include a statement on internal control, prepared in accordance with proper practices“‘
4.15 In 2004, CIPFA released the guidance document …The Statement on Internal Control in Local Government: Meeting the requirements of the Accounts and Audit Regulations‘3 for local authorities to enable them to produce a Statement on Internal Control. It advises following 8 stages:
1. Establish principal statutory obligations and organisational objectives 2. Identify principal risks to achievement of objectives 3. Identify and evaluate key controls to manage principal risks 4. Obtain assurances on effectiveness of key controls 5. Evaluate assurances and identify gaps in control/assurances 6. Action plan to address weaknesses and ensure continuous improvement of the system of internal control 7. Statement on Internal Control 8. Report to Cabinet/Executive Committee4
4.16 Few, if any, of these stages can be carried out without the application of a corporate, consistent risk management framework.
4.17 Many of the developments in the public sector corporate governance field have stemmed from those in the private sector. In the private sector, corporate governance regulations were introduced by the London Stock Exchange (LSE) in 1992 following a series of high profile incidents and damaging litigation. This led to a number of regulations, such as the Combined Code on Corporate Governance (1998) and the Turnbull Committee Report (1999), which both specifically required the boards of listed companies to establish and review their systems of internal control covering all types of risk.
4.18 Considering the impact such private sector developments have had on the growing risk management requirements of local authorities, it is worth highlighting a recent
2 …The Good Governance Standard for Public Services‘, The Independent Commission on Good Governance in Public Services (2004), page 5. 3 The Statement on Internal Control in Local Government. Meeting the requirements of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2003, CIPFA (2004), page 8. 4 At Leeds, this report goes to the Council Business Committee. Page 14 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
proposal published by the Department of Trade and Industry. From 2005, listed companies will be required to publish detailed information about their key risks and the management of them under a new Operating and Financial Review (OFR). Where an OFR does not comply with the statutory requirements of the board, directors can be found guilty of a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to an unlimited amount or even imprisonment if it can be proved they were aware of the risks but failed to manage them appropriately. Similar requirements may well be introduced in the public sector in coming years.
Audit Commission
4.19 In the public sector, the Audit Commission noted in 1997 that …“ it is important that authorities have arrangements in place for reviewing both the nature and severity of risk“ ..risk management should be an integral part of an authority‘s overall management arrangements.‘ In 2001, their …Worth the Risk‘ paper5 argued that councils must identify and cope with the risks that threaten the achievement of their key strategic aims and recognise that the risk management process is an ongoing one.
4.20 From 2002, local authorities have been required to demonstrate to the Audit Commission that their risk management practices are sound through Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA). In order to achieve the highest ranking of 4 for …Risk Management and Internal Control‘ - and therefore to secure additional freedoms and flexibility from central government - each Council must evidence:
· Formal risk identification · Mapping of risks to internal controls, budgets and resource allocations · Reviewed and updated risk register · Comparisons with peer authorities · Monitoring effectiveness of internal controls through key indicators · Changing behaviour and resource allocation in response to clarifying risks · Involvement of members in determining key risks and responses.
4.21 Over the coming year, the Audit Commission is likely to review councils‘ service continuity planning arrangements as well as the wider corporate risk management framework through its CPA.
Service Continuity Planning
4.22 The Civil Contingencies Act (2004) will further raise the profile of risk management by placing a statutory duty on a number of organisations, including local authorities, to carry out a range of civil protection activities to help prevent and mitigate the damaging effects of an emergency incident. Category 1 responders, such as local
5 Worth the Risk: Improving Risk Management in Local Government‘ (2001) Audit Commission Page 15 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
authorities, will be responsible for maintaining plans to help ensure that if an emergency happens, the organisation is able to carry out its own functions. They will also be responsible for promoting business continuity management to local commercial organisations6. In order to do so, it is logical for councils to ensure their own houses are in order with regard to both risk management and, as part of this, to service continuity planning.
4.23 The Act was given Royal Assent on 18 November, but the regulations which will give effect to its provisions are subject to a public consultation scheduled for completion in March 2005. The legislation will formally come into force - i.e. have legal effect - from October 2005 (with the exception of business continuity management promotion which commences in April 2006).
Leeds City Council,s Risk Management Methodology
4.24 The Council adheres to a Risk Management Methodology which is explained in full in the accompanying Toolkit. The key steps and supporting specific arrangements are summarised below.
Risk Management Steps
· Establish objectives, strategies, scope and stakeholders · Identify the risks, both opportunities and threats, and their possible impact(s) in relation to the Council‘s corporate, departmental and service objectives and, where relevant, to other stakeholder objectives. · Analyse the risks to determine the key controls currently in place to either exploit the identified opportunity or prevent and mitigate the identified threat. · Evaluate the risks in terms of the probability of their occurrence and the impact if they do occur using a 5 x 5 matrix. · Prioritise risks according to risk appetite - that is, the level of risk the stakeholders are prepared to accept (see sections 4.22 - 4.25 below). · Treat risks by deciding whether to: Ø accept, avoid, transfer or reduce the probability and impact, thereby mitigating a threat; or Ø accept or increase the probability and impact, thereby exploiting an opportunity. · Agree actions to manage risks in line with the risk‘s relationship to objectives, availability of resources and the risk rating determined through the evaluation process. Consider target risk rating, risk owners, target dates by which the action must be carried out and performance indicators to allow the ongoing monitoring of each risk. · Control risks by undertaking the agreed action. · Monitor and report on status of risks.
6 Civil Contingencies Act, Clauses 2(i) and 4 Page 16 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Specific Arrangements
· Corporate and departmental risk registers will be maintained and reviewed on an ongoing basis. These will link directly back to corporate and departmental objectives. · A Corporate Risk Management Group will meet regularly to discuss cross- cutting risks and monitor and recommend on the Council‘s risk management framework. · Key cross-cutting risks will be reported to CMT and/or Executive Board to inform their decision-making processes. · Service Improvement Plans both at departmental and unit level will incorporate a risk management approach. · All projects, as defined under the Council‘s Project Management Framework7, will identify the risks both prior to the project start date as part of the option appraisal process and throughout the life of the project. The level to which the Council‘s Risk Management Framework should be applied will depend on the critical nature of the project. · The Council‘s Risk Management arrangements will be subject to constant review by the Risk Management Unit and Corporate Risk Management Group. They will also be audited by the Council‘s external auditors, Internal Audit and the Audit Commission through CPA. These review mechanisms are designed to help ensure that risk management continues to aid the achievement of the Council‘s objectives and enhance service delivery. · The above processes will form a key part of the authority‘s overall risk management and internal control framework and thus will directly feed through to the annual assurance Statement on Internal Control now required by statute8.
Risk Appetite
4.25 The Council evaluates risks on the basis of the probability of them occurring and the impact of the consequences if they do. A standard set of evaluation criteria is used to assign a score to both probability and impact and the resultant risks are then plotted on the maps as depicted in figures 1 and 2 below.
4.26 Risks are treated in accordance with the Council‘s …risk appetite‘; that is the level of risk the authority deems to be acceptable. While all risks should be judged on their own merit, managers also have the responsibility to manage their risks as they see fit. Nevertheless, good practice suggests that any risk classified as …very high‘ should be deemed to require immediate management attention with the aim of treating it, either to reduce the level of threat or maximise the opportunity.
7 At the time of writing, the Project Management Framework is under development. 8 See sections 4.11-4.13 above. Page 17 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Risk Map - Threats Risk Map - Opportunities
5 Key 5
Very high 4 4 t t
c High c a a p 3 p 3 m Medium m I I
Low
2 2
1 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Probability Probability Figure 1 Figure 2
4.27 By way of illustration, a threat assessed as having a very high probability of happening and very high potential impact would be plotted within the top-right corner of the risk map (figure 1). This should result in appropriate action to reduce both the probability and impact and move the risk towards the bottom-left corner of the risk map. Equally, an opportunity identified that currently has a low probability of being exploited but a very high potential impact if it is would be plotted within the top-left corner of the risk map (figure 2). This should result in appropriate action to move this risk towards the top-right corner of the risk map to raise the likelihood of the Council benefiting from the opportunity.
4.28 If management chooses to take no further action and accepts the level of any very high risk as it stands, the justification for this decision must be recorded within the risk register and an appropriate risk owner allocated to monitor and report on the status of the risk.
Responsibilities
4.29 Risk management should be an integral responsibility of every employee and elected member of Leeds City Council in the performance of their jobs. However, specific roles have been assigned to help implement the LRM Framework on a practical basis in line with the authority‘s objectives. The tables below outline these roles.
LRM Framework Responsibilities
Group/ Responsibilities Individual Full Council · Consider risk implications of Council decisions. Council · Sign off Statement on Internal Control (comprising, amongst Leader other things, the contribution that risk management plays in achieving organisational objectives). · Endorse the LRM Framework. Page 18 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Group/ Responsibilities Individual Chief · Sign off Statement on Internal Control (comprising, amongst Executive other things, the contribution that risk management plays in achieving organisational objectives). · Endorse the LRM Framework. Executive · Approve the Council‘s Risk Management Policy and Strategy Board · Approve annual report on the Council‘s risk management arrangements from Director of Corporate Services. · Consider threats and opportunities that could impact upon the Council‘s objectives when drawing up and monitoring performance against Corporate Plan. · Consider risk implications of Executive Board decisions. CMT · Agree LRM Framework for approval by Executive Board. · Apply risk management to corporate planning processes. · Consider risk implications when carrying out its roles. · Consider risk implications when appraising major projects. · Consider significant risks referred to it by DMTs. · Review corporate risk register each year and escalate to Executive Board any risks that remain very high despite treatment or that cannot be/are not being managed at this level. Priority · Apply risk management to Priority Board planning processes. Boards · Consider risk implications when carrying out their roles. · Consider risk implications when appraising major projects. · Establish and maintain Priority Board risk registers which are reviewed at least quarterly. · Report to CMT any significant risks that remain very high despite treatment or that cannot be/are not being managed at this level. Director of · Responsible for establishment of, and compliance with, LRM Corporate Framework to help ensure effective and adequate risk Services management arrangements in place. · Provide annual review of the Council‘s risk management arrangements to CMT and Executive Board based on annual assurance statements received from directors. Directors In compliance with the LRM Framework: · Ensure effective risk management arrangements in place in their own departments; · Highlight the risk management implications in all appropriate reports, including Executive Board reports; and · Provide annual assurance statement to Director of Corporate Services on effectiveness of their risk management arrangements.
Page 19 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Group/ Responsibilities Individual DMTs · Apply risk management to departmental planning processes. · Consider risk implications when carrying out their roles. · Consider risk implications when appraising major projects. · Consider significant risks referred to them by Chief Officers. · Review departmental risk register at least quarterly. · Report to CMT any significant risks that remain very high despite treatment or that cannot be/are not being managed at this level. Chief Officers · Apply risk management to Service Planning processes. · Consider risk implications when carrying out their roles. · Consider risk implications when appraising major projects. · Consider significant risks referred to them Service Managers. · Escalate to DMT any risks that remain very high despite treatment or that cannot be/are not being managed at this level. · Contribute to departmental annual assurance statements. Service · Apply risk management to Service Planning processes. Managers · Consider risk implications when carrying out their roles. · Consider risk implications when appraising major projects. · Consider significant risks referred to them. · Escalate to Chief Officers any risks that remain very high despite treatment or that cannot be/are not being managed at this level.
Project · Apply risk management throughout life of any project defined Boards and as …major‘ in line with the corporate Project Management Project Framework.9 Managers · Consider and document contingencies for project failure. All Council · Comply with LRM Framework as relevant to their role. staff · Maintain awareness of threats and opportunities that could impact upon Leeds City Council‘s objectives. · Notify managers of any threats that could adversely impact upon the achievement of the Council‘s objectives or opportunities that could better enable the authority to achieve its objectives. Partners/ · Take responsibility for having effective risk management Contractors arrangements in place when working with Leeds City Council.
9 At the time of writing, the Corporate Project Management Framework is under development. Page 20 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Supporting Arrangements
Group/ Individual Responsibilities Risk Management · Develop and maintain LRM Framework Unit (RMU) · Develop a training programme · Act as central source of guidance and disseminate good practice · Facilitate risk management workshops · Maintain and report on corporate risk register and Corporate Services‘ risk register Corporate Risk · Challenge LRM Framework Management Group · Monitor and recommend on risk management (CRMG) · Identify corporate and departmental cross-cutting risks · Report to CMT on key cross-cutting risks · Ensure active promotion of LRM Framework in departments Departmental risk co- · Maintain departmental risk registers and report on ordinators these to relevant DMT and to CRMG. · Ensure active promotion of LRM Framework in their department · Co-ordinate the roll-out of risk management training within their department Internal and External · Audit and inspection of LRM Framework and risk Audit management arrangements within departments
Action Plan
4.30 The proposed three-year timetable for the rollout of the LRM Framework is as follows:
(see overleaf)
Page 21 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Action 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 RMU set up LRM Framework drawn up and approved LRM Framework rolled out CRMG set up
Departmental risk co-ordinators in place RMU Intranet site Training programme Risk workshops
Corporate and departmental risk registers Annual assurance statements Statement on Internal Control
LRM Framework reviewed Risk management audited
Review and Version Control
4.31 The LRM Framework, including this Strategy, will be subject to ongoing review and challenge both internally by the RMU, CRMG and staff, and externally by the auditors. This will help to ensure that it remains up to date and in line with best practice as well as to continue to meet the Council‘s needs. The RMU is responsible for maintaining the LRM Framework‘s master documents and will issue any amendments via its Intranet site (see Appendix B for Version Control).
Page 22 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
RISK MANAGEMENT TOOLKIT
Page 23 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
5 Risk Management Process
Corporate/ Departmental Establish Objectives, Strategies, Service Plans Scope, Stakeholders
Identify Risks (opportunities & threats)
Analyse Risk What existing controls are in place
to mitigate/exploit the risk?
r
e d
i Evaluate Risk s
n Assess Probability & Impact of
o occurrence against existing controls. C
R
e
c
Prioritise Risk o
r
According to risk appetite d
,
(acceptance) using the 5 x 5 Matrix.
R
e
p
Yes o Is the risk acceptable? (Red, Amber, Yellow, Green)
r
t
&
No
M
o
Decide on risk treatment method n
i
t
o
r
Reduce Reduce Accept Increase Increase Transfer Avoid probability impact threat/ probability impact threat threat (threats) (threats) opportunity (opp) (opp)
Agree risk management actions
Target risk Assign Risk Action Risk rating Owners Target Dates Indicators
Take Action! Page 24 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Risk Management Process
5.1 The steps outlined in the diagram are explained below.1
Establish objectives
5.2 Risks can only be identified by direct reference back to corporate, departmental, service area and/or project objectives. Internal and external stakeholders must also be considered as all will have different objectives and thus perceive different risks. Agreeing, documenting and communicating the relevant objectives is a precursor to beginning the risk management process.
Identify
5.3 Different techniques or prompts can be used to help to ensure that threats and opportunities are identified and analysed. These can include:
Ø Structured interviews Ø Cross-departmental Meetings Ø Questionnaires and Benchmarking Ø Workshops Ø Audits and Risk Assessments Ø Brain-storming Sessions Ø Horizon Scanning
5.4 Annexe __ sets out the main categories of risk that the Council is likely to encounter and provides a useful starting point for staff in identifying risk2. In addition, the Risk Management Unit can assist in this exercise.
Analyse
5.5 The existing controls in place to manage the risk should now be established and documented. One means of identifying controls is to draw a work breakdown structure to outline the processes involved to meet the previously-established objectives. Again, workshops, brainstorming sessions and questionnaires can also be useful tools, involving senior managers, representatives of the different stakeholders and others with the appropriate knowledge and experience.
1 Templates to support each of the steps and worked through examples are under development. 2 Risk types are under development. Page 25 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Evaluate
5.6 Available data should be used to provide information to help assess the probability of any risk arising and the possible consequences it may have if it does arise with the current level of controls in place. The risk matrices at Annexe _ should be used to help assign a numerical value to both probability and impact3. These matrices help to draw upon historic data and experience when assessing probability and a number of impact areas, such as financial, reputation, health and safety. By using such matrices, the Council will be able to rate all of its risks in an objective manner.
This allows comparisons to be made and so enables better prioritisation when considering treatment.
Prioritise
5.7 Now each risk has been scored, they can be plotted on a risk map to highlight whether the risk is very high, high, medium or low, as depicted in figures 1 and 2 below:
Risk Map - Threats Risk Map - Opportunities
5 Key 5
Very high 4 4 t t
c High c a a p 3 p 3 m Medium m I I
Low
2 2
1 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Probability Probability Figure 1 Figure 2
5.8 As referred to in the Risk Management Policy, risks should be treated in accordance with the Council‘s …risk appetite‘, that is the level of risk the authority deems to be acceptable. While all risks should be judged on their own merit, managers also have the responsibility to manage their risks as they see fit. Nevertheless, good practice suggests that any risk classified as …very high‘ should be deemed to require immediate management attention with the aim of treating it, either to reduce the level of threat or maximise the opportunity.
5.9 By way of illustration, a threat assessed as having a …very high‘ probability of happening and …very high‘ potential impact would be plotted within the top-right corner of the risk map (figure 1). This should result in appropriate action to reduce both the probability and impact and move the risk towards the bottom-left corner of the risk map. Equally, an opportunity identified that currently has a …low‘ probability of being exploited but a …very high‘ potential impact if it is would be plotted within the top-left corner of the risk map (figure 2). This should result in appropriate action to
3 At the time of writing, the matrices are under development. Page 26 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
move this risk towards the top-right corner of the risk map to raise the likelihood of the Council benefiting from the opportunity.
5.10 In this way, management can prioritise their risks. As a minimum, all risks classified as either …high‘ or …very high‘ should be actively treated. Risks classified as …medium‘ or …low‘ should be monitored on an ongoing basis to ensure they remain at this level.
Treat
5.11 There are a number of ways of treating risks dependant on two things:
· the priority level determined in the previous step; and · the resource implications involved in managing the risk relative to the consequences of it happening: for example, it may be cheaper and less time consuming to run the risk of a threat occurring than to actively manage it.
5.12 Possible courses of action to treat both threats and opportunities include:
· Risk Acceptance - accept the risk, perhaps nothing can be done at a reasonable cost to either mitigate the threat or exploit the opportunity. Monitoring is still important to ensure that the risk rating does not change.
· Threat Transfer - transfer the risk to a third party either by insurance or by contractual agreement. However, management must bear in mind that the transfer itself can bring about a new threat: the organisation to which the risk has been transferred may not manage the risk effectively, which could still negatively impact upon the Council‘s reputation.
· Threat Avoidance - an informed decision not to become involved in activities that lead to the possibility of the risk being realised.
· Threat Reduction - action to reduce either the probability of a threat occurring or lessening the its potential impact if it is realised.
· Opportunity Exploitation - action to increase either the probability or beneficial impact of an opportunity.
Agree
5.13 Once actions have been agreed to best manage the risks, these actions should be assigned to an individual owner. This should be the individual with either the direct ability to command the resources required to mitigate the threat or exploit the opportunity or who is a member of the team with such authority.
5.14 The general rule is that risks should be managed at the lowest appropriate level at which the authority exists to make this decision and command the relevant Page 27 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
resource. In other words, risks which impact upon an individual business unit should wherever possible be managed at that level. However, the following risks should always be reported up to the next management level:
· those which are considered unable to be managed at the current management level; · those that require the help of a higher management level to resolve; and · those that are deemed critical to business objectives and identified as RED on the risk map.
5.15 Target dates by which to carry out the agreed actions and performance indicators to help ascertain whether the actions have been carried out should also be established.
5.16 It should now be possible to define the target risk rating, that is, if the action is meant to reduce the probability of a threat, its target probability score should be lower than at present. This will help when monitoring the risk to ascertain whether the risk treatment is working as planned.
Record and Report
5.17 Appropriate and effective recording and reporting arrangements reinforces and supports the Council‘s management arrangements. To facilitate this, the steps taken along the risk management process thus far (what the objectives, risks and controls are, how the risks have been evaluated, how they will be treated etc.) should be documented within a risk register4.
5.18 The timely communication of this risk register to all stakeholders supports accountability and enables informed decision-making at the appropriate level of the organisation.
Monitor
5.19 Risk management is not a static process and therefore it must be subject to continuous monitoring and review, considering those risks already documented and any new risks arising. The risk owners are responsible for monitoring progress against their risks to ensure that treatment actions are having the desired outcomes on threats and opportunities.
Contingencies
5.20 Despite our best efforts and the most effective risk mitigation plans, some threats will still materialise. Contingency planning is needed to define approaches to handling those eventualities that can be reasonably anticipated and are reasonably likely to occur (contingency is the action you will take if the threat is realised or deemed to be unavoidable).
4 At the time of writing, a sample risk register is under development. Page 28 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
5.21 It is therefore necessary that contingency plans are developed for the most critical risks to ensure that, even if the risk does arise, there are effective service continuity plans in place in order for the Council to be able to continue to deliver its services.
Page 29 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
6. Contact Information
Name Job Title Contact Information
Coral Main Principal Risk Tel.: 0113 39 51570 (RMU) Management Officer E-mail: [email protected]
Satinder Salona Risk Management Tel.: 0113 39 51571 (RMU) Officer E-mail: [email protected]
Andy Good Service Continuity Tel.: 0113 39 51573 (RMU) Officer E-mail: [email protected]
Leanne Risk Management Tel.: 0113 39 51572 Cummings Assistant E-mail: [email protected] (RMU)
Tim Pouncey Chief Officer (Audit & Tel.: 0113 24 74224 Risk) E-mail: [email protected]
Richard Davies Head of Risk & Tel.: 0113 24 74513 Emergency Planning E-mail: [email protected]
The Risk Management Unit is located on 3rd Floor West, Civic Hall. Please contact the RMU staff either directly using the contact information above or e-mail [email protected].
Page 30 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
7. Glossary of terms
Please click on the relevant letter in the table below:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M
N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
A ALARM Association of Local Authority Risk Managers
AIRMIC Association of Insurance and Risk Managers
Assurance Statement An annual statement documenting directors‘ verification and validation that their departmental risk management arrangements are working in practice.
B BCI Business Continuity Institute
Business Continuity Plan - See Service Continuity Plan below
Business Continuity Planning (BCP) - See Service Continuity Planning (SCP) below
Business Impact Analysis (BIA) The process used to identify, assess and prioritise the Council‘s Mission Critical Activities (see MCAs below) and the minimum level of resources required to maintain or restore a minimum level of service delivery.
C Capability Demonstrable capacity to respond to and recover from a particular hazard or threat.
CIPFA Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy.
Civil Contingencies Act The Act, together with accompanying regulations and non-legislative measures, which is designed to deliver a single framework for civil protection in the UK to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century.
Consequence - See Impact below
Page 31 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Contingency Action The arrangements and plans that describe the actions to be taken in the event of disruption occurring or risk impacting. These actions can be pre-planned and rehearsed before the situation arises.
Corporate Governance The system by which organisations are directed and controlled i.e. the way in which organisations manage their business, determine strategy and objectives and go about achieving those objectives with the underlying principles of openness, integrity and accountability.
Corporate Risk A category of risk management that looks at ensuring an organisation meets its corporate governance responsibilities, takes appropriate actions and identifies and manages emerging risks.
CRMG Corporate Risk Management Group at Leeds City Council. (See Appendix A for the CRMG‘s Terms of Reference.)
D Disruption Any incident that causes an interruption to a business unit‘s working environment, which results in an inability to function or provide service to internal or external customers.
E Escalation The process of passing the risk/opportunity for action (and possibly ownership) to the next level e.g. DMT to CMT.
Exercise The critical testing of Service Continuity Plans which rehearses roles and responsibilities and tests the recovery and continuity of the Council‘s systems and processes set up to respond to an incident.
H Hazard An accident or naturally occurring phenomenon with the potential to cause physical or psychological harm to members of the community, including loss of life, damage or loss to property, or disruption to the environment or structures (economic, social and political) upon which a community‘s way of life depends.
I Impact The effect on the Council‘s objectives of the perceived or actual consequences resulting from the occurrence of a risk. This may be a loss or a gain. It can be expressed as a number between 1 and 5, with 1 indicating minimal impact and 5 indicating a highly significant impact in a number of consequence areas, such as
Page 32 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
reputation, finance, health and safety, legislative compliance, the environment and the Council‘s stakeholders.
Incident A situation that may be, or may lead to, an interruption to the Council‘s service- delivery, disruption, loss, emergency or crisis.
Innovation Something new which may lead to better services, achievement of objectives or better value for money.
Internal Control The whole system of financial and other controls established in order to provide assurance of effective and efficient operations, internal financial controls and compliance with laws and regulations. Internal controls form part of a risk management process and play a significant part in the management of key risks to the fulfilment of business objectives.
IRM Institute of Risk Management
L Likelihood - See Probability
M Mission Critical Activity (MCA) Critical activity(ies) provided by the Council to internal and external stakeholders which enables the authority to achieve its objectives and deliver services.
O Opportunity Something which could enhance the Council‘s ability to achieve its objectives.
OPM Office for Public Management
Ownership The person who is accountable/ responsible for the management of the risk. This should be an individual who either has the direct ability to command the resources required to manage the risk or who is a member of a team which has the authority to reallocate resources.
P Probability The likelihood of the risk occurring, expressed as a number between 1 and 5, with 1 indicating probability is very low and 5 indicating it is almost certain.
R Reciprocal Agreement Two-way agreement by which organisations agree to use each other‘s resources in the event of a service continuity incident.
Page 33 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Residual Risk The level of risk remaining after actions have been taken to manage the risk to an acceptable level. (See Risk Appetite below.)
Resilience The ability of an organisation, staff, system, network, activity or process to absorb the consequences and resulting impact of a business interruption, disruption and/or loss and continue to provide a minimum acceptable level of service.
Risk Anything which may impact upon the Council‘s ability to achieve its objectives. These can be categorised as either threats or opportunities.
Risk Appetite The level of risk that the authority deems acceptable.
Risk Assessment The structured process of identifying potential risks, quantifying their probability of occurrence and assessing their likely impact on objectives.
Risk Exploitation Action taken to raise the likelihood of the Council benefiting from an opportunity.
Risk Management The effective treatment of threats and opportunities in order to enhance the delivery of Council services.
Risk Mitigation Steps taken to reduce the probability or impact of a risk (threat).
Risk Register The tool used to capture and collate risk information.
Risk Review Process of monitoring and reassessing risks and opportunities over time, against mitigating actions and current plans.
RMU The Council‘s Risk Management Unit. The team is located within Corporate Services‘s Audit & Risk Division, 3rd Floor West, Civic Hall.
S Service Continuity Plan The output from the SCP process is a plan which documents a collection of procedures and information maintained in readiness for use in an incident.
Service Continuity Planning (SCP) The ongoing process of identifying the potential threats to the delivery of the Council‘s services, assessing their impacts and probabilities, and developing and
Page 34 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
implementing plans and strategies to combat these. This aims to ensure the continuity of specific services if disruptions materialise.
SOLACE Society of Local Authority Chief Executives.
Stakeholders All those who have an interest in the Council, its activities and its objectives. These may include customers, partners, employees, shareholders, owners, government and regulations.
Stand-by Arrangements Arrangements to have available the assets which have been identified as replacements should the primary assets be lost following a business disruption. Typically these include accommodation, IT systems and networks and people.
Statement on Internal Control (SIC) Annual statement on the review of the effectiveness of the systems of internal control, of which risk management is a key component.
T Threat Something which could adversely affect the Council‘s ability to achieve its objectives.
V Vulnerability The susceptibility of a community, services or infrastructure to damage or harm by a realised threat.
Page 35 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Appendix A: Corporate Risk Management Group - Terms of Reference1
1 Purpose
1.1 The Corporate Risk Management Group (CRMG) is responsible for supporting and facilitating the effective management of threats and opportunities within Leeds City Council. This helps to ensure that the Council has robust risk management and, within this, service continuity planning, arrangements in place.
1.2 The CRMG will:
· Challenge the Council‘s Risk Management and Service Continuity Planning Policies, Strategies and Toolkits. · Review the corporate risk register on an ongoing basis and, where applicable, recommend risk treatment actions. · Review very high risks documented in departmental risk registers. · Identify cross-cutting risks based on reports from departmental risk co-ordinators and reviews of departmental risk registers. · Consider new risk management and service continuity planning initiatives proposed by the Risk Management Unit (RMU). · Act as a forum to exchange views on risk management and service continuity planning issues and share good practice.
2 Membership
2.1 The CRMG is comprised of senior managers representing each department who have appropriate decision-making authority. Resource input will need to be proportionate in the context of organisational wide risks.
2.2 The Group is comprised of:
· Formally appointed representatives from within each Department at Chief Officer level as a minimum; · Representatives from the Audit & Risk Division; and · Senior staff from Education Leeds and ALMOs.
2.3 Specialists from applicable service areas will be invited to attend specific meetings as and when the need arises in order to address particular risks. Other stakeholders may also be invited on occasion.
1 Note: these Terms of Reference are draft and will be reviewed, amended as necessary, agreed and signed off by the members of the CRMG when they meet. Page 36 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
3 Conduct and Frequency of Meetings
3.1 The meetings will be chaired by the Director of Corporate Services.
3.2 Meetings will normally be held quarterly.
3.3 Core members unable to attend a meeting will nominate a fellow colleague to represent their interests.
3.4 The CRMG is supported by a quarterly reporting cycle and progress update in the form of a risk status report from each Departmental Risk Co-ordinator. The Secretariat will facilitate this process.
3.5 The Secretariat will issue an agenda and papers at least three working days in advance of each meeting. The meetings are supported by a set of common products, including action points and decision logs.
3.6 The Group will assess its performance on an ongoing basis to ensure it is working collaboratively in the corporate interests of the Council and meeting its objectives.
3.7 External assurance will be gained from Internal and External Audit via their reviews of the Council‘s risk management arrangements.
Page 37 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Risk Management Framework DRAFT Appendix 1
Appendix B: Version Control
Version no. Date of Change(s) Reason for change Approved Date of change(s) made by: by: approval
Page 38 of 38 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.5 25/1/05 Leeds City Council Service Continuity Planning Policy DRAFT Appendix 2
Service Continuity Planning Policy
DRAFT
RISK MANAGEMENT UNIT
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 0113 (39) 51570 / 1 / 2 / 3
Page 1 of 4 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.3 7/12/04 Leeds City Council Service Continuity Planning Policy DRAFT Appendix 2
1. Background
1.1 In line with its commitment to effective risk management, Leeds City Council believes that Service Continuity Planning (SCP) constitutes a core activity for the authority. SCP is vital to ensure that the Council is able to deliver the key services upon which individuals, communities and the Council itself depend in the face of disruptions to their operation.
1.2 This Policy establishes the context for the effective management of principal threats to the Council‘s mission critical activities and services. It is in line with the principles stated in the Business Continuity Institute‘s industry-standard document, PAS56.1 Since SCP is a component of the Council‘s wider risk management arrangements, this Policy should be read in conjunction with the Risk Management Policy.
1.3 With regard to SCP, under Civil Contingencies legislation the Council will have a statutory duty to:
· Maintain plans for the purpose of ensuring that if an emergency occurs the organisation is able to continue to perform its own functions2; and · Provide advice and assistance to those undertaking commercial activities in their communities on business continuity management (BCM).
1.4 In order to fulfil the above obligations, it is logical for councils to ensure their own houses are in order with regard to service continuity planning.
1.5 The Act was given Royal Assent on 18 November 2004, but the regulations which will give effect to its provisions are subject to a public consultation scheduled for completion in March 2005. The legislation will come into force - i.e. have legal effect - from October 2005 (with the exception of BCM promotion which commences in April 2006).
2. Service Continuity Objectives
2.1 The Council‘s principal objectives for undertaking SCP are as follows:
· to ensure that the occurrence of disruptions or threats does not impede the achievement of its strategic or departmental objectives; · to ensure that all of its critical services can be restored quickly and efficiently following disruptions; · to ensure that the Council can deliver the activities necessary to support an emergency response; · to protect the Council‘s reputation and other assets; and · to be compliant with statutory and regulatory obligations and adhere to industry best practice.
1 BCI, PAS56 …Guide to Business Continuity Management (2003) 2 Civil Contingencies Act, Clause 2(i). Page 2 of 4 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.3 7/12/04 Leeds City Council Service Continuity Planning Policy DRAFT Appendix 2
3. Service Continuity Planning Approach
3.1 SCP is defined as the on-going process of identifying the potential threats to the delivery of the Council‘s services, assessing their impacts and probabilities, and developing and implementing plans and strategies. This aims to ensure the continuity of specific services if disruptions materialise. By addressing threats that could negatively impact upon the ability of the Council to deliver its key services, SCP ultimately safeguards the interests of the authority and its stakeholders.3
3.2 Systematic processes for SCP are set out in the Council‘s …Service Continuity Planning Strategy‘. This clarifies the benefits of SCP and roles and responsibilities for implementing SCP arrangements throughout the Council. The accompanying Toolkit contains templates, examples and a full glossary of terms.4 Together with the Policy, these documents form the Leeds Service Continuity Planning (LSCP) Framework.
3.3 As an integral part of the LSCP Framework, it is our policy to:
· formally identify threats or hazards which could give rise to service disruptions; · establish what procedures are currently in place to enable service continuity; · measure these threats in terms of both probability and impact; · establish what additional measures or strategies should be implemented to provide the desired levels of mitigation; · ensure that written corporate, departmental and service-level plans are prepared and maintained to document clearly the procedures to be followed in the event of a disruption; · raise awareness of the need for SCP with all officers managing the delivery of Council services; · ensure staff are trained to understand their roles and procedures are regularly validated through exercises; · implement a consistent approach to SCP across all departments; · ensure that SCP issues are taken into account in the planning stages for all new systems and business processes; · co-ordinate and incorporate SCP with existing Risk Management and Emergency Planning arrangements. · ensure that the Council‘s response to major emergencies can be supported; and · compare our service continuity arrangements with peer authorities.
3 See BCI, PAS56 …Guide to Business Continuity Management (2003), paras. 2.3 and 2.4, p.1. 4 At the time of writing, the Strategy and Toolkit are under development. Page 3 of 4 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.3 7/12/04 Leeds City Council Service Continuity Planning Policy DRAFT Appendix 2
4. Responsibilities for Managing and Owning Service Continuity Planning
4.1 Ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the authority has effective SCP arrangements in place as part of the overall risk management framework lies with the Council itself. However, in practical terms, these responsibilities are discharged through the Executive Board as follows:
Stage One Plans, LSCP LSCP Key SCP BIAs exercises, Framework Framework rolled out undertaken training Director of Corporate produced approved undertaken Services & RMU
CMT & Executive Stage Two Board Annual Assurance Report to Ongoing assurance Report statements CMT & Exec. review of SCP Directors statements reviewed reviewed Board arrangements produced Director of Corporate Figure 1 Services, RMU, CRMG and Audit
4.2 Directors are responsible for ensuring that all of their services undertake a business impact analysis to determine which of these require service continuity measures to be developed and that appropriate plans, exercises and training are implemented. Directors will be responsible for submitting an annual assurance statement on the management of service continuity risks in their department to the Director of Corporate Services as part of the overall risk management assurance statement. 5 These will then be reviewed and results reported to the Executive Board.
4.3 As part of his/her responsibility for ensuring effective risk management structures, processes and procedures are in place, the Director of Corporate Services will subject this Policy to an annual review.
4.4 A Corporate Risk Management Group will be established to challenge the SCP Policy and other SCP arrangements and to provide advice and support to officers and members. It will also help monitor, co-ordinate and recommend on matters relating to SCP.
4.5 The corporate Risk Management Unit, located in the Audit and Risk Division of the Corporate Services Department, has a key role in maintaining the LSCP Framework. To this end it is developing a portfolio of corporate service continuity resources to enable departments to implement and embed SCP within their areas and disseminating good practice and consistency.
5 Such assurance statements will help to meet the Council‘s statutory responsibility to produce an annual Statement on Internal Control. Page 4 of 4 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial versionDraft versio http://www.fineprint.comn 0.3 7/12/04 AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: Nick de la Taste
Tel: 24 74560
REPORT OF CHIEF DEMOCRATIC SERVICES OFFICER REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11th FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : MEMBERS, ATTENDANCE AT SEMINARS AND CONFERENCES
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board ü ü (details contained in the report) Decision
Summary
This report arises from a review of arrangements for Members‘ attendance at Seminars and Conferences which were established in May 2000. These arrangements included an approved list of conferences and seminars together with the attendant approval mechanism.
The recommends revisions to the approved list, changes to the approval mechanism and regular monitoring by the Member Management Committee. The report also identifies the fact that the current arrangements are also used as a mechanism for processing travel and subsistence claims for Executive Members attending meetings. It recommends that it would be more appropriate for these to be administered by a separate process.
The report has been considered in detail by the Member Management Committee, all of whose comments and observations have been incorporated within the report as now presented.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This report recommends amendments to the arrangements for Member attendance at conferences and seminars, last considered by Executive Board at its meeting on 10th May 2000.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.0 CURRENT ARRANGEMENTS
2.1 In brief, the arrangements approved were as follow:
· an approved list of conferences setting out those conferences, seminars and meetings which qualify for the payment of travel and subsistence allowance (the list also indicating the maximum number of Members who may attend).
· Members wishing to attend conferences and seminars to submit an individual application for approval by the relevant Executive Member and the then Chief Whip
· the relevant Executive Member, together with the Chief Whip, to have the authority to approve additional Members to the number indicated
· the relevant Executive Member, together with the Chief Whip, to have the authority to approve attendance at conferences and seminars not included on the list
· attending Members to be asked to complete a feedback form
· summary of Member attendance at conferences to be provided to Executive Board on quarterly basis
3.0 COMMENTARY
3.1 It is appropriate to consider amending the above arrangements for a number of reasons.
· the approved list of conferences has not been reviewed since 2000 and, in practice, significant numbers of additional conferences and/or additional Members, are approved
· the existing nomination and approval processes do not appropriately reflect the changed political organisation of the Council i.e. deletion of the function of Chief Whip.
· the arrangements do not properly take account of any conferences and seminars arising from membership of the Standards Committee.
· in the absence of a more suitable mechanism, the approval process for conferences as detailed above is also used in relation to Executive Members attending meetings outside Leeds. Such activities are not strictly conferences and the purpose of the application form is purely to provide an audit trail for the related travel and subsistence claims.
· the recently created Member Management Committee now has an advisory role in relation to Member Development which has strong links with Member attendance at conferences and seminars.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4.0 PROPOSED ARRANGEMENTS
4.1 The approved list of conferences has been revised and appears at Appendix A to this report. The purpose of this list is to provide a clear process for dealing with those regular events which may be anticipated and planned for; it is not the intention that this should form an exhaustive list of those conferences and seminars which may be attended by Members.
4.2 The proposed arrangements for approvals and administration are as follow.
4.3 A Member wishing to attend a conference or seminar from the approved list will be asked to submit a request form to the Chief Democratic Services Officer. The request will then be progressed as described below and, in all cases, the relevant Group Whip will be advised of whether the request has been approved or refused.
4.4 In relation to the approved list it is proposed that the Chief Democratic Services Officer would be responsible for authorising Member attendance.
4.5 In authorising Member attendance at conferences and seminars on the approved list, the Chief Democratic Services Officer would consult with the appropriate Executive Member as indicated and with the Chair of the Member Management Committee. At the suggestion of the Member Management Committee it is further proposed that, at the beginning of each Municipal Year, the Member Management Committee should be asked to consider the approved list and, where it considers appropriate, to make recommendations as to Member attendance.
4.6 For conferences and seminars which are not on the approved list, officers will routinely explore options for running events in Leeds with a view to providing greater opportunities for attendance by Leeds Members and, possibly, sharing expenditure between neighbouring authorities. Where it is not feasible to provide a locally organised alternative, a Member would be asked to complete a request form indicating whether attendance is considered to be primarily for the purposes of assisting them to undertake their current role on the Council or whether it is being requested for the purposes of personal development (see Appendix B). The Member Management Committee has indicated that it would wish to monitor this aspect in particular, with a view to ensuring an equitable distribution of resources between Members and Groups.
4.7 Again for conferences and seminars which are not on the approved list, the Chief Democratic Services Officer would be authorised to approve attendance in consultation with the Members as detailed in Appendix C (it should be noted that, in the case of the Standards Committee, it is considered more appropriate for consultation to take place with the Director of Legal and Democratic Services in her capacity as Monitoring Officer).
4.8 Details of which Members have attended particular conferences and seminars will be made available to all Members, for the purposes of enabling discussions and feedback with those Members who have attended. Such contact details will also indicate whether any handouts/literature have been deposited with the Member Development Officer for wider access by Members
4.9 In liaison with the consultees as detailed in this report, the Chief Democratic Services will indicate cases where more formal evaluation/feedback is required for the purposes of guiding decisions with regard to future attendance. Appendix D details the form which Members would be requested to fill out in such cases. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4.10 The Member Management Committee would receive reports on a quarterly basis, to include e.g. details of attendance, rejected requests, expenditure and feedback etc.
4.11 The procedure as outlined above would not be used for attendance by Members at outside meetings in connection with claims for travel and subsistence by Members who are required to represent the Council in their capacity as office holders with the Council. These will be submitted for processing by the Chief Democratic Services Officer in the same manner as other such expenditure claims.
5.0 CONSULTATION
5.1 This report has been considered, in draft, by the Member Management Committee at a special meeting held on 11th January 2005.
5.2 The Member Management Committee made a number of suggestions, all of which have been incorporated in the report as now presented.
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 That the schedule detailed in Appendix A be adopted as the approved list of conferences and seminars to be attended by Members.
6.2 That the Chief Democratic Services Officer be given authority to approve Member attendance at conferences and seminars as detailed in this report.
6.3 That Member attendance at conferences and seminars be monitored by the Member Management Committee on a quarterly basis.
6.4 That all claims for travel and subsistence in connection with attendance at meetings by Members in their capacity as office holders of the Council be submitted for approval by the Chief Democratic Services Officer.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix A
Approved List of Seminars and Conferences to be attended by Members
Department Conference Executive Member Consultee Chief Annual LGA Conference Leader Executive‘s National Taxi Association Annual Central and Corporate Functions Meeting National Association of Councillors Leader Annual Conference Eurocities AGM Leader Core Cities Annual Conference Leader City Services Association of Public Sector City Services Excellence Conference Corporate LGA Annual Local Government Central and Corporate Functions Services Finance Conference SIGOMA Annual Conference Central and Corporate Functions IDeA e-champions Conference Central and Corporate Functions LGA Emergency Planning Events Central and Corporate Functions Development LGA Transportation Conference Development National Association of British Development Market Authorities and Conference of the Executive Councils of the Association Annual Cities Conference Development
RTPI National Planning Conference Development Neighbourhoods LGA Housing Conference Neighbourhoods and Housing and Housing National Society for Clean Air and Neighbourhoods and Housing Environmental Protection Learning and Council of Local Education Learning Leisure Authorities North of England Education Learning LGA Education National Conference Learning LGA Education Regional Meetings Learning LGA Annual Conference: Culture Leisure and Tourism National Childminding Association Learning Social Services Local Government Association - Social Care and Health Social Services Conference
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com MEMBER ATTENDANCE AT SEMINARS AND CONFERENCES APPROVAL FORM
NAME
TITLE OF EVENT
Please attach any relevant information and booking forms DATE
VENUE
COST
APPROVED LIST Is the event on the Approved List of Conferences?* DETAILS Yes No *the approved list can be found overleaf.
If No, please enter information in support of your application below, or attach it to this form.
Is the event primarily for your personal development?
Yes No
Please return this form to the Members Services Manager, 1st Floor West, Civic Hall ““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
MEMBER: DATE: NOTES:
MEMBER: DATE: NOTES:
GROUP WHIP ADVISED? DATE: –––. FEEDBACK REQUIRED? YES NO
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY CHIEF DEMOCRATIC SERVICES OFFICER: “ ...... DATE: “““...
OFFICE USE: DETAILS ENTERED ON SAP: DATE:
BOOKINGS MADE: DATE:
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix C
Approval Process for Members attending Conferences and Seminars which are not on the Approved List
Category Consultees Attendance requested for personal Chair of Member Management Committee* development purposes or Relevant Group Whip (if different from above) Attendance requested in connection Director of Legal and Democratic Services with membership of Standards (Monitoring Officer) Committee Attendance requested in connection Chair of Member Management Committee plus with an Executive Scrutiny or Leader of Council Regulatory function
* As appropriate, the Chair of Member Management Committee may consult with other Group Whips and/or refer the request to a meeting of the Member Management Committee.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com External Event Review Form
We would welcome your views on the event you have just attended. This information may be shared with other Members and officers in order to monitor the standard of external learning events and to share learning. We find this information valuable and appreciate your thoughts.
Name: Event Title:
Event Provider: Event Date:
Please tick the appropriate box below.
Facilities (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent) 1 2 3 4 ¨ Any requested additional requirements met ¨ Room comfort Trainer (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent) 1 2 3 4 ¨ Delivery style ¨ Subject knowledge ¨ Handling of exercises & questions ¨ Encouraging participation ¨ Preparation, planning & organisation
Content (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent 1 2 3 4 ¨ Logical structure ¨ Training methods used ¨ Quality of manuals, booklets & handouts ¨ Relevance of activities, exercises and tasks to work ¨ Pitched at right level ¨ Amount of time allocated Learning (1 = not at all, 2 = some, 3 = mostly, 4 = all) 1 2 3 4 ¨ The event objectives/aims were met ¨ My own personal learning objectives were met ¨ I am clear how to put my learning into practice on the job ¨ The learning was new to me Overall (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent) 1 2 3 4 ¨ My overall opinion
Thank you, please continue over the page.
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 08 - Members' Attendance at Seminars and Conferences.doc PDF 04/02/05created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1. Which parts of the event will be most useful to you in your role?
2. Which parts of the event were not relevant to your role?
3. What were the key learning points?
4. Would you recommend this event to other Members?
5. Any other comments about the event?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this form. Please return it, with any additional items to: Kay Small Member Development Officer Members Services 1st Floor West Civic Hall
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 08 - Members' Attendance at Seminars and Conferences.doc PDF 04/02/05created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.: Originator: M. J. Foster
Tel: 2474091:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION Appendices B and C Exempt Under Rule 10.4 (7) & (12)
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF LEGAL & DEMOCRATIC SERVICES REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11th FEBRUARY 2005
SUBJECT : SOUTH LEEDS STADIUM ‘ Capital Scheme 02721
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Beeston and Ethnic Minorities Holbeck Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board ü ü (details contained in the report) Decision
SUMMARY
Members were last informed about the pending litigation between the contractor and the Council in December 1999, some 5 years ago and Members authorised the Director of Legal and Democratic Services (current post title) to take all necessary action to defend the Council‘s case. The case went to arbitration and appeal against the arbitrator‘s award. The arbitration itself took from April 2000 until November 2003 and the appeals have recently been discontinued as a result of a negotiated settlement. It is only now that there has been any further progress to report to Members. The report gives some background regarding the construction issues, the arbitration awards, the reasons why the dispute could not be resolved earlier and the outcome. The report looks at the financial implications and the implications on the Council‘s current contracting arrangements. Members are being asked to note the outcome and implications.
1. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 1.1 To advise Members of the outcome of a major construction dispute involving the Council.
2. BACKGROUND 2.1 The Council has recently concluded litigation in relation to the construction of South Leeds Stadium.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com1 2.2 The South Leeds Stadium Scheme was injected into the Council‘s Capital Programme in 1994 and was carried into effect in 1994 and 1995. It involved the construction of a sports stadium with pitch, further full size all weather pitch, numerous outside five-a-side pitches and various indoor dry facilities comparable with other local Council sports centres. Hunslet RLFC rents and uses the facilities as their ”Home£ for rugby league matches.
2.3 The Scheme was designed by an external Architect and constructed by an external contractor under a JCT standard form of contract with design. The Quantity Surveying work was carried out internally by the (now) Architectural Design Services.
2.4 The contract price for the Scheme was –4.19m.
2.5 The Scheme ran into difficulties and disputes that resulted in the commencement of legal proceedings by the contractor against the Council in mid 1997. The disputes centred around a 17 week delay which the Council claimed was mainly due to the contractor whereas the contractor claimed the delay was due to the Council changing some of the design. Since the contractor was also responsible for part of the design, the issues to whose fault it was became complex. The contractor claimed that liquidated and ascertained damages of –174,000 which the Council had deducted should not have been deducted and also claimed that additional work and loss and expense associated with the delay amounted to –2.5m. The Council‘s view was that the contractor would not have incurred as much loss and expense if it had performed more diligently. These disputes were reported to a joint meeting of the Strategic Policy and Development Services Group Appointed Members Sub- Committee in June 1997 which authorised the taking of ”all necessary steps to defend or settle any claims brought against the Council.£ A further report to the Executive Board on 1st December 1999 gave Members an update on the dispute regarding:
· Details of the claim; · The cause of the delay; · Commercial/settlement considerations at the time.
2.6 The report of December 1999 also informed Members that the dispute would be likely to proceed to arbitration and that a further report detailing the outcome and expenditure would be presented back to the Executive Board. A copy of the report presented to the Executive Board on 1st December 1999 provides more detailed background and is attached as exempt Appendix A.
2.7 A report presented to the Executive Board in February 2004 regarding the ”Landmark Scheme£ referred to one further litigation matter relating to a major construction project outstanding and this is that matter.
3. ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
3.1 Due to the legal expertise and resources required to conduct the substantial legal work connected with this litigation, external solicitors who specialise in construction disputes were engaged to act on behalf of the Council. The Council has acted on the advice of the external solicitors throughout the proceedings.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com2 3.2 Prior to reaching arbitration, 2 attempts had been made to reach a commercial settlement. The Council expected to pay the contractor at least a further –350,000 but the contractor was claiming –2.5m as a ”global£ claim. The ”global claim£ meant that the contractor was claiming one amount to cover: variations, additional work, extensions of time and loss and expense. Before any payment by the Council can be authorised there needs to be a justification to make the payment. The onus is on the contractor to make that justification by breaking the claim down into more detail. In the absence of detail, no payment is made. The Council did have a view on the value of work done and this value was made as an offer to the contractor. Although the offer was rejected by the contractor, the offer was made as a ”sealed bid£ which gave the Council some protection against legal costs, should the Arbitrator‘s final award be within that limit. Sealed bids were made in 1997 and 1998. Prior to the arbitration proceedings beginning in 2000, officers once again considered whether it was in the Council‘s best interests to make a further offer to the contractor. Consideration was given to the advantages and disadvantages of making a further offer but on the basis of advice from the external legal advisers regarding the relative strengths of the respective cases, it was agreed that the Council would not make such an offer.
3.3 By late December 1999, the contractor had not produced the necessary further and better particulars required to give any support to their financial claim. The Arbitrator agreed to defer the start of the arbitration hearing to February 2000 rather than January 2000.
3.4 The contractor then revised its claims, leaving the financial value the same, but changing their perceived cause of the claim, ie the emphasis was on joinery and concrete terracing rather than mechanical and electrical work. The Council required further time and different expert witnesses to re-evaluate the amended claim. It appeared that the contractor‘s case was weakened by this amendment in that the financial consequences of the changes and delays in joinery and terracing were considered by the Council‘s legal advisers to be less than those relating to the mechanical and electrical.
3.5 The Arbitrator allowed an adjournment of the arbitration proceedings at the Council‘s request until April 2000. The arbitration commenced in April 2000 and ran to July 2000. A further 2 weeks was arranged in September 2000 to discuss some outstanding issues. Exchanges of Counsel summaries and final submissions were concluded in January 2001.
3.6 External legal advisers advised that the arbitration hearing proceeded very well for the Council with substantial flaws being identified in the contractor‘s case under cross-examination. External legal advisers believed that, when taking out the flaws in the contractor‘s claim, the contractor‘s claim would not be substantiated but that the cause of the delay, still could not be accurately calculated due to insufficient information.
3.7 However one issue that arose during the arbitration hearing was the Council‘s difficulty in explaining when the design was ”frozen£, as South Leeds Stadium was subject to design changes whilst erection was taking place. A similar concern was identified in the Saxton Gardens Phase 1 project which was subject to scrutiny in 2001. Actions agreed with the District Auditor regarding the ”management of capital expenditure£ show that the Council has since put in place an approvals mechanism
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com3 to ”freeze£ designs and provide a baseline should unforeseen changes prove necessary.
3.8 After the completion of the arbitration hearing, the Arbitrator was diverted on other cases and had a substantial teaching commitment in Hong Kong. Furthermore, the Arbitrator fell ill for several months and required regular holidays. Three years from the commencement of the arbitration hearing, the Arbitrator made what was to be a 1st partial award of 4 separate awards.
3.9 The Arbitrator made 3 partial awards relating to:
· valuation of variations, remeasured work and final account (April 2003) · the extension of time to be authorised (October 2003) · the contract costs and payments due relating to the previous awards (November 2003)
3.10 The third partial award resulted in the need for the Council to make a payment within 28 days to the contractor which is included in Section 5.0 below.
3.11 The remaining fourth and final partial award relating to the apportionment of legal costs between the two parties has been formally concluded by consent and is explained below.
4. ARBITRATION RESULTS AND FINAL OUTCOME
4.1 Results
4.1.1 The Arbitrator‘s decisions, in summary, are shown in Appendix B.
4.1.2 The Council has paid all the costs due for these award decisions from the provisions made within the Council‘s capital programme and budget.
4.1.3 The final award to be made by the arbitrator regarding the distribution of legal costs incurred by each party was likely to require the Council to meet the cost of both parties. The Council‘s legal costs paid out are detailed in Appendix C and it was anticipated that the contractor‘s legal costs would be similar. A contingency of the same amount to cover the contractor‘s legal fees was made in the Council‘s budget.
4.1.4 The Arbitrator‘s awards found against the Council. The making of partial awards rather than one award has also worked against the Council since any appeal against an award has to be made within a time limit of the award being made; has to be made without knowing the outcome of subsequent awards and has to be made solely in the context of that award even though there are interrelated matters between each award.
4.1.5 Based on cost implications and the potential of success on appeal and the advice of the Council‘s external legal advisers and Counsel, the Council decided to appeal and challenge the decisions of each of the 3 partial awards.
4.1.6 The appeal against the first partial award was heard (in part) on 5 December 2003. A further hearing scheduled to start on 12th July 2004 to hear the remainder of the appeals was cancelled at short notice by the contractor‘s Counsel. Due to commitments, a further hearing was arranged for April 2005 with a subsequent period of time for a decision.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com4 4.1.7 It had been anticipated that no decision from the Court hearing held in December 2003, regarding the first partial award, would be made until all 3 partial award appeals had been heard. Quite unexpectedly, on 7th July 2004, the judge made a decision and found in the Councils favour but the financial implications of the decision would not be known until the appeals against the other partial awards had been heard. Even then, the likely decision would be to remit the matter to the Arbitrator for him to re-calculate the effect of the Court decision. That would have been likely to have been at least 12 months from now.
4.2 Negotiated Settlement
4.2.1 The contractor‘s solicitor approached the Council‘s external legal adviser suggesting that the appeals would be expensive and time consuming and, if the Council‘s challenges were based on getting some reduction from the overall award, then their client would be pleased to hear what the Council‘s expectations were. Separately, the contractor approached the Council regarding discussions around a possible settlement. Initial discussions took place on Tuesday 9th November 2004 and a further meeting the following week concluded the settlement.
4.2.2 Clearly, the Council had some risk and expense in continuing with the litigation. Also, the first appeal decision was encouraging and potentially, if the other appeals were similarly successful, the Council would have reduced costs. A balanced decision was required. This same balance of risk was required by the contractor since, based on the Arbitrator‘s decision, the contractor was likely to get full recovery of their legal expenses. If the Council continued with the appeals and was successful, then the contractor may be awarded much less. However, the contractor would have to wait a further 12 months before finding out the result. The negotiated settlement reached a compromise that results in the Council paying two thirds of the estimated contractor‘s legal costs. It is anticipated that this reduction in payment for the Council is at least as good as any value associated with a future decision by the Arbitrator in recalculating the works cost and distribution of fees.
5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 Exempt Appendix C summarises the payments made by the Council pursuant to the scheme, and the costs associated with pursuing the litigation, but the following should be noted: -
· There have been significant cost implications to the Council due to the Arbitrator‘s decisions. The Arbitrator‘s value of the contract and work done by the contractor is not dissimilar to the Councils view. However, the Arbitrator‘s decision to award the full extension of time to the contractor (implying that the Council was at fault for the whole of the 17 weeks delay) has been very costly in terms of liquidated and ascertained damages, loss and expense claimed by the contractor and legal fees incurred by both parties.
· In practice, all of the disputes and issues were inextricably bound together and any apportionment of costs and settlement amounts to them is somewhat arbitrary.
· Since at the point of settlement the claims were 9 or 10 years old, interest payments were a very significant component.
· The final settlement terms has mitigated the potential costs to some extent. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com5 6. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COUNCIL ON ITS CURRENT CONTRACTING ARRANGEMENTS
6.1 The Council has made significant changes and progress in its contracting arrangements since the introduction of Best Value legislation (1998) particularly with the review of Procurement and Professional Design Services and has adopted National Best Practice wherever possible. Since the project was constructed 10 years ago, the Director of Legal and Democratic Services does not believe that any unknown or additional issues will be brought out by a review of the South Leeds Stadium scheme.
6.2 Bearing in mind that this project was completed in 1995 and the first arbitration decision was made in April 2003, there have been many changes in the Council‘s processes and procedures during this period.
6.3 The Council has reviewed its mechanism for considering projects that are potential problems or causing concern. A list of projects is regularly considered by a group of senior officers to prevent or mitigate occurrences and for overcoming actual occurrences. A project may enter the monitored list from various intelligence sources or could be through direct referral. Often the matters are minor and resolved quickly. The group also advises to ensure realistic and practical timescales are planned. Every effort is put into the planning and implementation stage to prevent the project developing problems. When a project has a problematic occurrence or outcome, as well as the immediate action taken to resolve the problem, the review considers the lessons learnt and the corrective action that may need to be put in place on future projects.
6.4 Several projects are causing the group some concern and these are being communicated to the appropriate project board and Executive Member in accordance with the recommendations made by the Scrutiny inquiry who looked at the issues around the Millennium Stage project. 2 of these projects have resulted in adjudication within the contract, which is a 28 day decision process introduced in standard form contracts to resolve disputes quickly and cheaply.
6.5 In February 2004, Members of the Executive Board considered the implications of the lessons learnt in relation to the Landmark Scheme. These lessons have been further considered by a working party of the Scrutiny Board (Development Services). This working party has not yet concluded its recommendations to the Scrutiny Board who, in turn, may make recommendations to the Executive Board.
6.6 The February 2004 report identified the Council‘s existing arrangements and National Best Practice regarding:
· The contractual relationships between parties; · The separation of key roles and responsibilities; · The client role; · The role of and communication with appropriate Members; · Design Freeze and · Form of Contract.
6.7 The Scrutiny working party (yet to conclude) has also considered the ”Landmark Scheme£ in relation to other reported issues: PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com6 · Scrutiny investigation into Saxton Gardens Phase 1 (1996) · District Auditor‘s report on managing capital expenditure (1998) · Scrutiny investigation into Millennium Square Stage (2002)
6.8 In terms of lessons learnt on the South Leeds project, it is felt that the following be noted:
· The project did not have a recognised client · There was no project board · The project team was not formally brought together · The design team comprised too many organisations e.g. External Architect, Internal Quantity Surveyor, External Engineers, Internal …project manager‘ and External contractor with partial (substantial) design · The mechanism for reporting and receiving approval to variations was cumbersome and slow · There was significant variations made during construction · The budget was very tight · The timescale in which the contractor was expected to perform was short · The form of contract was deemed satisfactory at the time but modern contracts do not contain arbitration clauses. The arbitration clause allowed the contractor to force us into arbitration.
6.9 Each of these items has been addressed in the Council‘s revised processes and procedures.
6.9.1 The project did not have a recognised client.
All projects are assigned to the appropriate department in either the capital programme or the revenue account and the corresponding Director takes responsibility and accountability.
6.9.2 There was no project board.
All projects over –3m in value have a project manager. The Departmental Director decides on the need for a project board.
6.9.3 The project team was not formally brought together.
Projects with a project board have a project manager and a project design team who meet regularly.
6.9.4 The design team comprised too many organisations e.g. External Architect, Internal Quantity Surveyor, External Engineers, Internal £project manager, and External contractor with partial (substantial) design.
Design teams may of necessity require various specialist disciplines but regular meeting of the design team provides cohesion and joint working. The use of partners, such as the Mouchel Parkman partnership for engineering design services assists in this. The proposed strategic alliance partner(s) for architectural design services will also assist once in place. Early contractor involvement on design team and project board reduces design issues assigned to the contractor.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com7 6.9.5 The mechanism for reporting and receiving approval to variations was cumbersome and slow.
Financial and Contract Procedure Rules within the Council‘s Constitution set out the requirements for reporting and seeking approval of variations. These are regularly reviewed and changed to provide the necessary robustness of Council procedures and to assist staff in their implementation. Delegated decisions, introduced with the Council‘s constitution, permits Directors to make decisions regarding variations involving additional costs within prescribed limits.
6.9.6 There were significant variations made during construction.
Projects are now subject to brief and design freezes (gateways) to prevent or minimise change once in contract.
6.9.7 The budget was very tight.
Tenders are evaluated for price and quality. Quality factors include ensuring that the tender is adequately resourced as well as financed. Value for money and value engineering of projects assist in ensuring that the project is deliverable within budget/tender.
6.9.8 The timescale in which the contractor was expected to perform was short
Project gateways ensure that sufficient time is planned into projects to allow satisfactory completion by the contractor. The contractors tender is evaluated for proposed resource and work programme.
6.9.9 The form of contract was deemed satisfactory at the time but modern contracts do not contain arbitration clauses. The arbitration clause allowed the contractor to force us into arbitration.
Contracts contain dispute resolution mechanisms that allow for quick/prompt decisions before the dispute escalates. This includes adjudication ÷ independent adjudicator hears the dispute and makes a decision within 28 days ÷ and mediation which involves the 2 parties discussing and agreeing a way forward. The contracts do not eliminate the possibility of dispute but do encourage prompt resolution and do not enable one party to force the other into litigation. However, litigation is still an ultimate possibility.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Members are asked to note the contents of this report and appendices.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com8 AGENDA Appendix A ITEM NO.:
Originators: M. J. Foster D. Outram Tel: 247 4091/4461
REPORT OF Executive Director (Development) and Chief Legal Officer COMMITTEE : Executive Board DATE : 1 December 1999
SUBJECT : South Leeds Stadium - Capital Scheme 02721
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Beeston Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
1. Purpose of the Report
To update Members on the claims arising out of the construction of South Leeds Stadium.
2. Introduction
2.1 Construction of the South Leeds Stadium was completed in November 1995, some 17 weeks later than the original contract period. This delay has proved to be a main source of dispute between the Council and the contractor, Clugston Group Limited.
2.2 In June 1997 a joint meeting of the Strategic Policy and Development Services Group Appointed Members Sub-Committee received a report on the contractual claims and outstanding additional works and resolved that:
· The Executive Director (Development) and the Executive Director (Legal Services) be authorised to take all necessary steps to defend or settle any claims brought against the Council and to prosecute appropriate claims against other parties;
· The Executive Director (Development) and the Executive Director (Legal Services) submit a further report to Members in due course upon the action taken by them in pursuance of the authorisation above;
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com1 · Approval be given to the carrying out of the outstanding and additional works identified in the report and that –140,000 be released for this purpose from the financial provision made in respect of Phase 2 of the South Leeds Stadium scheme;
· Any expenditure incurred taking all necessary steps (referred to above) be also met from the uncommitted element of the Phase 2 provision.
2.3 The Council engaged external solicitors, Masons, to provide legal advice in relation to the dispute. Arbitration proceedings were commenced by Clugston against the Council in Mid 1997. The matter has now reached a stage where an arbitration hearing seems inevitable unless some eleventh hour commercial settlement were to be promoted by Clugston.
2.4 This report outlines the timescale and costs which will be incurred if the matter continues to arbitration and gives several scenarios, including …worst‘ and …best‘ case together with the estimated costs involved and a recommendation based on the current factors.
3. Background
3.1 The principles behind the concept of South Leeds Stadium are that of a multipurpose sports complex comprising a rugby pitch, athletics track and field events, ten 5 a side football pitches together with covered stand, changing facilities and associated roads, car parking and other facilities. The project was procured using a combination of several consultants to the Council. The Council employed David Lyons and Associates (DLA) to design and administer the project and employed the Council‘s own Design Services Agency (DSA) for quantity surveying and structural engineering services. W. S. Atkins (Northern) Ltd. was employed to undertake specialist mechanical and electrical (M&E) consultancy work. There were a number of elements of specialist design to be carried out by the construction contractor once the works contract had been awarded.
3.2 Tenders were first received in 1994 and greatly exceeded the budget allocated by the Council. After extensive modifications to the design and specification, a contract sum of –4.194m was agreed with Clugston for the construction and partial design of the works. However, it is worth noting that variations have taken place to the contract and, at the time of the commencement of arbitration proceedings, the valuation of the contract was –4.45m and since then a further valuation now puts the cost at –4.51m. A cost of –4.86m, subject to Clugston making the necessary claims and valid documentation, has been projected by the Council‘s Quantity Surveyor as follows:
Original contract value –4,194,000 Variations –370,000 Loss and Expense –300,000 TOTAL –4,864,000
The valuation of –4.51m takes account of all the justifiable claims made by Clugston including –140,000 payment …on account‘ for loss and expense. A sum of –52,750 has been withheld from the –4.51m due to defective work.
3.3 The contract, which was awarded in October 1994, required Clugston to complete the works in 36 weeks ending 21 July 1995 and stipulated that Clugston should pay liquidated and ascertained damages at the rate of –34,800 for each week, or part of a week, that the works were delayed for any reason which did not entitle Clugston to an PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com2 extension of time for completion. During the project, additional works were added to the contract in line with increased budget provisions as approved by Members on 6 February 1995 (DSGC), 11 April 1995 (RGC) and 19 April 1995 (SPC). The Council finally took possession of the complex on 15 November 1995, some 17 weeks late and with a significant number of items of work unfinished or considered by the Contracts Administrator (DLA) to be defective.
3.4 The Council was served with a Notice to Concur (the document which effectively commences an arbitration) by Clugston in April 1997. In its Statement of Case, Clugston claims:
· –685,548 representing the outstanding value of measured work 1 and variations; · –174,000 by way of refund of liquidated damages2 previously deducted by the Council (for the 5 week period); · –1,975,090 by way of loss and expense3 in respect of the costs of the disruption and prolongation of the work; · Interest and financing charges and VAT on the above items; · A declaration that Clugston was entitled to an extension of time under the contract for the entire 17 weeks overrun.
3.5 The total value of Clugston‘s monetary claims is therefore –2.835m excluding interest.
3.6 Masons Solicitors were appointed in mid 1997 and offers of settlement were advised by Masons to be made by the Council in September 1997 and December 1998. Each of these offers, which were rejected by Clugston, remain sealed with the Arbitrator, and should have implications (explained later in the report) at a later date on the apportionment of costs.
3.7 On 1st May 1998 Clugston amended its Statement of Case and served its Reply and Defence to the Council‘s Counterclaim. The amended Statement included a ”correction£ of an error in the computation of the original Statement, the effect of which was to reduce the principal sums claimed by –500,000 to –2.335m excluding interest.
4. Report
4.1 An investigation, prior to service of the defence, of the causes of the delay indicates the following factors were instrumental in extending the duration of the works:
· flow of design information from the Council‘s consultants including David Lyons and Associates to Clugston; · late procurement of suppliers by Clugston; · poor management and execution of key elements by Clugston; · work varied into the contract by the Council;
1 Measured work is work that is specified by quantity within the bills of quantity for the purposes of pricing but which is to be subject to measurement. For example, a tenderer is asked to price for 100,000 bricks but then uses only 99,900. Payment is made pro-rata to the original tender price. 2 Liquidated and ascertained damages are the costs to be deducted, from the sum due to the contractor, as a result of the loss of income and/or expense to the Council caused by the delay of the project. 3 Loss and/or expense relates to the contractor‘s increased costs or reduced income as a result of changes made to the contract by the client. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com3 · rectification of defective work by Clugston.
4.2 David Lyons and Associates, as contract administrator, agreed to two separate extensions to the contract period of 7 and 5 weeks, due to variations and additional work. As they were contradicted by the investigation referred to in para. 4.1, above, and were procedurally flawed, they were stated as such in the defence. The Council paid –140,000 on account of loss and expense for the extended 7 and 5 weeks which had been previously agreed and liquidated damages for the remaining 5 weeks (17- 12) were deducted from the payments to Clugston. In theory, the sum of –420,000 (–34,800 X 12) should be paid back to the Council consequent on the lack of entitlement to an extension of time.
4.3 It is not a simple exercise to quantify the factors referred to in 4.1 above. There are complex issues and, to add to the complications, several of the causes of the delay, identified above, are interrelated. Also, Clugston has made what is referred to as a …global‘ claim for loss and expense. The claim is for an overall amount and has no breakdown of detail. This means that it is not possible to attribute particular sums of money to particular causes of delay. Whilst a payment of –140,000 was made to Clugston for loss and expense for the original 12 weeks delay, Clugston claims that the loss and expense on the total contract overrun, i.e. 17 weeks, is –1.98m, which is, proportionately, excessive.
4.4 Responsibility for the length of the individual delays amounting to 17 weeks is in dispute. Masons advise that Clugston‘s responsibility could range from 9-17 weeks. The Council may be responsible for up to 8 weeks due to the issue of work variations.
4.5 In July 1999 it was estimated that DLA is responsible for some 2-3 weeks of the delay. However, the Council is advised by Masons that action should not be taken against DLA until the Clugston arbitration is resolved and indeed doing so would contradict the Council‘s primary case against Clugston. DLA have claimed a fee entitlement of –351,089 against a contract price of –209,000. DLA has not yet pressed its claim for additional payment. Masons advise that they are not aware of any matter in relation to the prolongation or disruption of the works which would justify a claim by the Council against W. S. Atkins who were the Council‘s M&E consultants.
4.6 The costs are complex and involve claims and counter claims between Clugston and Clugston‘s sub-contractors as well as the claims between the Council and Clugston. Clugston would have accepted –1.2m plus costs in October 1998 and October 1999. The October 1998 settlement offer was rejected because the figure exceeded the Council‘s valuation of the contract and the Council had incurred legal costs which were to be recovered. Additionally, the Council is counter claiming for the following items which amount to –840,000:
· payment of liquidated damages for the extension for 12 weeks (–420,000 - 5 weeks having already been deducted); · loss and expense re-payment made due to the provisionally agreed extension (–140,000); · cost of defects and additional fees (–245,000); · revaluation of measured work (–35,000).
4.7 Appendix 1 shows details of the figures based on the potential …best‘ and …worst‘ case and other possible outcomes for the Council and highlights the financial values of the dispute in more detail.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com4 4.7.1 The £best, case scenario is based on the Arbitrator accepting the Council‘s projected cost of –4.86m (i.e. contract sum of –4.194 plus variations and some loss and expense payments). It also assumes that the Council would receive the liquidated damages and that the legal costs will be met by Clugston. It is fair to say that arbitrations rarely go wholly in favour of one party.
4.7.2 The £worst, case scenario is based on the possible, but unlikely event, of the Arbitrator deeming that the full 17 weeks extension should be granted and that Clugston‘s claims detailed in paras. 3.4, 3.5 and 3.7 (i.e. –2.335m) for measured work, loss and expense and damages is valid. This scenario would result in the Council incurring all the legal costs including those of Clugston and interest charges. This total cost, inclusive of legal and arbitration costs is estimated to be nearly –9m (see Appendix 1). It is likely that the Arbitrator will decide somewhere between the extremes of …best‘ and …worst‘ case.
4.7.3 A £possible, case scenario, figures for which are included in Appendix 1, is for the Arbitrator to decide that Clugston be given a 12 week extension, which was provisionally given by the Contract Administrator. This would result in the Council bearing a large portion of the legal and arbitration costs and making loss and expense, interest and finance charge payments. In this instance, the total cost, inclusive of legal and arbitration costs is estimated to be over –7m but depends entirely on the views of the Arbitrator in his apportionment of costs and validity of Clugston‘s claim for loss and expense.
4.7.4 Appendix 1 contains the figures for a £better, case scenario which is based on the Council being responsible for 8-9 weeks of the delay. Specialist consultants have been engaged to analyse the scheduling of the work and to determine the effect of the variations and the additional work on the overall programme. The analysis suggests that Clugston may be due up to 8-9 weeks extension of time. It is not possible to accurately calculate the total cost of this decision because the Arbitrator‘s likely view on the apportionment of costs is unknown. For the purposes of giving an indicative view in this report, it has been assumed, rather crudely, that all the costs could be apportioned on the basis of 8/17 for the Council and 9/17 for Clugston, based on the full claim of Clugston (i.e. –686,000 measured work and –1,475,000 for loss and expense). On this basis, and assuming both parties have incurred similar costs, the total cost, inclusive of legal and arbitration costs and interest is estimated to be –6.2m which is some –1.3m more than the Council‘s projected cost of –4.86m.
4.8 The arbitration is programmed to commence on 19th January 2000 and to last for 22 weeks with heavy costs for accommodation, Counsel and other legal and specialist advice. Counsel has been booked on behalf of the Council and will commence his preparations on 29th November 1999 at a cost of –105,000 prior to the hearing and an estimated cost approaching –200,000 for the full hearing. These costs are in addition to the legal fees of Masons which currently stand at –600,000 and the total legal and arbitration costs incurred by the Council are likely to be –1.1m by the completion of the arbitration hearing.
4.9 The Council has clearly already incurred high costs in preparing its case for the pending hearing and has attempted to minimise these by making the sealed offers which, it is advised, will significantly protect the Council‘s position on costs. The implication of the sealed offer is that, if the Arbitrator decides that the amount to be paid by the Council to Clugston is less than the amount contained in the sealed offer made by the Council, then the Council should recover a high proportion of its costs incurred after the date of making the offer. However, Clugston have similarly made an offer of settlement in the sum of –1.2m plus all their legal costs, finance charges, PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com5 etc.. The implication of Clugston‘s offer is that, if the Arbitrator decides a settlement figure greater than Clugston‘s, the Council would have to meet Clugston‘s costs. Also, should the Arbitrator decide on a settlement figure between that of the two parties, recently amended arbitration law requires that the Council would incur the costs.
4.10 The Executive Board, on 3rd November 1999, approved a Capital Programme which contained a provision of –824,000 in respect of this contractual claim (being the remaining uncommitted element from Phase 2). This report seeks the release of further resources from the capital contingency provision to enable the engagement of the QC and to make any settlement payments should either the opportunity to settle prior to the hearing arise or as a result of the arbitrator‘s decision. Details of the expenditure and any outcome would, clearly, be reported back to the Executive Board. Authority to spend is requested to cover the following based on the …better‘ case outlined in Appendix 1:
· arbitration and counsel costs –320,000 · loss and expense –554,000 (–694,000-–140,000) · re-measured work –148,000 (–323,000-–175,000) · TOTAL –1.022m
5. Commercial Consideration / Settlement Negotiations
5.1 A letter received by the Council on 25 October 1999 from Clugston‘s solicitor sets out terms on which Clugston would be prepared to settle. Basically, the terms are requiring the Council to pay –1.2m plus Clugston‘s costs and interest which, at this stage, could be more than –600,000. Then, of course, the Council would have to stand its own legal costs to date. The terms are very similar to those previously made by Clugston in October 1998 and that offer was rejected. Clearly, both the Council and Clugston have incurred additional legal costs between the period October 1998 to October 1999 so the offer is now even less attractive.
5.2 There is a high degree of commercial risk if the Council were to make a counter offer. There needs to be a careful consideration of the outcomes and costs to see if a final settlement could be made prior to the hearing.
5.3 As legal and other costs have risen substantially on both sides over the period of the dispute, and continue to rise, the monetary difference between the parties on the value of the claim has also increased. As additional evidence has been uncovered by the experts appointed on behalf of the Council, Masons have become increasingly confident that the Council‘s defence to the claim has improved and the strength of Clugston‘s claim has diminished. Indeed, there appears to be significant question about the validity of Clugston‘s claim.
6. Recommendations
6.1 That the Executive Board note that:
· the offer of settlement received on 25 October 1999 has not been accepted and no counter offer will be made by the Council at this stage.
· –0.6m legal and specialist costs have been incurred to date by the Council and that this case may proceed to arbitration with an indicative further cost of –0.5m.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com6 6.2 That the Executive Board agrees the release of contingency provision of up to –1.022m from within the capital programme to be used to fund the Arbitrator ‘s decision and costs arising from the dispute, subject to a further report detailing the outcome and expenditure.
MJF\proj\1767
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com7 AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Chris Wrench Telephone: 247 4956
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: Review of Leeds City Council School Admission Policy
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Introduction
This is a summary report, which brings together two reports previously presented 1.1 to the Admission Forum, (these comprise nearly 100 pages) as well as the views of Scrutiny Board, the Admission Forum and Education Leeds in relation to the Leeds school admission policy. 1.2 The Admission Forum and Scrutiny Board requested that Education Leeds undertake a review of the Leeds admission policy to compare outcomes with a number of alternative admission policies. The review was planned to take into account a range of measure and not simply to concentrate on maximising the percentage of first preferences achieved.
1.3 The report has been agreed and accepted by the Admission Forum at their meeting on 24th January 2005 and it has now been forwarded to Executive Board for them to consider the recommendations.
2. Recommendations
2.1 1. That the current admission policy be retained as it affords a safety net school for parents and offers all communities a continuing local school.
2. That the issue of the Council admission policy and the degree of first preferences be viewed as part of the school improvement agenda rather than as a separate issue.
3. The current straight line measure be retained as a straightforward and unequivocal method of determining distance.
4. That the three recommendations above be sent to all school Governing Bodies for comment and that a further paper be prepared on the results of the consultation exercise.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Chris Wrench
Telephone: 247 4956
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: Review of Leeds City Council School Admission Policy
Electoral Wards Affected: Please indicate that the following have been addressed within the report: All Specific Implications For: Resource Implications: Ethnic Minorities Finance Women Personnel Disabled People Accommodation/Buildings ü
Policy Implications:
Executive Board Eligible for Call-in Not Eligible for Call-in Decision ü ü
1.0 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 1.1 This is a summary report, which brings together two reports previously presented to the Admission Forum, (these comprise nearly 100 pages) as well as the views of Scrutiny Board, the Admission Forum and Education Leeds in relation to the Leeds school admission policy.
1.2 The Admission Forum and Scrutiny Board requested that Education Leeds undertake a review of the Leeds admission policy to compare outcomes with a number of alternative admission policies. The review was planned to take into account a range of measure and would not simply concentrate on maximising the percentage of first preferences achieved. Other important factors it took into account were: · Siblings already at the school · Proximity of the pupil‘s home to the school · Impact on extra district pupils · Proximity of primary schools to secondary schools · Number of children who receive none of their preferences · Relevant legislation such as the Greenwich judgement · Any change to the distance children would need to travel to school · Impact on ethnic minority communities · Impact on identified hotspots · Impact on appeals
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1.3 As well as taking these factors into account the measuring system currently used, straight-line distance was compared with measuring along roads to see if there would be an advantage in changing the measuring system.
1.4 The review compared the admission policies in a number of different LEAs to ascertain if there was a link between the policy and the percentage of first preferences achieved. This summary document does not give all the details on all the factors that were taken into account but gives the highlights that led to the recommendation given at the end of the report.
1.5 The work was undertaken by the Admissions Team and the Planning Team within Education Leeds with the computer analysis being undertaken by the University of Leeds.
Appendix 1 gives the current Leeds admission policy and the six alternative policies that were examined. Appendix 2 gives preference statistics by ward Appendix 3 gives the comments of Scrutiny Board
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 CONSTRAINTS Any review will automatically be subject to a number of constraints. For example we can only apply the data we hold to the six alternative models. This data is based on the preferences parents‘ made based on the current system. Under any new system a new pattern of preferences will emerge.
At the time of the review information was in the public domain that may have already affected parent‘s preferences, for example the advent of the Academy, changes at Primrose and Carr Manor High schools and the new South Leeds School. There are issues around falling rolls in the primary and secondary sectors as well as the continuing work of the primary and secondary and post 16 reviews which are dynamic and which cannot be modelled.
The exercise was based on statistics with the view that all parents would optimise their preferences. Catchment areas were drawn up for policy 5 but again these were based on numbers in an area fitting into the admission limit of a secondary school. It is highly unlikely that agreement would be reached on catchment areas without considerable discussion with all stakeholders.
3.0 CONCLUSION OF THE REPORT INTO THE REVIEW OF ADMISSION POLICIES
3.1 The conclusions of the report indicated:
a. All alternative policies examined lead to an increase in the percentage of first preferences achieved for both primary and secondary, but to a larger extent secondary schools. b. The alternative policies improves the percentage of first preferences achieved for ethnic minority pupils. c. All the alternative policies lead to a concentration of surplus places in under subscribed schools. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com d. The improvement in first preferences achieved is at the expense of longer distances travelled to allocated schools, particularly for those not allocated their first preference. This could lead to an increase in appeals.
3.2 RESULTS OF THE REVIEW
An analysis of the last round of admission data was undertaken as at March 1st 2004. This is the initial allocation before any movement, appeals or waiting list adjustments. Separate information was collated on hotspots, ethnicity and appeals. It was possible to model all the alternative policies by straight line and road distance.
3.3 Secondary Schools. Summary of results
Policy Distance Measure % 1 st Pref % 1st ‘ 3rd Pref
Current policy Straight line 85.0 94.0 Policy 1 Straight line 90.9 95.4 By road 90.8 95.4 Policy 2 Straight line 90.3 95.4 By road 90.3 95.4 Policy 3 Straight line 90.3 95.4 By road 90.3 95.4 Policy 4 Straight line 90.8 95.2 By road 90.8 95.1 Policy 5 Straight line 90.8 95.4 By road 90.8 95.4 Policy 6 Straight line 90.8 95.4 By road 90.8 95.4
The table indicates there is not a significant difference between the alternative policies in terms of percentage of first preferences achieved. However, each policy achieves more than 5% higher first preferences than the current model as at March 1st the initial allocation stage. There is also little difference between the policies when using straight line or road distances.
The higher percentage first preference achieved for the alternative policies occurs because in the existing policy, if a school is over subscribed then distance takes priority over preference and a pupil living closer to a school that is their second preference will be allocated to the school before a pupil who lives further away that has that school as their first preference. The alternative policies prioritise preference above distance therefore more pupils will obtain their first preference because pupils living closer to the school who do not have the school as first preference will not be allocated ahead of them.
The current policy supports the concept of local children for local schools. It also allows for the nearest school to be a safety net school, which the parents can, in the main, rely on if they are unsuccessful in their first preference. The alternative policies remove the concept of a safety net school.
3.4 Primary schools. Summary of results
% 1st Pref % 1st ‘ 3rd Pref PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Current policy 89.5 95.2 Policy 1 91.8 95.6 Policy 2 91.9 96.0 Policy 3 91.9 96.0 Policy 4 91.8 95.2
Policy 5, priority areas was not completed due to lack of time. Policy 6, feeder schools is not applicable to primary schools.
The percentage first preferences achieved are higher in all alternative policies than the current policy. All alternative admission policies have a higher percentage of just over 2% above the current policy. However, when the percentage of 1st-3rd preferences is considered the gap is much smaller with policy 4 having no higher percentage than the current policy.
Given the safety net system in Leeds which allows parents to express a preference for schools outside their local area it is considered that the 1st to 3rd preference achieved is a better measure than 1st preferences only.
3.5 Secondary Pupils who achieved none of their preferences (Placements) % Placements
Current policy 4.2 Policy 1 4.0 Policy 2 3.9 Policy 3 4.0 Policy 4 4.2 Policy 5 4.0 Policy 6 4.0
Five out of the six alternative policies reduce the percentage of pupils that are placed in schools. However, when the numbers are considered in relation to the variables imposed by the constraints mentioned above the number of placements is relatively small.
3.6 Primary Pupils who achieved none of their preferences (Placements) % Placements
Current policy 4.3 Policy 1 4.0 Policy 2 3.6 Policy 3 3.6 Policy 4 4.5
Only policy 4 has a higher percentage than the current policy. However, the percentages are small and the same limitations apply as given for the secondary figures.
3.7 IMPACT ON SCHOOLS
The report highlighted the fact that the alternative admission policies exacerbate the PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com issue of surplus places in under subscribed schools. Under the alternative policies more pupils are offered places in their preferred school due to the removal of the safety net of the nearest school and therefore less pupils are offered places in under subscribed schools.
For four secondary schools ÷ City of Leeds, South Leeds, Braim Wood and John Smeaton the issue of surplus places in year 7 is significantly higher than under the current policy. The scale of the impact is such that for some of these schools an alternative admission policy could have an effect on the long term viability of the schools.
With the exception of John Smeaton the other schools are already involved in the secondary school review process. These schools need time for the new developments to take effect. The concentration of unallocated places and levels of under subscription in these schools could have an impact on the school standards and the wider Council strategy of …closing the gap‘. If positive change can be achieved for schools it could lead to a virtuous circle of rising standards, increased demand, wider social mix, leading to further improvements in standards.
For Primary schools the number of schools with surplus places over 25% would increase from the current figure of 53 to 61, an additional 8 schools.
3.8 TRAVEL
The alternative policies had a neutral effect on the travel distance for primary schools. However, for secondary schools it is calculated that an additional 1000km each day would be travelled for year 7. By the time there were five year groups in secondary schools an additional 5000km would be travelled each day . This is because preference is prioritised over distance and parents will preference the outer area schools and gain admission. The percentage of first preference achieved is gained at the expense of longer average journeys to school.
Education Leeds also has concerns about disputes that could be generated with parents concerning measurements along roads, for example unlit roads or unsafe roads.
3.9 BLACK AND ETHNIC MINORITY (BME) PUPILS
The first report produced for the Admission Forum and Scrutiny Board raised concerns about the percentage of BME pupils allocated the school of first preference. The figures given were as follows for secondary schools:
Secondary school preferences achieved by ethnicity
Ethnicity Number 1st Prefs 1st ‘ 3rd Prefs Placement Of Pupils
Asian Heritage 638 80.7 93.1 5.0 Black Heritage 99 63.6 90.9 6.1 Mixed Heritage 159 67.3 84.9 9.4 White 5759 86.6 94.4 3.8 Total 6655 85.0 94.0 4.2
As the numbers of BME pupils in the allocation system is relatively low each year the PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com categories were compressed into the four headings given above.
The table indicates that BME pupils appear to achieve a lower first preference percentage than the …white‘ community. The second report presented to the Admission Forum examined this issue.
The additional work consisted of an analysis of preferences and ethnicity by ward as well as other analyses. Appendix 2 gives the detail of first preferences by ward for BME pupils.
The conclusions of the additional report were as follows:
1. Pupils of BME heritage are more concentrated in wards where the percentage of first preferences achieved is low. In short inner-city wards achieve lower first preferences than outer area wards. 2. Parents in these wards are less likely to preference their nearest school, suggesting that parents find schools outside of their local area more attractive. The current admissions system allows parents to make such preferences without penalty, due to the safety net of their local school being available. 3. Within wards with low levels of first preferences achieved, pupils of BME heritage have a level of first preferences no worse than the overall level of first preferences achieved in those wards. 4. The location of Roundhay School Technology College in relation to large BME populations has a significant impact on the percentage of first preferences achieved by BME pupils. It is the most over-subscribed school in Leeds and its geographical position is inviting to inner city families. Unfortunately these families are generally unsuccessful in gaining admission because of nearer alternative secondary school, which means they receive no priority for Roundhay.
3.10 SCRUTINY BOARD
Scrutiny Board (Lifelong Learning) discussed the findings of the Review of Admission Policies document in September 2004. They did not discuss the further report on BME pupils. Their comments are given in full in appendix 3.
The Board‘s comments stopped short of making any recommendation although they were broadly supportive of the current policy. They felt that the alternative policies had drawbacks in relation to negative effects on the inner city, which would affect less mobile families. They felt that action should be taken to protect inner city schools, which serve a broader social role within their communities. The Board were also concerned about additional travel that could be generated by adopting the alternative policies as well as the potential impact on community cohesion and pupil behaviour and attendance.
Members accepted that no admission system could deliver everyone‘s first preference given the high over subscription rates at some Leeds schools.
3.11 ADMISSION FORUM
The Admission Forum received the report and thanked officers for the thoroughness of the report . They commissioned a summary report to bring together the reports and viewpoints so far expressed. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.12 EDUCATION LEEDS
Education Leeds produced the two reports but significantly they did not make any recommendation concerning the six alternative policies or the current system. They entered into a dialogue with the Admission Forum and Scrutiny Board in order to assess the strength of commitment to change. The view of Education Leeds has been that it could administer any admission system as long as there is wide support.
However, its belief in local schools for local children and commitment to inner city schools is well known. It does not accept that the pursuit of maximum first preferences at the expense of all other considerations will be ultimately beneficial to the parents and communities of Leeds.
There are many challenges in Leeds but the greatest challenge is to make all schools good and improving schools. If all schools were good and improving then local communities would value their local school and the issue of first preferences and over subscription criteria would cease to be an issue. To this extent Education Leeds‘ view is that the admission policy is a secondary matter to the raising achievement agenda it is pursuing. The view of Education Leeds is that there are no strategic reasons for moving away from the current policy.
By changing to an admission policy that prioritises preferences over distance there would be effects, which would be counter productive. There would be a further drift out of the inner city with the consequent effect on a number of schools. This would lead to spiral downwards into lower finances and lower achievement in these schools. The improvements anticipated through the secondary and post 16 review would not have time to work through as pupils would drift leading to the downward spiral.
In the secondary sector we have schools, which are 70% over subscribed on first preferences and schools, which are 70% under subscribed. Our task is to promote all schools. To this end we have already taken steps, for example the new South Leeds school, new buildings at Carr Manor, the new Primrose school and the David Young Academy. We believe that ultimately these steps will produce stronger local schools for all the communities in Leeds. It is accepted that a change in the admission policy can have an effect in a small area or for a particular school but the overall effect could still have an impact on the inner city schools.
The policies that produce the higher levels of first preferences are derivatives of first preference first systems. The major drawback with these systems is the lack of a safety net school, the lack of clear advice for parents and most importantly the question of where does a child go if he or she cannot be granted a place at his first preference school? There is a danger that many parents will try for …popular schools‘ which are out of their local area and therefore they would not be successful. Their own local school would become full of its own first preferences and so the parent has lost the opportunity to attend this school. In fact all other local schools may be full of their own first preferences which leaves the parent with no choice at all.
4.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 There are no financial implications to the report
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5.0 STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS
5.1 The current admission policy and any proposed admission policy will meet all statutory requirements.
6.0 EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS
6.1 Equality issues were examined as part of the initial report to the Admission Forum. Reference has been made in the body of this report and in appendix 3 which states that BME pupils achieve a lower percentage of first preferences than the host …white‘ community, however the explanation lies in geographical factors and parents not preferencing their local school.
6.2 BME pupils achieve the same percentage of first preferences as all other children in the ward and the issue is viewed as one of raising standards and reputations of the more local schools which would then benefit all parents in the areas affected.
6.3 Securing good and improving schools in all areas of the City is critical in achieving the objective of allowing all our local communities access to good quality local schools.
7.0 LINKS TO KEY PRIORITIES AND CORPORATE PLAN
7.1 The link within the Council Corporate Plan is Making the Most of People and within the Vision for Leeds 2004 to 2020 it falls within the theme of Learning.
8.0 COMMENTS OF THE CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER
8.1 The determination of the Authority‘s School Admission Arrangements is a function to be performed by the Council under the arrangements involving Education Leeds.
8.2 The arrangements require that Education Leeds provide assistance, advice and where appropriate proposals to support the Council in the discharge of this function. The Council is to have regard to advice from Education Leeds when carrying out this function.
8.3 The contents of the attached report have been discussed with the Chief Education Officer. The Chief Education Officer feels that the proposals in the report contain all the analysis and considerations that he would wish to be drawn to the Executive Board‘s attention in considering this matter.
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 9.1 Executive Board Members are asked to agree that:
i) the current admission policy be retained as it affords a safety net school for parents and offers all communities a continuing local school.
ii) the issue of the Council admission policy and the degree of first preferences be viewed as part of the school improvement agenda rather than as a separate issue.
iii) the current straight line measure be retained as a straightforward and unequivocal method of determining distance.
iv) the three recommendations above be sent to all school Governing Bodies for comment and that a further paper be prepared on the results of the consultation exercise.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 1
THE CURRENT ADMISSION POLICY AND ALTERNATIVE POLICIES EXAMINED
The current Leeds admission policy is set out below.
Priority 1.
a. Children with a statement of Special Educational Needs (SEN), which names a school or unit with special resources. Other pupils with statements, which Education Leeds decides, need a place in a school or unit with special resources. b. Education Leeds may decide to admit any child in exceptional circumstances that would significantly benefit the child and/or their parents or local children and their parents. Children likely to fall into this category are: · Children in public care or fostered under an arrangement made by the local authority. · Children with a statement of special educational need · Children who do not have a statement but who may have special educational needs. · Excluded children or children with a history of challenging behaviour
Priority 2
Brothers and sisters (siblings)
Priority 3
a. If there are enough places for everyone who has applied, everyone will be offered a place. b. If there are more applications than there are school places, places are offered first to children living nearest to the school (measured by straight lime). This is done in line with parent‘s preferences, giving priority to:
1. Parents who show a preference for the nearest Leeds school to their home address. 2. Parents who show a preference for a Leeds school other than the one nearest to their home address c. If parents‘ preferences cannot be met in this way, then a place is guaranteed at the nearest community school with available places at the time of allocation.
There were six alternative over subscription criteria examined but it is suggested that each of the alternatives retain priority 1 of the current policy.
The six alternative policies are given below:
1.First preference first only. This would give priority to:
1st preference nearest school, sibling 1st preferences nearest school, non-sibling 1st preference non-nearest school, sibling 1st preference non-nearest school, non-sibling 2nd preference, etc
2. Sibling priority then first preference based on nearest school. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com This would give priority to:
Siblings 1st Preference nearest school 1st Preference, non-nearest school 2nd preference, etc
3.Sibling priority then first preference based on straight line distance, either straight-line or by road. This would give priority to:
Siblings 1st preference nearest (either by straight line distance or by road) 2nd preference nearest, etc
4. First preference only. This would give priority to:
1st preference (either straight line distance or by road) 2nd preference, etc
5. Admission priority areas (which could include designated catchment areas.) This would give priority to:
1st preference priority area, sibling 1st preference priority area, non-sibling 1st preference non-priority area, sibling 1st preference non-priority area, non-sibling 2nd, etc
6. Feeder schools. This would give priority for entry to secondary schools to:
1st preference, feeder school, sibling 1st preference, feeder school, non-sibling 1st preference non-feeder school, non-sibling 1st preference non-feeder school, non-sibling 2nd etc
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 2
Preference Statistics by Ward
Ward Number % first preferences % with nearest of BME achieved school as first pupils* preference All pupils BME All pupils BME pupils pupils Gipton & Harehills 172 65.8 65.7 24.7 27.9 Chapel Allerton 110 67.7 69.1 24.5 20.0 Roundhay 69 82.4 89.9 57.0 59.4 City & Hunslet 65 63.0 80.0 28.2 41.5 Moortown 55 71.3 72.7 32.3 25.5 Hyde Park & Woodhouse 40 75.0 87.5 19.8 25.0 Armley 39 79.0 92.3 33.4 48.7 Alwoodley 36 67.2 58.3 51.4 41.7 Beeston & Holbeck 30 68.1 80.0 34.9 30.0 Burmantofts & Richmond Hill 26 55.4 61.5 27.3 26.9 Calverley & Farsley 26 92.4 84.6 45.3 53.8 Weetwood 19 92.3 84.2 56.5 57.9 Kirkstall 18 87.2 83.3 40.0 33.3 Killingbeck & Seacroft 13 70.4 53.8 24.1 0.0 Headingley 13 90.3 92.3 6.5 15.4 Morley South 13 90.4 100.0 66.1 76.9 Pudsey 13 97.2 84.6 62.5 61.5 Farnley & Wortley 12 85.9 83.3 46.9 50.0 Cross Gates & Whinmoor 10 68.3 30.0 13.0 0.0 Otley & Yeadon 9 97.1 88.9 91.3 88.9 Morley North 8 86.6 87.5 65.7 50.0 Horsforth 8 97.4 87.5 86.4 87.5 Middleton Park 7 72.6 57.1 38.8 42.9 Adel & Wharfedale 7 90.1 71.4 47.5 28.6 Garforth & Swillington 7 94.2 100.0 88.4 71.4 Temple Newsam 6 76.1 66.7 65.6 16.7 Kippax & Methley 5 84.9 100.0 72.8 100.0 Bramley & Stanningley 5 86.1 80.0 44.6 40.0 Ardsley & Robin Hood 3 89.3 66.7 79.1 66.7 Wetherby 3 96.7 100.0 90.0 66.7 Guiseley & Rawdon 3 98.0 100.0 85.4 66.7 Rothwell 2 88.5 100.0 66.4 100.0 Harewood 2 94.1 50.0 23.0 0.0 Out of Area 42 TOTAL 896 85.0 76.5 52.5 39.2 Note. The observed differences between all pupils and BME pupils will not be significant for wards with small numbers of BME pupils.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 3
Scrutiny Board (Lifelong Learning)
Comments on the review of admissions policies
September 2004
Background
Members of the Scrutiny Board discussed the findings of the review of admissions policies, commissioned by the Leeds Admissions Forum, on 23 rd September 2004.
The discussion formed one element of a wider inquiry by the Scrutiny Board on the topic of school places, but was timed specifically to allow any comments from the Scrutiny Board to be taken into consideration when the Executive Board considers how to take forward the review.
Members had a wide ranging discussion, which will be reflected in the report to be produced at the end of the Scrutiny Board‘s school places inquiry. In the meantime the following comments relate to the review.
Comments
· Members support the view of Education Leeds that they wish to operate an admissions policy which has broad stakeholder support, and which achieves at least the overall levels of first preference attained by the current system.
· In broad terms, the Board felt that primary admissions were operating more or less satisfactorily already, with the exception of a few minor hotspots.
· The Board believes that the principles of educational entitlement need to be supported by a system that provides access to a quality education for all pupils. In order to work towards this goal, the quality of education provided across the city‘s secondary schools needs to improve further, such that parents will feel more confident that preferencing their local school is an acceptable, or even desirable, option.
· In particular Members felt that action needs to be taken to protect the authority ‘s inner city high schools, in order to extend entitlement to less mobile families, as well as fulfilling the broader social role which some schools perform within their local communities. Links were also made with the growth of new population within the inner city as a result of regeneration. It was noted that the options explored in the review all resulted in predicted higher levels of …drift‘ away from the inner city high schools, and also concentrated surpluses within particular schools in the primary sector.
· In this context, Members also touched on the issue of surplus places and falling school rolls. Whilst this will be explored in more detail as the Board‘s inquiry develops, Members‘ initial view was that issues around the supply of places and the overall quality of education were more fundamental to the drive to deliver entitlement than the current debate around possible changes to the admissions policy.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · The Board was concerned about the additional travelling that could be generated by adopting some of the models outlined, including the potential impact on community cohesion and pupil behaviour and attendance.
· The Board also noted that the Admissions Forum had requested further more detailed research on the lower preference rates for black and minority ethnic (BME) communities. It was suggested that this may be linked to mobility issues, with more mobile BME families enjoying similarly high levels of first preferences to more mobile white families. It was recommended that the mobility factor be taken into account in commissioning the further research requested.
· Members acknowledged some of the caveats regarding change outlined in the report, including the fact that no changes to the system can deliver everyone‘s first preference given the high over subscription rates in some secondary schools, and that the improvements in first preference rates produced in the modelling exercise were based on parental preferences exercised against the current criteria and may not be replicated to the same extent if the admissions policy changed. It was also acknowledged that fluctuations in schools ‘ reputations among parents (and the media) had a significant impact on patterns of preference year on year.
· Members commented on the marketing of local schools to local parents, and a possible role for Education Leeds in getting this message to parents, although it was acknowledged that the marketing of schools is a controversial issue when rolls are falling and schools may be seen to be competing for pupils.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Liz White
Telephone: 247 5585
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: THE EDUCATION BILL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1 The purpose of the report is to highlight for Members the key issues covered by the Education Bill which was introduced to Parliament on 30 November 2004.
1.2 The key reforms proposed within the Bill are :
· a more efficient, effective and streamlined inspection service for schools and early years provision that gives a sharper analysis of each school‘s performance whilst freeing schools from over burdensome inspection requirements
· guaranteed three year budgets for every school from 2006 aligned with the school year and ring fenced to schools
· school profiles which will give parents a balanced assessment of each school‘s ethos, characteristics, performance and improvement priorities. It will replace the annual governors‘ report.
· other parts of the Bill will establish a common basis for inspection of education and day care services in children‘s centres and extended schools; streamline the collection of school level data ; extend existing legislation requiring local authorities to invite proposals for new or replacement secondary schools ; extend the remit of the Teacher Training Agency to reflect its new role in leading and developing the remodelled school workforce.
2. RECOMMENDATION
2.1 Members are invited to note the key issues within the Education Bill.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com1 AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Liz White
Telephone: 247 5585
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: THE EDUCATION BILL
Electoral Wards Affected: Please indicate that the following have All been addressed within the report:
Specific Implications For: Resource Implications: Ethnic Minorities Finance Women Personnel Disabled People Accommodation/Buildings
Policy Implications:
Executive Board Eligible for Call-in Not Eligible for Call-in ü ü Decision
1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1 The purpose of the report is to highlight for Members the key issues covered by the Education Bill which was introduced to Parliament on 30 November.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 In January 2004 the Government announced a package of proposals aimed at simplifying the school improvement process, improving data flows and strengthening the accountability framework for schools.
2.2 This was followed in February 2004 with publication of Ofsted‘s consultation document The Future of Inspection. Its main proposal was the introduction of shorter, more regular and less burdensome school inspections.
2.3 The two sets of proposals were brought together in a policy document A New Relationship with Schools, published jointly by the Government and Ofsted
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com2 in June 2004. It set out proposals for inspection reform and a new accountability framework with a simplified approach to school improvement. It placed emphasis on school self evaluation, which schools would be expected to keep up to date at least annually.
2.4 In July 2004 the Dfes published its Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners. This placed A New Relationship with Schools in context alongside other key reforms, including the introduction of a guaranteed three year budget for all schools from 2006 and the requirement on LEAs to invite proposals from a variety of promoters where a new or replacement school is needed.
2.5 On 1 November 2004 Ofsted published a consultation document Framework for Inspecting Schools. It set out proposed requirements for school inspections from September 2005, incorporating significant developments in the policy for school inspections which had been outlined in A New Relationship with Schools. Consultation closes on 31 January 2005.
2.6 On 6 December 2004 Ofsted, alongside other children‘s services inspectorates and commissions, published a consultation report on the new inspection framework of children,s services. At the same time views were also sought on three related developments, namely new arrangements for joint area reviews, annual performance assessment of children‘s services and key judgements and evidence to inform inspections and reviews. Taken together, these were designed to fulfil the intentions set out in the Children Act for there to be an integrated inspection service. Consultation ends on 28 February 2005 and the new framework will be published in April 2005.
2.7 The Education Bill, published on 30 November 2004, makes provision for the necessary legislative changes for all these reforms. It sets out how the Government intends to raise standards by developing a new relationship with schools, with clearer priorities and fewer bureaucratic burdens. It promotes greater autonomy and diversity in the education system and the development of an enhanced strategic role for local education authorities, with greater emphasis on their enabling and empowering roles. It also makes provision to extend the remit of the Teacher Training Agency and a number of other miscellaneous provisions.
3. DFES FIVE YEAR STRATEGY FOR CHILDREN AND LEARNERS
3.1 The Dfes Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners was presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State on 8 July 2004. It was one of a range of five year plans produced by major government departments. It‘s key principles of reform incorporate :
· greater personalisation and choice · opening up services to new and different providers · freedom and independence for headteachers, with more streamlined funding arrangements · major commitment to staff development · partnerships with parents, employers, local authorities and voluntary organisations
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com3 3.2 The 2004 Spending Review described the Government‘s plans for funding these proposals, including :
· an average growth rate of 4.4% per year in real terms from 2004/05 to 2007/08 (–12b in total) · education spending to rise to 5.6% of GDP by 2007/08 · capital investment in education to rise from –5b in 2004/05 to –7b a year in 2007/08 · efficiency gains of at least 2.5% per year of Dfes 2004/05 baseline
The spending review confirmed increases in funding for schools to deliver the objectives of the five year strategy so that the average funding per pupil will rise to at least –5,500 per pupil by 2007/08.
4. KEY ISSUES
4.1 The Education Bill provides the legislative framework to support the policy developments set out in A New Relationship for Schools and the Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners.
4.2 The key reforms proposed within the Bill are :
· a more efficient, effective and streamlined inspection service for schools and early years provision that gives a sharper analysis of each school‘s performance whilst freeing schools from over burdensome inspection requirements
· guaranteed three year budgets for every school from 2006 aligned with the school year and ring fenced to schools
· school profiles which will give parents a balanced assessment of each school‘s ethos, characteristics, performance and improvement priorities. It will replace the annual governors‘ report.
· other parts of the Bill will establish a common basis for inspection of education and day care services in children‘s centres and extended schools; streamline the collection of school level data ; extend existing legislation requiring local authorities to invite proposals for new or replacement secondary schools ; extend the remit of the Teacher Training Agency to reflect its new role in leading and developing the remodelled school workforce.
4.3 School inspections
4.3.1 The Bill proposes the repeal of 1996 School Inspections Act and re-enacts many of the act‘s provisions, but with some significant changes. It will reform school inspection in line with the introduction of a new system of more regular, lighter touch inspections featuring 2-5 days notice followed by a two day inspection, with inspections taking place every 3 years. School self evaluation will be the starting point for this shorter and sharper inspection
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com4 regime.
4.3.2 School improvement partners, accountable to the LEA, (or Children‘s Trust when established) will be nominated to work with all schools to identify strengths and weaknesses. In order to reduce burdens on schools the intention is that each school will have a …single conversation‘ each year led by the …school improvement partner.‘ They will review the school‘s self evaluation, assess benchmarking data and consider relevant changes to national and local priorities. It is envisaged that the school improvement partner for a secondary school will be an experienced serving headteacher.
4.3.3 The Chief Inspector will be required to report on, in addition to existing requirements, the contribution made to the well being of the pupils (corresponding to the well-being definition in the Children Act 2004 based on the five outcomes) and how far the education provided meets the needs of the range of pupils at the school.
4.3.4 Inspection will be at the discretion of the Chief Inspector, given the power to inspect a school at any time, even when not under a duty to do so, and treat it as though it were a …statutory‘ inspection.
4.3.5 The Bill removes the duty on a school to produce an action plan following inspection.
4.3.6 The Bill proposes the alignment of the inspection of early years provision with school inspection. There will be common basis for inspection of education and day care services delivered in children‘s centres and extended schools.
4.4 Inspection of schools causing concern
4.4.1 The current four categories of schools causing concern (those requiring special measures, in serious weakness, underachieving and inadequate sixth form) will be replaced by two categories. These categories will be …schools which require special measures because they are failing to provide an adequate standard of education and show insufficient capacity to improve‘ and those that, …while providing an acceptable standard of education are nevertheless not performing as well as they should in one or more respect and should be served with an improvement notice.‘
4.4.2 The Bill proposes a simplification of the current requirements for follow up action, including removing the duty on a school to provide an action plan.
4.5 Inspection of early years provision
4.5.1 The Bill aligns the frequency of early years and school inspections and enables a single report to be produced from more than one inspection on a single site, for example the inspection of wrap-around provision
4.6 The school profile
4.6.1 Schools will no longer be required to produce a Governors‘ Annual Report or to hold an Annual Parents Meeting. Instead, the school will be required to
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com5 produce a School Profile which will be a short comprehensive document providing an overview of each school‘s performance and vision. The intention is that it will help parents and carers gain a broader and deeper understanding of the performance and achievements of schools.
4.7 Data Collection
4.7.1 The Bill allows data to be shared between the Dfes, the Inland Revenue and Department for Work and Pensions, in order to verify the information provided in applications for the education maintenance allowance and to improve the administration of free school meals.
4.7.2 The Bill also allows for the collection of data on individual teachers and support staff for statistical and research purposes.
4.8 Training the school workforce
4.8.1 The Bill extends the remit of the Teacher Training Agency to reflect its role in leading and developing the remodelled school workforce and to enable it to carry out activities in relation to the whole school workforce, not just in relation to teaching posts. It ensures that the Agency will have appropriate powers to take on these new roles in the provision of training and development for the school workforce. The Agency will be renamed the Training and Development Agency for Schools.
4.9 School Organisation
4.9.1 The Bill will require local authorities to invite proposals for all new or replacement schools, to increase the diversity of secondary education provision.
4.9.2 It will give foundation bodies, which are bodies of three or more voluntary or foundation schools, the powers to publish proposals to establish new schools, including entering into competition for a new secondary school.
4.9.3 The Bill gives the Secretary of State the power to direct LEAs, or the governing bodies of maintained schools, to bring forward proposals to rationalise school places.
4.10 School Funding
4.10.1 The Bill makes technical changes to existing legislation that will allow schools to receive guaranteed three year budgets aligned to the school year. It amends current legislation through which councils currently receive Revenue Support Grants, replacing it with provisions for a ring-fenced grant based on the schools‘ Formula Funding Share with effect from 2006.
4.10.2 It also delegates limited decision making powers from the Secretary of State to school forums to give them the power to agree applications from local authorities to increase the limit on central expenditure within the schools budget or to vary certain elements of the application of the minimum funding guarantee.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com6 4.11 Other provisions
4.11.2 Other provisions within the Bill include :
· governing bodies to be able to offer pupils the opportunity to experience modular courses more usually offered in a higher education setting
· re-enacting the requirement for schools and LEAs to set challenging annual targets for pupil performance
· bringing the power of governing bodies to direct excluded children to attend alternative provision in line with those for other children
· extending the fixed penalty notice system to the parents of such children
5. TIMETABLE
5.1 The stages of the enactment of the Bill and implementation of proposals have yet to be confirmed, but are likely to follow the timetable :
Education Act Spring 2005
September 2005 : proposals for new self evaluation systems and school improvement partners
September 2006 : all new systems in place
6.0 COMMENTS OF THE CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER
6.1 The contents of the report have been discussed with the Chief Education Officer. The Chief Education Officer feels that the report includes the points, observations and argument he would wish to be drawn to the Executive Board‘s attention in considering this matter.
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Members are invited to note the key issues emerging from the Education Bill.
References
Copy of the reports and associated documents referred to in this report can be seen on the Ofsted and Dfes websites ( www.ofsted.gov.uk and www.dfes.gov.uk). Paper copies can be made available on request.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com7 AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: David McDermott Telephone: 2475179
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: School Funding Proposals 2005/06
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. This report advises the Executive Board on responses to consultation with headteachers and governors on proposals for the allocation of growth within the overall funding available for schools in 2005/06.
2. A letter detailing the proposals was sent to all schools. This was supported by six briefing sessions which were attended by approximately 150 headteachers and governors.
3. Responses were requested by 26 January and reported to the Schools Forum on 27 January.
4. Only 2 responses (one written, one oral) were received by the deadline date. The low level of response reflects the fact that there is little discretion left to Local Education Authorities (LEAs) in the distribution of school funding since the introduction of the requirement to ”passport£ the government funding allocation on to schools coupled with the Minimum Funding Guarantee.
5. The Schools Forum noted the proposals and responses and recommended implementation of the proposals to the City Council.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com1 AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: David McDermott Telephone: 2475179
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: SCHOOL FUNDING PROPOSALS 2005/06
Electoral Wards Affected: Please indicate that the following have ALL been addressed within the report:
Specific Implications For: Resource Implications: Ethnic Minorities Finance Women Personnel Disabled People Accommodation/Buildings
Policy Implications:
Executive Board Eligible for Call-in Not Eligible for Call-in Decision 3 3
1.0 Purpose of the Report
To advise members of the Executive Board of the results of the recent budget consultation process with schools and the Leeds Schools Forum and to seek approval to proposals affecting school funding for 2005/06.
2.0 Background
2.1 The details of the funding settlement for Leeds are set out in Appendix 1 of this report and the separate Education Budget Briefing Note being considered at this meeting. In overall terms the anticipated revenue budget for education for 2005/06 will result in significant real terms growth. It is anticipated that the Individual Schools Budget will provide over –3.4m in real growth above inflation. However the DfES funding regulations mean that the majority of this growth will be in the budget delegated directly to schools whilst spending on LEA services has been allocated an increase which does not match inflation.
2.2 A paper (copy attached as Appendix 1) setting out the education funding context for 2005/06 and a number of detailed proposals was sent out to all schools with a deadline for responses of 26 January 2005.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1 2.3 To support and inform the consultation process a series of six briefing sessions were held around the city. These meetings were attended by approximately 150 headteachers and governors.
3.0 Format for Responses
Schools were asked to respond in accordance with a proforma which covered the main issues covered by the consultation. These issues were:-
· The proposal to continue to retain a central fund to protect schools in financial difficulty;
· The Central Schools Block budget and the current level of delegation;
· The LEA Central Block budget;
· The proposals on the allocation of growth within the Individual Schools Budget;
· The proposed allocation of Standards Funds.
In addition respondents were invited to make any other comments that they wished in relation to funding for 2005/06.
4.0 Summary of Responses
4.1 Schools in financial difficulty
Schools were invited to indicate whether they were in favour of retaining a fund to support schools in financial difficulty.
4.2 Central Schools Block
Schools were asked to comment on the budget proposals for increases to the Central Schools Block and the current level of delegation as part of the overall budget strategy. The main issues in this category were:-
Increases as a result of budget pressures:- –K · Community Language Team 11 · School Maternity Scheme 30 · Provision for Difficult to Place Children 255 · Nursery Education provided in non-maintained settings 140 · Prudential Borrowing 136 · Capital Expenditure funding from the Revenue Budget 100
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2 4.3 LEA Block
Schools were asked to comment on the proposals for increases in LEA Central Block budgets.The main issues were the funding of the following priorities for service enhancements and budget pressures from within the restricted increase allowable under DfES regulations:- –K Building Schools for the Future (BSF) team 231
School Improvement Service 240 School Interventions budget 180 Home to School/College Transport 423 School VER costs 250 Personnel 100
4.4 Individual Schools Budget(ISB)
Consultation on the ISB largely related to a number of proposals for use of the real terms growth as a result of the relatively favourable budget for schools. These proposals can be summarised as follows:- –K Secondary Funding for Inclusion - Behaviour 1000 Area-based Management (No Child Left Behind) 460 Premises 1000 Workforce Reform 840
In addition some minor changes to the formula allocations for premises and for pupils from underachieving black and minority ethnic groups are proposed on the basis that the Minimum per Pupil Funding Guarantee will offset any losses for individual schools.
In overall terms the above proposals would deliver approximate increases in real terms (ie after funding inflationary pressures) of:-
–m Secondary 2.2 Primary 1.2
4.5 Standards Fund
There is now very little discretion available to LEAs in the distribution of Standards Fund grants in that the allocation to schools is largely contained within the grant guidelines. Views were requested on the proposed realignment of funding through the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant (EMAG) and the use of the grant for ICT Infrastructure and Hands-on Support and the e-Learning Credits Grant. In particular the proposal for ICT contained a suggestion that 5% (–255K) together with 2.5%(–174K) of the e-Learning Credits Grant should be retained centrally to provide support for schools in this area.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3 4.6 General
Only two responses (one written, one oral) were received to the consultation. The low level of response reflects the lack of discretionary funding powers now available to LEAs as a result of the introduction of the Minimum Funding Guarantee and the requirement to passport funding to schools.
5.0 Schools Forum
The results of the consultation as set out above were reported to the Leeds Schools Forum on 27 January 2005. The Chief Executive of Education Leeds will report orally at the Executive Board meeting on the views expressed by members of the Schools Forum on the budget proposals.
6.0 Comments of the Chief Education Officer
6.1 The determination of the local schools budget, individual schools budget and a school‘s budget share remain functions to be performed by the Council under the arrangements involving Education Leeds.
6.2 Standards Fund grants are the responsibility of the Council and are a function managed by Education Leeds on behalf of the CEO as client.
6.3 The arrangements require that the Council have regard to advice and draft plans where appropriate from Education Leeds when carrying out these functions.
6.4 The contents of the Education Leeds paper have been discussed with the Chief Education Officer. The Chief Education Officer feels that the report includes all points and observations he would wish to be drawn to the Executive Board‘s attention in considering this matter and recommends the proposed changes to Executive Board.
7.0 Recommendations
Members of the Executive Board are asked to indicate their approval to the following proposals;-
i) the implementation of the Individual Schools Budget formula changes as proposed in the consultation paper; ii) the allocation of the growth in the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant (EMAG) as proposed.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4 Appendix 1 Budget Briefing and Consultation on Funding for Schools December 2004 - January 2005
1. Funding of Education Nationally and the Increase in Funding for Schools in Leeds 2005/06
1.1 National Funding of Education 2005/06
The table below shows the revenue funding being made available by the DfES this year and next year. 2004-05 2004-05 2005-06 at Increase Original Adjusted (2/12/2004) from 2004- National funding totals for 05 —m —m —m Education Adjusted Education Formula Spending (EFS) 26,402 26,380 27,870 5.65% Specific and Special Grants Transition Grant 120 121 60 -50.0% School Standards Grant (recurrent) 874 850 912 7.3% Leadership Incentive Grant 175 194 202 4.1% Threshold & Performance Pay 840 885 908 2.6% Standards Fund 1,721 1,295.1 1,540.4 18.9% EiC 0 330 386 17.0% Total for Grants 3,730 3,675.10 4,008.4 9.1%
Overall Total 30,132 30,055.1 31,878.4 6.1%
The 2004-05 original figures in the table above are based on the funding table contained in the …Workforce Agreement‘ from January 2003 amended to include the additional funding made available following the announcement by the Secretary of State to Parliament on 17th July 2003.
Planned EiC funding was originally included within the Standards Fund total but has now been shown separately.
The 2004-05 adjusted figures and 2005-06 budget figures are from the funding details released on 2nd of December 2004. There may be further grants where national totals have not yet been decided.
The difference between the 2004-05 original figures and adjusted figures take into account changes in the calculation of grants and distribution mechanisms, changes in responsibility and the removal of funding for new City Academies from EFS.
The majority of funding comes through Education Formula Spending (EFS) which is allocated to LEAs as an Education Formula Spending Share (EFSS) in three blocks, the Schools Block, LEA Central Block and Youth and Community Block. The following table shows that whilst the EFS total has increased by 5.65%, the Government has directed funding towards the schools block.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5 Breakdown of National Education Formula Spending to Blocks 2004/05 2005/06 Increase Increase —m —m —m % Schools Block (Schools Formula Spending SFS) 23,337.49 24,699.73 1,286.34 5.83% LEA Block 2,503.87 2,599.13 95.26 3.8% Youth and community Block 539.06 570.86 31.8 5.9%
Total 26,380.40 27,869.72 1,489.32 5.65%
1.2 Funding for Education in Leeds
The table below shows the revenue funding being made available by the DfES this year and for 2005/06 through grants, and nationally assumed expenditure based on EFS.
Breakdown of Education Formula Spending Share and Grant totals for Leeds 2004/05 2005/06 Increase —000s —000s —000s % Education Formula Spending Share (EFSS) Schools Block (SFSS) 323,593 340,526 16,933 5.23% LEA Block 31,361 32,390 1,029 3.28% Youth and community Block 8,035 8,501 466 5.80% Total 362,989 381,417 18,428 5.08%
Specific and Special Grants School Standards Grant (recurrent) note (1) 11,475 11,509 34 0.3% Leadership Incentive Grant note (2) 5,590 5,400 -190 -3.4% Threshold & Performance Pay 13,000 14,140 1,140 8.7% Standards Fund (revenue) note (3) 33,944 37,011 3,067 9.0% EiC 10,410 10,885 475 4.6% Total for Grants 74,419 78,945 4,526 6.1%
Overall Total note (4) 437,407 460,362 22,955 5.25% Notes (1) The 2005/06 figure for the School Standards Grant is an estimate based on forecast pupil numbers in January 2005. The figure also takes into account the reduction in the number of schools. (2) The allocation for each Secondary school increases to –135,000 but the number of schools has reduced to 40. (3) The Standards Fund allocation for 2005/06 includes estimated allocations where the actual allocation will be dependent on January 2005 pupil numbers. (4) The increase for Leeds cannot as yet be fully compared to the national increase as the national totals for Standards Funds and EiC have not yet been fully allocated.
The increase in funding for Leeds through EFSS is below the national average due to a combination of demography, where Primary pupil numbers are decreasing faster than the national average, and relative changes in socio-economic indicators, where the indicators show that the relative level of need has reduced against that of other LEAs.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 6 1.3 DfES Regulations regarding school funding
The Secretary of State has asked LEAs to confirm that the Schools block will increase by the increase in the schools formula spending share (SFSS). This document assumes that the schools block will increase by the full –16.933M increase in SFSS.
The schools block is made up of delegated school budgets known as the individual schools budget (ISB), funding devolved to schools from the Standards Fund and Excellence in Cities grants, and centrally retained funding known as the Central schools block. In 2004/05 the Secretary of State has set out additional regulations that only allow LEAs to increase the central schools block by the same percentage increase as the ISB and devolved funding to schools. Three items are excluded from this requirement; increases in the cost of education for pupils under five in Private, voluntary or independent settings, increases in contributions to the standards fund and any funding retained to assist schools in financial difficulty.
1.4 Use of Increase in Schools Formula Spending Share to meet DfES regulations
As an Excellence in Cities Authority the DfES assume that we will take up all allocations from the Standards Funds. Between 2004/05 and 2005/06 the increase required in the LEA contribution to devolved Standards Funds is –649,330.
Following the DfES regulations it is estimated that the increase in SFSS would be applied as in the following table.
Budget Area Increase – ISB (excluding LSC funding) —14,950,000 Central Schools Block —1,058,000 Contribution to Devolved Standards —649,000 Funds Private, Voluntary and Independent —275,000 Nursery costs Total —16,933,000 The above table gives an estimated maximum expenditure for the Central Schools block as the final figures will depend on the DfES approved regulations, and only draft regulations and guidance have been received.
A LEA may only increase central schools block expenditure by a higher percentage than the increase in the individual schools budget (ISB) with the permission of The Secretary of State for Education. If a LEA wishes to do this it must consult the Schools Forum and include the view of the Schools Forum in any application. Based on current budgetary information the LEA does not wish to apply to increase the centrally retained schools Block expenditure above the level of the increase in the ISB.
It is proposed that the budget established to support schools in financial difficulty is retained at the 2004/05 level of –600,000.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 7 The current 2004/05 Education Budget is split down into the Individual Schools Budget, Central schools budget and LEA Budget and details are attached at APPENDIX A.
2 LEA Block funding and budget pressure 2005/06
The increase in funding for the LEA central block through the LEA FSS is –1,029,000. Funding increases for the LEA block are not covered by the DfES regulations and Education Leeds is awaiting confirmation from the City Council as to the increase in funding for LEA Central functions. The table attached as APPENDIX B summarises cost pressures and saving areas against services provided centrally within this block, against a resource increase of –820,000 identified within the Council‘s Financial Plan.
3 Central Schools Block budget pressures 2005/06
APPENDIX C summarises cost pressures and savings areas within the Central Schools Block. Following the DfES regulations linking the increase in expenditure on Centrally retained services to the increase in the ISB it has been assumed that the Schools Block may not increase by more than –1,058,000, excluding any increase necessary in contributions to the Standards Fund and increased cost of Nursery Education. For budgetary purposes these costs also fall within the central schools block and so the overall increase is –1,983,000.
4 The Individual Schools Budget 2005/06
Assuming the City Council confirms the passporting of SFSS the ISB will increase by a minimum of –14,950,000.
4.1 The Minimum per Pupil Funding Guarantee.
The DfES introduced a mechanism to ensure that all schools receive an increase in funding on the majority of their formula funding from 2004/05. The minimum per pupil funding guarantee is the first call on increased resources within the ISB and works as follows:
Primary and Secondary Schools · Start with the budget and full time equivalent pupil numbers from the Section 52 Budget Document for 2004/05; · Remove funding for formula factors not included in the guarantee to produce the …Baseline‘; · Add 4% to the baseline in Secondary schools, 5% in Primary schools; · Adjust for pupil number changes. For each pupil add or subtract an amount equivalent to the baseline budget per pupil plus a 4% increase in Secondary schools, 5% in Primary schools, multiplied by a percentage to reflect the DfES estimate of how much of the baseline is for pupil led funding. The percentage is 80% for Primary schools and 87.5% for Secondary schools; · For schools with increasing pupil numbers a second calculation is undertaken. The baseline budget per pupil is increased by 3.9% in Secondary schools, 4.9% in Primary schools and multiplied by the 2004/05 pupil numbers. · The minimum funding guarantee for each school is the higher figure produced by each of the calculations above.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 8 Having calculated the minimum funding guarantee, each school will be guaranteed this figure, plus whatever funding is generated through the local formula for factors excluded from the guarantee.
Special Schools · Start with the budget and full time equivalent pupil numbers from the Section 52 Budget Document for 2004/05; · All non place led funding should increase by 4%; · Average place led funding should increase by 4%.
The minimum funding guarantee is set 1% higher in Primary schools than in Secondary and Special Schools as the DfES forecast that the implementation of Planning Preparation and Assessment (PPA) time in Primary schools will be more costly.
4.2 Items excluded from the baseline;
The DfES regulations specifically exclude funding from the following formula factors:
Funding for Rates; Individual pupil funding that moves in-year. In Leeds this is Funding for inclusion level 2 funding; Key stage1class size funding; LSC funding for sixth forms Funding through a specific PFI factor.
In addition, LEAs can request that additional local factors can be excluded from the baseline, where leaving funding within the baseline would result in an inequitable distribution. Following discussion with the Schools forum, the DfES approved that the following items could be excluded from the baseline:
Safetynet; Small School Salary protection; FFI level 1 pupil led funding; FFI transitional adjustments.
However, the DfES will only approve the exemption of particular factors based on named schools where the application of the guarantee would lead to significantly anomalous outcomes.
It is intended to make individual application to the DfES where the application of the guarantee would lead to a significantly anomalous outcome in 2005/06. This is likely to include schools that have received Safetynet funding in 2004/05 or specific additional one off funding due to reorganisation.
A spreadsheet to allow schools to model the effects of the minimum funding guarantee has been made available on INFOBASE for schools.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 9 4.3 Cost of the Minimum Funding Guarantee
Based on projected pupil numbers it is estimated that the minimum per pupil guarantee will cost in the region of –12,300,000 across Primary, Secondary and Special Schools.
4.4 Inflationary and Demographic Pressures within the Minimum Funding Guarantee
· Inflation of 2.95% for pay awards and 3% for other costs, together with an increase of 0.8% in the superannuation rate for support staff is estimated to cost –9,200,000
· Further implementation of a career structure for teaching assistants and the further use of Higher Level Teaching Assistants is estimated to cost –534,000
· The cost of premises and other previously central insurance is estimated to increase by –500,000 above inflation
· The continuing reduction in pupil numbers is estimated to produce a saving of –1,800,000
· The additional 1% through the Minimum per pupil guarantee for Primary schools is estimated to cost –1,370,000
· The cost of gas is to increase by 55.2%, adding –883,000 to school energy costs.
The overall effect of the above pressure that will be built into the Age Weighted Pupil Unit and other formula factors is –10,690,000. This will enable all elements of the funding formula to be increased for inflation. This should allow approximately —1,600,000 growth within the minimum funding guarantee.
4.5 Inflationary and budget pressures outside of the Minimum Funding Guarantee
· The funding that is allocated through Funding for Inclusion will increase by 4% to stay in line with the Minimum Funding Guarantee.
· The cost of the Class size pledge is expected to increase by –130,000 based on forecasts of Key Stage One numbers in January.
· The Unitary charge costs for PFI schools are estimated to be higher than the allocations through the premises formula. In order to cover this gap the PFI factor within the formula will be used to fund the difference. This funding will be delivered to PFI schools and becomes part of the Governor contribution to the Unitary Charge. It is estimated that the funding required in 2005/06 will be –1,750,000.
· It is estimated that savings through school closures and reorganisation will save –1,770,000. This is a combination of premises savings, small school protection savings, savings of one-off funding required in 2004/05 to pump prime new schools through the reorganisation allocation. Outside of the Minimum per Pupil Guarantee it is anticipated that there will be over –1,800,000 of budget growth to be built into the formula.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 10 5 Proposals for the allocation of Budget Growth within the Individual Schools Budget
Having allowed for the funding changes detailed above it is anticipated that there will be approximately –3,400,000 available to build into the formula. In line with providing schools with the minimum per pupil guarantee some of this funding must be pupil led.
The City Council has determined within its Medium Term Financial plan that a first call on budget growth should be to provide additional funding to Secondary schools in order to address the issue of achievement. Whilst the City Council has historically funded education at a higher level than the Government suggested levels through …Standard Spending Assessment‘ and now …Education Formula Spending Share‘ the relative funding of Secondary schools compared to Primary has been lower than in comparable LEAs. Also, a major initiative within the City is …No Child is Left Behind‘ that seeks to find new initiatives to support schools. With this in mind the following priorities for the use of budget growth are proposed.
5.1 Funding for Inclusion Secondary Schools Behaviour Band
It is proposed that: no new funding is allocated to schools linked to individual pupils at level 2 on F band. The funding attached to pupils currently funded will remain in place until 31st August 2005, unless a pupil leaves prior to this date. A sum of –1,000,000 is added to the total funding delivered through F band level 2 and the total is distributed by a formula that uses indicators of need.( Free school meal entitlement, number of looked after children, key stage results, absence rates, pupil mobility and the number of …hard to place‘ pupils admitted in the previous year. Including inflation this will mean a total allocation of over –4,000,000 will be made available to Secondary schools for pupils with challenging behaviour through the F band of FFI.
5.2 Funding for Inclusion Primary Schools Behaviour Band
It is an aim that all F band level 2 funding in Primary schools is moved to a formula allocation and managed through school-led wedge or area based structures. However, the scale of resource required by individual pupils in comparison to the allocation that a formula would deliver means that until such mechanisms are developed it is not thought practical to move away from the current funding attached to individual pupils. It is however proposed that the bureaucracy attached to the current F band level 2 funding system is reviewed and reduced.
It is proposed that the moderation of pupil needs is carried out in a way similar to that in Early Years FFI, but funding is agreed for a time limited period in line with all other areas of FFI.
5.3 Support for Wedge or Area Collaboration in £No Child is Left Behind,
For a number of years the LEA has allocated funding through the formula in order that schools can work together in families. In order to move forward on the agenda of …No Child is Left Behind‘ it is proposed to include within school budgets a lump sum allocation. It is proposed that this allocation is pooled on an area basis in order to
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 11 release staff in each wedge or school defined area to work on collaborative arrangements. It is proposed that this sum is –1,200 per Primary school and –4,000 per Secondary school.
Realisation of the aims of …No Child is Left Behind‘ will ensure that: · Admission of all hard to place pupils will be by admissions forum protocol, and no pupil will be out of school for more than 20 days. · All pupils will be on the roll of schools, even when placed on appropriate alternative pathways. · All possible funding streams will be delegated or devolved to schools. · All Education Leeds provision will be charged at the full daily rate as there will be no central funding. · FFI F-Band funding for Secondary schools will be increased to –4M and all distributed to individual schools by a formula that includes an allocation for the successful integration of hard to place pupils. · FFI F-band funding for Primary Schools will be moved toward a formula over the next two years. · Schools will meet the educational needs of all of their pupils‘, and either individually or through pooled budgets provide a range of different curriculum options. · All decisions made regarding resource provision, including LSUs, PDCs, Nurture Groups, BEST Teams and PRUs, will be made locally by the Area teams.
Headteachers will be a position to make clear decisions about what resources are required to meet the needs of their students.
Central resources will only be retained to support the statutory, monitoring, challenge and intervention role of Education Leeds.
5.4 Premises Expenditure
School spending on premises and repairs and maintenance in particular is higher than the current formula funding. It is proposed to introduce a pupil led repairs element to the AWPU in order to bring funding back into line with expenditure. It is proposed that an additional –1,000,000 is allocated through the AWPU by this method. Using a pupil-led allocation will use some of the formula headroom within the minimum funding guarantee.
5.5 Premises Formulae
Analysis of expenditure on energy in schools coupled with the increase in the cost of gas allows simplification of the current formula. It is proposed that the funding disparity for different heating fuels is removed, thus providing a simple allocation per pupil and per square metre.
5.6 Workforce reform
Under the staged introduction of these reforms from September 2004 the amount of time that teachers are required to cover for absent colleagues has been limited to 38hrs per year and from 1st September 2005 all teachers are entitled to 10% PPA time during the school day. A small allocation was introduced into the AWPU from 2004/05 and it is proposed that an allocation amounting to –1,370,000 is provided to Primary
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 12 schools through the AWPU as per paragraph. 4.4 above. This will form part of the minimum funding guarantee increase.
5.7 Allocations supporting English as an Additional Language (EAL) and underachieving groups.
The funding formula currently includes three factors that use EAL as an allocation mechanism. These are known as EAL, Getting Started, Community Language. The main allocation was originally allocated on the number of pupils from minority ethnic groups but had to be changed when the DfES determined that only EAL could be used as an allocation mechanism within funding formulae. However, the DfES have now reintroduced the use of the number of pupils from underachieving minority ethnic groups as an allowable factor within formulae. Indeed, the DfES now expect the Ethnic Minority Standards Fund grant to be allocated out to schools based on need determined by both EAL and underachieving minority groups.(See Standards funds later). In order to seek simplification of the funding formula and to reintroduce consistency between the allocation of the funds through the formula and need it is proposed to combine the three factors into one.
It is proposed that an amount per pupil is allocated through the formula for each pupil in every school that has either English as an additional language or is from an underachieving BME group. Combining the factors would allocate approximately –835,000 in Primary schools and –870,000 in Secondary schools.
5.8 Additional Budget Growth
Having funded all demographic, inflationary and other changes listed above, and any cost of the minimum funding guarantee it is proposed that any further growth within the budget is targeted at Secondary achievement and workforce reform through the AWPU.
5.9 Budget Protection
Any school that would receive a reduced level of funding due to data changes or the effects of formula changes above will receive protection provided by the minimum per pupil guarantee.
6 School Standards Grant 2005/06
A school will receive the higher of an allocation based on the DfES grant table below or an amount that equates to an increase of 4% per pupil on the per pupil value of the SSG received in 2004/05. This equates to the larger of:
(A) the following scale: Primary Secondary Special No. of Pupils PLASC 2005 No. of Pupils PLASC 2005 No. of Pupils PLASC 2005 0-100 –11,000 0-600 –82,000 0-100 –28,000 100.5-200 –21,000 600.5-1200 –98,500 100.5+ –38,000
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 13 200.5-400 –31,000 1200.5- –115,000 1800 400.5-600 –46,500 1800.5- –132,000 2400 600.5-800 –62,000 2400.5+ –148,000 800.5+ –77,000
or (B) the following formula: ( X é Y ) * Z * 1.04
where
X = total of SSG received by the school in 2004-05 Y = the number of pupils used to calculate the school‘s SSG in 2004-05 Z = the number of pupils used to calculate the school‘s SSG in 2005-06
7 Teachers Threshold / Performance Related Pay Grant 2005/06
The Government intention was that this grant was to transfer into EFS from April 2005. It has now been decided that the grant will be paid to LEAs as a non ring-fenced specific formula grant. Through the formula Leeds has been allocated —14,139,698. This amount is a cash-limited sum and must be managed by the LEA to support the cost of paying teachers that reach the upper pay scale, teachers who progress on the upper pay scale and other performance points awarded to teachers. The first call on this allocation will be to continue to fund schools for the full cost of teachers that reach the Upper pay scale (UPS1). The remaining Grant will be used to contribute to the cost of progression on the upper pay scale and other performance points.
8 Standards Funds 2005/06
Grants ceasing in 2005-2006 or no longer available Seed Challenge (grant 35) The 2004/05 allocation was the last year of Seed Challenge funding.
Beacon Schools (Grant 11) As already notified to schools, Beacon School contracts that ended in 2004- 2005 will not be renewed. Beacon School contracts that run beyond 2004-2005 will continue to be funded until the end of the contract.
Inflation Proofing The grants within the School Development Grant have been increased by 4% in cash terms (the same rate as the main per pupil guarantee). Targeted and demand led grants have also been up rated, with the exception of those grants where increased costs will be negotiated between the Department and individual schools: Beacon Schools, Training Schools, Leading Edge and Fresh Start.
The table at APPENDIX D lists the Standards funds to be devolved to schools in 2005/06 and details the proposed methods of devolution.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 14 9 Capital Funding 2005/06 and beyond
Devolved Formula capital will continue at least through to 2007/08.
1. The national formula for allocation is:
Figures in – Per School Per Primary Per Secondary Per SEN pupil or Pupil Pupil boarding pupil
2005-06 13,150 49.40 74.10 148.20
2006-07 17,000 61.00 91.50 183.00
2007-08 18,500 63.00 94.50 189.00
The large increase between 2005/06 and 2006/07 includes the transfer of ICT infrastructure (currently within grant 31a) to devolved formula capital.
10 Learning and Skills Council funding for Sixth Forms
The Learning and Skills Council is planning to increase its funding of school sixth forms in line with the DfES minimum per pupil funding guarantee.
· The pupil entitlement and qualification rates will increase by 4 per cent · The real term guarantee will increase by 4 per cent · In schools where sixth form numbers increase in September 2005 the school will receive a minimum per pupil increase of 3.9 per cent in the real terms guarantee · A school‘s individual retention rate from the 2003/04 year will be used in the 2005/06 allocation · Schools must raise any issues with the 2005/06 allocation with the LSC by 28th February, the allocation cannot be adjusted for issues raised after this date.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 15 APPENDIX A
DfES Expenditure Heading Net Expenditure 2004/05 SCHOOLS BUDGET
Individual Schools Budget –319,653,110 Devolved Standards Fund allocation - revenue –6,988,350 Specific formula grant - Excellence in Cities (EiC) –7,847,220 Support for schools in financial difficulty –600,000 ISB and other Delegated and Devolved funding —335,088,680
Provision for statemented pupils –2,395,070 Provision for non-statemented pupils with SEN not included in –505,200 1.2.2 Support for inclusion –500,060 Inter-authority recoupment –58,630 Fees for pupils at independent special schools & abroad –2,646,600 Pupil Referral Units –2,913,370 Behaviour Support Services –1,633,190 Education out of school –1,569,380 Nursery education provided other than in maintained nursery –4,869,270 schools/classes Free School Meals - eligibility –114,060 Fees to independent schools for pupils without statements of SEN –21,580 Museum Services –274,250 Library Services - nursery, primary and special schools –266,820 School admissions –638,700 Licences/subscriptions –379,530 School-specific contingencies –400,000 Miscellaneous (not more than 0.1% total net SB) –69,920 Servicing of schools forums –10,000 Staff costs - supply cover (not sickness) –1,763,310 Standards Fund - Non-Devolved –2,970,000 Non-Standards Fund specific grant –35,760 Specific formula grant - EiC Non-devolved –2,294,000 Central Schools Block Total —26,328,700
TOTAL SCHOOLS BUDGET —361,417,380
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 16 DfES Expenditure Heading Net Expenditure 2004/05 LEA BUDGET
Statutory / regulatory duties –6,793,840 Premature retirement costs / redundancy costs –2,051,120 Existing early retirement costs (commitments entered into by –3,386,180 31/3/99) Residual pension liability (eg FE, Careers Service, etc.) –638,020 Monitoring National Curriculum Assessment –76,725 Educational Psychology Service –1,619,160 Inclusion administration, assessment and co-ordination –254,140 LEA functions in relation to child protection –103,210 Therapies and other Health Related Services –71,040 Parent partnership, guidance and information –264,050 Monitoring of SEN provision –281,130 School improvement including EDP –3,198,635 Asset management –4,251,330 Supply of school places –703,240 Excluded pupils –51,500 Behaviour Support Plans –192,380 Pupil support –672,340 Home to school transport –6,930,640 Home to college transport (16-18) –788,920 Education Welfare Service –2,476,050 Music Service (not Standards Fund supported) –302,400 Visual and Performing Arts (other than music) –236,570 Outdoor Education including Environmental and Field Studies (not –208,950 sports) Total LEA Central Functions —35,551,570
YOUTH AND COMMUNITY Youth Service –7,864,280 Adult and Community learning –1,350,610 Student Support under new arrangements –765,270 Discretionary Awards –31,300 Total Youth and Community —10,011,460
TOTAL LEA BUDGET —45,563,030
TOTAL EDUCATION REVENUE EXPENDITURE —406,980,410
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 17 APPENDIX B
BUDGET 2005/06 LEA Block 2005/06 Base Budget 2004/05 35,551
Indicative Resource Allocation 2005/06 820
BASE BUDGET PRESSURES INFLATION Pay Award (Teachers 2.94%, Officers 2.95%, Soulbury 3.05%) 595 Superannuation (officers) 138 Price Inflation 622 Income Inflation -184 Sub Total 1,171
FULL YEAR EFFECTS Outdoor Pursuits (full year saving) -52 Key Skills Officers - residual funding -102 Sub Total -154
PFI COSTS BSF Team (part funded from operating surpluses in 2004/05) 231 PFI - additional contract monitoring capacity 42 Sub Total 273 CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITIES School Improvement - additional Quality Assurance Adviser capacity plus 240 administrative support School Interventions budget 180 Sub Total 420
OTHER BUDGET PRESSURES Home to School & College Transport - mainly due to increased transport 423 days School VER costs 250 School Organisation Committee 10 School Clothing Vouchers 20 ICT - full year leasing and maintenance costs, Freedom of Information 92 Software Laptop security 25 Leadership Support Team Leader 30 Finance & Legal resources to develop advice for schools re Community 36 Facilities Powers Personnel - additional capacity for redeployment activity (funded from 100 operating surplus in 2004/05) Welfare - Attendance Champion Initiative (previously grant funded) & 135 Truancy officer Headteacher Support Service (funded from operating surplus in 2004/05) 60 Sub Total 1,181
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 18 BUDGET 2005/06 LEA Block
TOTAL BUDGET PRESSURES 2,891
PROPOSED SAVINGS Additional operating surpluses generated in 2004/05 -250 Standards Fund underspends b/fwrd from previous years -308 Attendance Champion / Truancy officer to be absorbed within Welfare -135 budget Finance & Legal resources re Community Facilities Powers met from -36 extended schools Standards Funds PFI/BSF external development costs to be met through sinking fund -712 mechanism Leeds Learning Network charge -131 Investment Income -60 Other savings to be identified ( possibly ICT support, ICT leasing, terms -439 and conditions of employment, Standards Funds realignment, Artists in Schools or other efficiency savings) Sub Total -2,071
OTHER SAVINGS Review of Post-16 Transport policy (subject to elected member consideration) Sub Total 0
TOTAL PROPOSED SAVINGS -2,071
VARIANCE TO INDICATIVE RESOURCE ALLOCATION 0
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 19 APPENDIX C
BUDGET 2005/06 Central Schools Block 2005/06 Base Budget 2004/05 31,623 Indicative Resource Allocation 2005/06 1,983 BASE BUDGET PRESSURES INFLATION Pay Award (Teachers 2.94%, Officers 2.95%, Soulbury 3.05%) 268 Superannuation (officers) 25 Price Inflation 379 Income Inflation -62 Sub Total 610 FULL YEAR EFFECTS Islamia - grant ceased -15 Clark Hall - grant ceased -28 IT - leasing/maintenance 40 SEN Inclusion Service (restructure) 51 Admissions system - IT costs 12 Sub Total 60 CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITIES LEA standards fund contributions 649 Revenue contribution to capital - Primary Review 350 Sub Total 999 OTHER BUDGET PRESSURES Community Language Team 11 School Maternity scheme 30 Difficult to place pupils - Pupil placement team / Transitional 255 Learning Centre Nursery education provided other than in maintained nursery 140 classes Sub Total 436 TOTAL BUDGET PRESSURES 2,105 PROPOSED SAVINGS Outside Placements -100 Breakfast clubs (fund from extended schools Standards Fund) -22 Sub Total -122 TOTAL PROPOSED SAVINGS -122
VARIANCE TO INDICATIVE RESOURCE ALLOCATION 0
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 20 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX D SSuummmmaarryy ooff ddeevvoollvveedd SSttaannddaarrddss FFuunndd aallllooccaattiioonnss ffoorr 22000055--22000066 aanndd ddeevvoolluuttiioonn pprrooppoossaallss
The grants shown below are those which have an element to be devolved to schools.
Grant no. Grant name Total grant Retained Devolved Proposed basis of devolution 1 School Development 10230229 1409158 8821071 Each school will receive the sum of the total cash they received Grant for the constituent grants in 2004-2005 increased by 4% plus a share of any amount remaining based on the formula previously used for the School Support Staff and National Literacy & Numeracy grants updated for current data. 3 Ethnic Minority 1701784 236922 1464862 It is proposed to move the allocation of this grant to a more needs Achievement Grant based approach in line with DfES guidance. Allocations will be made to those schools whose numbers of pupils with EAL and numbers in underachieving BME groups are above the sector average. In PRIMARY numbers in underachieving BME groups will be given a weighting of 2, EAL a weighting of 1. Individual school allocations will be protected at 90% of their 2004/2005 level. In SECONDARY numbers in underachieving BME groups will be given a weighting of 2, EAL a weighting of 1. In SPECIAL an equal weighting will be given to EAL and underachieving groups and individual school allocations will be protected at 85% of their 2004/2005 level. The total amount allocated between Primary and Secondary sectors will be realigned to reflect up to date total pupil numbers in each sector. The total amount allocated in the Special sector will be maintained at its 2004/2005
22
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com level.
4 Advanced Skills 1536355 29100 1507255 Schools with ASTs will be given an allocation to fund the Teachers differential salary cost of each AST and an allocation of –6200 (or proportion thereof for part-time teachers) towards the cost of outreach activities. 5 Golden Hellos To be claimed from the Teacher Schools will receive reimbursement of the full costs incurred Training Agency. making these payments to eligible teachers.
Grant no. Grant name Total grant Retained Devolved Proposed basis of devolution 7 Targeted Support for 982907 0 982907 This grant will be allocated to schools for specific purposes during Primary Strategy the year. This grant is the equivalent of the funding paid in previous years to support the literacy and numeracy strategies. 7a Targeted Support for 447075 0 447075 This grant, which is to provide funding to support primary schools Primary Strategy to work together in Learning Networks, is to be allocated to groups of schools applying to work together as a network. Funding will be at a rate of –12000 per network in 2005-2006. Further details will be made available to schools. 8 Targeted Support for 1178258 0 1178258 This grant will be allocated to the most challenged secondary KS3 Strategy schools via intervention plans, catch-up and booster programmes. 9 Leadership Incentive 5400000 0 5400000 An amount of –135000 will be allocated to each secondary school Grant to accelerate improvement in standards, strengthen leadership and stimulate collaboration.
23
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 11 Beacon Schools 76500 0 76500 Allocations will be made to named schools. This grant ends for all schools in August 2005. 13 Specialist Schools Not yet announced This grant is allocated on a per pupil basis to each Specialist School. The grant rate is –126 per eligible pupil rising to –129 from September 2005. 14 Training Schools 45000 0 45000 This grant is paid to designated training schools.
17 Summer Schools for 55724 0 55724 Allocations will be made to selected schools for Summer School Gifted & Talented Pupils activities. 18 Excellence in Cities 10884865 2572960 8311905 This grant is used to fund Learning Mentors, Learning Support Units and the Gifted & Talented programmes. Allocations for Learning Mentors will be the full year equivalent of the amounts which were recalculated with effect from September 2004, as part of the EiC review, increased by 4% for inflation. Allocations for LSUs will be increased by 4% for inflation. Allocations for the Primary Gifted & Talented strand will be made to those schools participating in this programme from September 2004, including a 4% increase for inflation. Allocations for the Secondary Gifted & Talented strand will be the full year equivalent of the amounts which were recalculated with effect from September 2004, as part of the EiC review, increased by 4% for inflation. Grant no. Grant name Total grant Retained Devolved Proposed basis of devolution 40 Enterprise Learning 827257 0 827257 It is proposed to make allocations form this new grant to each Pathfinders secondary school to provide each KS4 pupil with the equivalent of 5 days activity focussed on enterprise capability and supports the requirement to provide work-related learning. It is proposed to allocate the grant 90% on numbers of pupils aged 14-16 and 10% on eligibility for free school meals.
24
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 31a ICT Infrastructure and 5102941 255147 4847794 LEAs are allowed to retain 2.5% from this grant as of right BUT Services can retain more with schools' agreement. The LEA wishes to retain 2.5% of the total allocation of this grant to fund management and support of the delivery of ICT in Schools and a further 2.5% in order to provide a Hands on Support Service for schools to assist in the achievement of the national priority of enhancing the way teachers use ICT to support teaching and learning via a programme of peer support for teachers in their own classrooms. The same amount was retained in 2004-2005 and agreement to this proposal would allow continuation of the work started on this development. 31c E-learning credits 1388735 173590 1215145 LEAs may retain a proportion of this grant with the prior agreement of all schools. It is proposed to retain 2.5% of this grant for the provision of technical support and a further 10% for the central procurement of city-wide resources which will be available to all schools. It is proposed to devolve the remainder to schools on the basis of a lump sum of –1000 per school plus an amount per pupil. Allocations will also be made to the Travellers Education Service and in respect of three and four year olds in private, voluntary and independent settings.
25
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2005/06 School Funding: Consultation Response
We would welcome comments that you wish to make on any aspect of the funding proposals for 2005/06, although we would particularly like responses on the points on the following sheets:
Responses will be summarised and presented to the Schools Forum to inform any recommendations to the Executive Board of the Council.
Response from: Name/position –––––––––––––––––––––––––..
School–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Please submit a response by Wednesday 26th January 2005, by post or fax to
Carol Woodham Financial Services 8th Floor East Merrion House LS2 8DT
Fax 0113-2475099
Or e-mail a response to [email protected]
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com26 1 Schools in Financial Difficulty (section 1.4) 1a Should the LEA follow DfES guidance and continue YES / NO to retain funding for this purpose ? Please make any comments on this funding:-
2 LEA Central block (section 2.) 2a Please make any comments on the central LEA budget proposals
2b Please make any comments on any areas within the central LEA budget where you feel that either additional resources should be retained to support schools or where responsibilities should be further delegated to schools and expenditure reduced.
3 Schools central block (section 3.) 3a Please make any comments on the Schools central budget proposals
3b Please make any comments on any areas within the Schools central budget where you feel that either additional resources should be retained to support schools or where responsibilities should be further delegated to schools and expenditure reduced.
4 Individual Schools Budget (section 4)
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com27 Please make any comments on the funding of the minimum funding guarantee, inflationary and demographic pressures (section 4)
Please make any comments on the proposals for the use of the growth within the ISB (section 5) for example: Extension of workforce reform funding within the AWPU Changes to FFI F band for Secondary Schools Changes to FFI F band for Primary Schools Lump sum for schools to progress pooled management arrangements Realignment of premises funding towards expenditure levels Simplification of Premises formulae The use of one funding factor targeted on both English as an additional language and underachievement Having funded all demographic, inflationary and other proposed changes that any further growth be targeted at Secondary achievement and workforce reform.
5. Devolution of Standards Funds 2005/06 (section 8) Please comment on the proposals for devolution, e.g. Use of growth in School Development grant
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com28 Re-alignment in EMAG Retention of part of ICT Infrastructure and Hands on support grant. Retention of part of the E- Learning Credits grant
Please make any other comments that you wish on funding for 2005/06
Thank you for your response.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com29 AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Richard Stiff Telephone: 224 3749
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: Outcome of Statutory Notices for Reorganisation Proposals in Morley Central
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Introduction
The purpose of the report is to inform Executive Board of the outcome of the 1.1 statutory representation period for the reorganisation of primary provision in Morley Central.
1.2 The report provides a summary of the representations received in respect of the statutory notices to close Morley Elmfield Infant School, Cross Hall Infant School and Cross Hall Junior School and to establish a new community Primary School operating in the existing Cross Hall Infant and Junior School buildings.
2. Recommendation
2.1 Executive Board is invited to:
2.2 i) Consider the representations received ii) Agree to proceed with the proposals iii) Note that as a result of the representations the determination of the notice falls to the School Organisation Committee iv) agree that the comments prepared by Education Leeds and contained in this report serve as the LEA‘s response to the representations for consideration
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Richard Stiff
Telephone: 224 3749
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: Outcome of Statutory Notices for Reorganisation Proposals in Morley Central
Electoral Wards Affected: Please indicate that the following have been addressed within the report: Morley South Specific Implications For: Resource Implications: Ethnic Minorities Finance ü Women Personnel ü Disabled People Accommodation/Buildings ü
Policy Implications:
Executive Board Eligible for Call-in Not Eligible for Call-in Decision ü ü
1.0 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
The purpose of the report is to inform Executive Board of the outcome of the statutory representation period for the reorganisation of primary provision in Morley Central.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 In September 2004 consultation was undertaken on a proposal to close Morley Elmfield Infant School, Cross Hall Infant School and Cross Hall Junior School and establish a two form of entry primary school offering 60 places per year on the existing Cross Hall sites. The proposed change to primary provision includes an increase in the admission number at Newlands Primary school from 45 to 60.
2.2 At its meeting on 17th November, the Executive Board agreed the publication of a statutory notice for the closure of Morley Elmfield Infant School, Cross Hall Infant School and Cross Hall Junior School on 31st August 2005 and the establishment of a new community Primary School in September 2005. The notice also included an increase in the admission number of Newlands Primary from 45 to 60.
2.3 The objective of the amalgamation proposal is to address the long-term viability of the schools involved and to secure the future of primary provision in the area. Morley Elmfield Infant School is particularly small, with only 55 pupils on roll at
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com January 2004 and 34.5% surplus places. The September count indicates current numbers have fallen further to 51 pupils on roll and 39% surplus places.
2.4 The proposal will effectively amalgamate the infant and junior schools. The quality of provision at the three schools is acknowledged, but there are advantages to establishing a primary school in terms of children‘s progression. For example, the school will be better placed to deliver the National Curriculum in a continuous and coherent way, with a single school ethos. Staff in primary schools are in a position to develop a good understanding of the children from ages 5 to 11 and this supports the individual needs of children throughout their primary years.
3.0 The Issue: Statutory Representations
3.1 Two statutory representations have been received, one signed by 12 individuals, and the other by an individual referring to a letter sent during the consultation period. The objections are both to the closure of Morley Elmfield Infant School. The first expresses concern that there will be insufficient Early Years Provision in the new school, and the second expressed concern over a future building programme at the new school.
3.2 Early Years Provision 3.3 The representation expresses concern that the proposal will leave too few nursery places available in the area and existing pupils of the nursery will be unable to remain together. Concern is also expressed about the levels of pupil to teacher ratios in nursery provision in the new school.
3.4 Education Leeds Response 3.5 September count figures indicate that there are 43 part-time pupils currently attending the nurseries in the two infant schools for the 104 places which currently exist. Early Years Service has been fully involved in the planning and consultation process for these proposals. There is a significant amount of Early Years provision in the area, much of which is undersubscribed. The provision of a 26 FTE nursery will provide 52 part-time places, which is adequate for the demand in the area. Pupil to staff ratios in nursery remain governed nationally and are at no risk of being exceeded. Since funding is based on pupil numbers, consolidating the nursery provision in one school will increase the level of resources the school could dedicate to this facility.
3.6 Recent Housing
3.7 The representation suggests that closing schools in the area is counter-productive when the amount of housing has increased.
3.8 Education Leeds Response
3.9 The amount of housing in the area has increased in recent years, and continues to do so. Careful account has been taken of planned future developments in assessing future demand. The number of pupils in local schools will not be sufficient to maintain provision at its current level even with planned new housing. Rationalisation must still occur if we are to provide viable and sustainable schools for the future. 3.10 Future building plans
The representation that refers back to a previous letter was originally concerned that PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com no plans have yet been drawn up for a permanent building solution on the existing Cross Hall Junior school site and that disruption would occur for pupils when such a building programme does take place.
3.11 Education Leeds Response 3.12 The existing Cross Hall Infant and Junior School buildings have sufficient capacity to provide for the accommodation needs of the new primary school and offer a good solution as the sites are linked. Education Leeds intends to explore a consolidated building solution based on the junior school building at some point in the future. This will be undertaken when sufficient funds become available through the Capital Programme. When financing is available plans will be developed in consultation with the Governing Body. As it is uncertain when this will be, this process has not commenced and detailed plans have not been drawn up. Some disruption is inevitable during such a building programme however there is a great deal of experience in Education Leeds to ensure that this is minimised.
4.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 There are at present no funds identified to provide the new accommodation required to extend the current Junior school building as a primary school. A building programme will be delivered through the Asset Management Plan and the Capital Programme.
4.2 There would be an annual revenue saving of approximately –74,000 from the closure of Elmfield Infant School, an annual revenue saving of approximately –94,000 from the closure of Cross Hall Infant School and an annual revenue saving of approximately –128,000 from the closure of Cross Hall Junior School. This would be reduced by approximately –150,000 due to the establishment of the new 2FE primary school to accommodate existing pupils, and potential costs incurred to protect staff at closing schools.
5.0 STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS
5.1 The review of primary provision fulfils the LEA‘s statutory requirement to keep under review the supply and demand of school places.
5.2 As representations that object to the proposal have been received, the proposal falls to the School Organisation Committee for determination. The statutory notice expired on 4th January 2005. The statutory process requires the LEA to formally place the proposal before the School Organisation Committee within a month of the expiry of the notice. This proposal was submitted to the School Organisation Committee on 18th January 2005. The SOC usually has up to 2 months from receipt of a proposal to make a determination, which in this case is 18 th March 2005.
5.3 The information contained in the Chief Education Officer comments section below clarifies why Executive Board needs to confirm that Leeds City Council as the proposer wishes to continue with this proposal and have the matter considered by School Organisation Committee and also agree its response to the representation which, as the proposer, it wishes SOC to consider. 6.0 EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS
6.1 Equality impact assessment indicates that these proposals are not likely to have differential impacts on the basis of ethnicity or gender. The three schools have a PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com similar ethnic composition, with mainly White/British pupils.
7.0 LINKS TO KEY PRIORITIES AND CORPORATE PLAN
7.1 Proposals under the Primary Review reflect key priorities identified in the Education Development Plan, the Asset Management Plan and the Corporate Plan in terms of contributing to the target to reduce primary surplus places, the raising achievement agenda and improving the school estate.
8.0 COMMENTS OF THE CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER
8.1 Proposals for the establishment, alteration or discontinuance of schools and the determination to implement such proposals remain a function to be performed by the Council under the arrangements involving Education Leeds.
8.2 The arrangements require that the Council have regard to advice and draft plans where appropriate from Education Leeds when carrying out this function.
8.3 The normal set of considerations and decisions by Members following the close of statutory notices is to:
(i) Consider whether there are statutory representations (if not, the Executive Board can determine the proposals unless they are linked proposals or dependent on PFI funding)
(ii) Consider and agree the responses to the statutory representations
(iii) Decide how next to proceed in the light of the representations and the information provided in response. The options being: · the School Organisation Committee to consider the proposals for determination; or · to decide to take the proposals no further; or · to decide on a further public consultation exercise with a revised set of options.
8.4 The contents of the report have been discussed with the Chief Education Officer. The Chief Education Officer feels that the report includes the points, observations and argument he would wish to be drawn to the Executive Board‘s attention in considering this matter.
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 Executive Board is invited to:
i) Consider the representations received ii) Agree to proceed with the proposals iii) Note that as a result of the representations the determination of the notice falls to the School Organisation Committee iv) agree that the comments prepared by Education Leeds and contained in this report serve as the LEA‘s response to the representations for consideration by the School Organisation Committee.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Richard Stiff Telephone: 224 3749
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005
SUBJECT: Reorganisation affecting Rodley and Aireview Primary Schools in Stanningley Planning Area
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 Introduction
Representatives from Rodley Village Primary School and Aireview Primary School 1.1 were granted a deputation to the Council on 12 January 2005. The deputations were in relation to the review of primary provision in the Stanningley Primary Planning Area.
2. Recommendations
2.1 Executive Board is asked to note the concerns expressed in the deputations.
2.2 Executive Board is also asked to note that Education Leeds will consider the points raised in further work on options for primary provision in the area.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM:
Originator: Richard Stiff
Telephone: 224 3749
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF EDUCATION LEEDS REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11th February 2005
SUBJECT: Reorganisation affecting Rodley and Aireview Primary Schools in Stanningley Planning Area
Electoral Wards Affected: Please indicate that the following have been addressed within the report: Bramley and Stanningley Specific Implications For: Resource Implications: Ethnic Minorities Finance ü ü Women Personnel ü Disabled People Accommodation/Buildings ü
Policy Implications:
Executive Board Eligible for Call-in Not Eligible for Call-in Decision ü ü
1.0 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1 Representatives from Rodley Village Primary School and Aireview Primary School were granted a deputation to the Council on 12 January 2005. The deputations were both in relation to the ongoing review of primary provision in the Stanningley Primary Planning Area. Copies of the deputations are attached.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 Executive Board received a report on primary provision in the Stanningley Area at its meeting on 17 November 2004, which summarised recent consultation on the proposal to amalgamate Aireview Primary School and Rodley Village Primary School in September 2005. At this meeting, the Executive Board decided not to proceed with the proposals as it stood, but asked for a further report on options for the area.
3.0 THE ISSUE
3.1 The deputation from Rodley Village Primary School asked that other options are considered further. These include the refurbishment of Rodley Village Primary School, the building of a new school in Rodley on either a site previously considered for a new school at Club Lane, or an alternative site. 3.2 The deputation from Aireview Primary expressed disappointment in the Executive
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Board's decision not to proceed with the amalgamation proposal recommended by Education Leeds and questioned the basis on which the decision was taken, given the public support expressed for it.
4.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 There are no financial implications directly related to the content of this report.
5.0 STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS
5.1 This report provides information on deputations to the full Council on proposals considered as part of the statutory responsibility of the LEA to manage the supply and demand of school places.
6.0 EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS
6.1 One of the deputation's expresses concerns that Executive Board did not treat the two schools and communities involved in the review process equitably in their considerations.
7.0 LINKS TO KEY PRIORITIES AND CORPORATE PLAN
7.1 The review of provision referred to in the deputations is relevant to a number of key priorities identified in the Education Development Plan (1.3), the Asset Management Plan and the Corporate Plan, in terms of managing the supply and demand of school places and school improvement.
8.0 COMMENTS OF THE CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER
8.1 The contents of the report have been discussed with the Chief Education Officer. The Chief Education Officer feels that the report includes the points, observations and argument he would wish to be drawn to the Executive Board‘s attention in considering this matter.
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 Executive Board is asked to note the concerns expressed in the deputations.
9.2 Executive Board is also asked to note that Education Leeds will consider the points raised in further work on options for primary provision in the area.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.: Originator: Doug Martin
Tel: 247 6940
REPORT OF Director of Learning and Leisure/ Director of Social Services/Chief Executive : Education Leeds REPORT TO Executive Board DATE : 11 February 2005 SUBJECT : IMPLEMENTING THE CHILDREN ACT IN LEEDS “ UPDATE
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
All Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board ü (details contained in the report) Decision ü
1.0 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1 This report provides the Executive Board with the progress on the implementation of the Children Act since the last report received at the meeting of 15th December 2004.
2.0 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS
2.1 The intensive period of issuing guidance related to the Act continues.
The following guidance has been received and is in the process of circulation to partners:
· Every Child Matters Change for Children: 1. Voluntary & Community Sector 2. Social Care 3. Schools 4. Health 5. Criminal Justice System
· DfES 10 Year Childcare Strategy (Executive Board 19th January 2005)
2.2 The following draft guidance have been issued for consultation. Lead Officers are required to consult with appropriate parties in the context of each set of guidance:
· Statutory guidance on interagency co-operation;
· The Integrated Framework for Inspections of Children‘s Services. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2.3 The Green Paper on Youth is expected to be published later this month, as is the consultation on:
· Children and Young People‘s Plan Guidance;
· Revised regulations on Private Fostering;
· Educational Guidance on Looked After Children;
· The Common Core Prospectus.
2.4 The DfES have published a timeline of when statutory requirements come into effect (attached at Appendix 1). A calender of circulation dates for local information is also attached at Appendix 2.
3.0 LOCAL DEVELOPMENTS
3.1 A seminar is arranged for Elected Members on the consultation of the Lead Member for Children‘s Services on Thursday 10th February 2005. The seminar will also cover the Leeds Preventative Strategy.
3.2 The Change Manager job description is being developed by the partnership. The position will be advertised later this month.
3.3 The Children and Young People‘s Strategic Partnership Executive held the first in a series of seminars to support the development of:
· A vision, revise membership and terms of reference;
· Agree key workstreams;
· Move towards an integrated action plan.
3.4 Completed an assessment of progress in Leeds on Change for Children for the DfES.
3.5 The City Council with partners is reviewing the support available for development of the change agenda in Leeds. Additional resources are proposed from Leeds Children Fund, Early Years Service and Education Leeds.
3.6 A joint visit to Sheffield of elected members and officers took place in December 2004. Sheffield has a pilot trust and trailblazer Information Sharing status.
3.7 The Joint Scrutiny of Social Care and Learning established on the Children Act are supporting the development of the agenda by looking at:
· Involvement of children, young people, parents and carers in the development on service provision;
· The trust structures being developed by the pilot local authorities.
3.8 The Children and Young People‘s Strategic Partnership is currently sited in the Leeds Initiative under the Learning Partnership. Members of the Narrow the Gap Executive of the Leeds Initiative have discussed the present location of the CYPSP and a decision has been made to consider the CYPSP Executive as a strategy group of the Leeds Initiative.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.9 Ofsted have published a timetable for future integrated inspections of children‘s services. Leeds falls within the year commencing April 2007 to March 2008.
4.0 RECOMMENDATION
4.1 Members are asked to note the contents of the report.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix 1 Timeline of when statutory requirements come into effect
2005 2006 2007 2008
Duty to co-operate Most Local Authorities have children,s All Local Authorities have Commences (1 Apr 2005) trust arrangements in place (2006) children,s trust arrangements in place (2008)
Children and Young People,s Plan All Local Authorities have Children and Young guidance issued (Apr 2005) People,s Plan in place (1 Apr 2006)
Directors of Children,s Services Most Local Authorities have appointed All Local Authorities have guidance issued (Mar 2005) a Director of Children,s Services (2006) appointed a Director of Children,s Services (2008)
Lead Member for Children,s Services Most Local Authorities have designated a All Local Authorities have guidance issued (Mar 2005) Lead Member for Children,s Services (2006) designated a Lead Member for Children,s Services (2008) Integrated inspection commences (1 Sept 2005) Integrated inspection framework issued (May 2005)
Duty to safeguard All Local Authorities have commences (1 Oct 2005) established Local Safeguarding Children Boards (Apr 2006) Local Authorities begin making arrangements for implementation of private fostering measures (1 Jul 2005)
Duty to promote the educational achievement of looked after children commences (1 Jun 2005)
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Appendix 2 CALENDAR CHILDREN ACT 2004
Date Document Purpose Action Response Lead Approved/Cleared By Executive Contact Board
1 December Every Child Information Circulated N/A D Martin N/A Informed 2004 Matters: Change for Executive December For Children Stakeholders CYPSP 2004 report concerned members
12 Integrated Consultation JB to link Required by Jane Bell Paper to Exec CYPSP To go to December Inspection - LPSA and 28th February and CMT January 2005 2004 Regulations and write report. 2005 report Framework Circulated to Exec CYPSP (DM)
August CAF Consultation Complete Complete Mary Executive CYPSP Informed 2004 Armitage December 2004 report
November IRT - Information Consultation Circulated 19th January Pat To go to CMT and Informed 2004 on Vulnerable CYPSP Exec 2005 Case/Mary CYPSP Executive December Children and Sub-group Armitage & 2004 report Young People formed John Smith
December DfES 10 year Information to Circulated N/A D Martin N/A To note on 2004 Childcare Strategy stakeholders CYPSP January 2005 Executive report
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Date Document Purpose Action Response Lead Approved/Cleared By Executive Contact Board
December Draft guidance Consultation Circulated : 18th February D Martin Paper to CMT, Informed 2004 Director and Lead Executive 2005 Cllr Jennings Executive Board, December Member Children‘s CYPSP, (on behalf of CYPSP Exec 2004 report Services Executive Members) Members of LCC, LCC Legal, Meeting CYPSP members called to compile response
December ECM Change for Information to Circulated N/A D Martin N/A To note in 2004 Children : stakeholders CYPSP Exec January 2005 Voluntary and report Community Sector Strategy
December ECM Change for Information Circulated N/A D Martin N/A To note in 2004 Children : Social for Exec members January 2005 Care stakeholders social report care/education /children Rosemary Archer and Chris Edwards
December ECM Change for Information To circulate to N/A D Martin N/A To note in 2004 Children : Schools for Schools schools with January 2005 letter report
December ECM Change for Information Via Susan N/A S Rautenberg N/A To note in 2004 Children : Health for NHS staff Rautenberg January 2005 Services report
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Date Document Purpose Action Response Lead Approved/Cleared By Executive Contact Board
December ECM Change for Information, To YOS and N/A D Martin N/A To note in 2004 Children : the YOS, Ian Levitt, January 2005 Criminal Justice Probation, Trevor Kerry report System Police, Courts
December Statutory guidance Consultation Legal? 16th March To agree To note in 2004 on interagency co- 16th March 2005 January 2005 operation 2005 report
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: Pauline A Foster
Tel: 0113 247 4474
REPORT OF The Director Of Development REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11 February 2005
SUBJECT : Leeds Evening and Night-time Economy Study
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
City and Hunslet Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive þ Eligible for Call In þ Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The evening economy of Leeds City Centre has expanded dramatically in the last 10 years and is now renowned nationally as lively cosmopolitan and progressive. It is important that this success continues, but like other cities Leeds is facing challenges of management arising from it‘s success.
In November 2002, Chesterton Planning and Economics and Urban Practitioners were commissioned by the Council to prepare a study to provide clear guidance on the future development and management of the evening and night-time economy in Leeds City Centre.
The report demonstrates that Leeds has experienced significant levels of growth in entertainment uses within the relatively restricted space of the city centre. This has been coupled with a significant increase in residential developments.
There is evidence that some difficulties have arisen, including some conflict between residents and users of late night leisure facilities, and concern from some existing evening operators about the proximity of new residential development to their premises and the potential for conflict to arise in the future. There is, therefore, a clear need to adopt a proactive approach to the management of the evening economy now, to ensure that it can continue to thrive and contribute to Leeds‘ national and international status.
The report‘s action plan and recommendations relate to six specific areas of activity: Licensing, Planning, Enforcement, Transport, Community Safety, Management and Partnership. PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com 1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To inform members about the findings of the report into Leeds City Centre Evening and Night-time economy study, and to report on follow-up work that officers of the Council and our partners have done to progress the report‘s recommendations.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Since Leeds launched its ‘24 hour city‘ initiative in 1993, which sought to encourage a continental style cafe and bar culture, Leeds City Centre has become nationally renowned for its vibrant nightlife. This success has attracted people to live and work in the city and amongst other things, has been influential in the increase in applications to local universities.
2.2 The economic success of the city centre is recognised nationally and Leeds is regarded as an example of best practice by government departments, regeneration practitioners and the private sector in terms of its city centre renewal and management practices. Retail yields have improved steadily since 2002, and the number of cafe s, bars, nightclubs, restaurants and hotels has also risen year on year. 122,000 workers were employed in the city centre (2002), representing 30% of jobs in the Metropolitan District.
2.3 As a result, Leeds has received many recent accolades including: … The UK‘s Favourite City ÷ Conde Nast, Traveller Magazine, …Visitor City of the Year‘, The Good Britain Guide, …Best UK University Destination‘, the Independent, …Number One City for Clubbing‘, Mixmag Music Dance Awards.
2.4 In order to ensure this success continues, Leeds like other towns and cities in the UK must ensure the city centre addresses any problems of management arising from this success. In particular, with regard to the night-time economy, the perception that the capacity for licensed premises within the centre has been reached or …saturated‘, and that the …cumulative effect‘ of evening and night-time uses does not become detrimental to the quality of the visitor and resident experience.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 Discussions during 2002 between the West Yorkshire Police, the Council and the Leeds Nightlife Association (now renamed the Leeds City Licensing Association ÷ LCLA), identified the need to address a number of problems which were emerging in Leeds City Centre at night. In particular:
· Conflict between residents and users of late night leisure facilities particularly with regard to noise and litter. · Incidents of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour, particularly at closing time of …early hours‘ clubs. · Crime and disorder …hot spots‘. · The predominance of the under 25‘s drinking and clubbing culture which may deter a wider cross section of the public from visiting the city centre in the evening. · The need to get large numbers of people home quickly and safely late at night.
3.2 As a result of these discussions, it was decided to commission research to provide clear guidance on the future development and management of the evening and
PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com night-time economy in Leeds city centre. In November 2002, Chesterton Planning and Economics and Urban Practitioners were commissioned by the Council to prepare such a study. The work was jointly funded by the Council and the Home Office via its Safer Communities Initiative Fund.
4. THE STUDY AIMS
4.1 The aims of the study were thus to:
· Capitalise on the positive aspects of the evening economy · Identify negative aspects and potential solutions · Retain Leeds‘ individuality and distinctiveness · Develop a clear and deliverable action plan
4.2 The methodology used to develop the action plan involved detailed research, extensive consultation with local business and other stakeholders, and research into good practice in other cities. The following key tasks were undertaken:
· A review of the background and context to Leeds City Centre, including its regional economic role and primary assets · A review of Council policy and initiatives · A review of national legislation and policy · Site visits to Leeds city centre, both during the day and at night, accompanied by the West Yorkshire Police and Managing Director of the Leeds Guide · A literature review on the 24 hour city and the evening economy · An analysis of the growth of entertainment uses and changes in the opening hours in the study area, using information obtained from the planning and licensing departments at Leeds City Council · An analysis of statistical information held by West Yorkshire Police · Desk research on market and economic changes that have taken place over the last ten years · Desk research on future trends on entertainment · A review of good practice from a number of international and national case studies · A review of market research of city centre evening users and non users · Two stakeholder workshops, to identify key issues and potential projects and recommendations · An extensive programme of consultation with representatives from a wide range of public agencies and private sector organisations including Leeds City Council, Leeds Supertram, Metro, West Yorkshire Police, District Magistrates, the Leeds Guide, local agents, retailers and the entertainment industry.
4.3 A full copy of the report which was published in October 2003 is deposited in the Members‘ Library. The report demonstrates that Leeds has experienced significant levels of growth in entertainment uses within the relatively restricted space of the city centre. This has been coupled with a significant increase in residential developments. The close proximity of a range of land uses and the creation of mixed-use schemes has many benefits including the creation of a vibrant 24-hour city and ease of access to a wider range of facilities.
4.4 Leeds City Council has a policy of promoting mixed-use development, including residential and evening uses throughout the city centre. A number of mixed-use schemes have already been delivered and there are several more in the pipeline. This policy, which has avoided the designation of an exclusive …entertainment zone‘,
PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com has served the city well, avoiding extreme concentrations of evening uses in any particular quarter, and limiting difficulties on the whole to a small number of individual large premises. However, there is evidence that some difficulties have arisen, including some conflict between residents and users of late night leisure facilities, and concern from some existing evening operators about the proximity of new residential development to their premises and the potential for conflict to arise in the future. There is, therefore, a clear need to adopt a proactive approach to the management of the evening economy now, to ensure that it can continue to thrive and contribute to Leeds‘ national and international status.
4.5 The action plan set out in Appendix 1 of this report includes recommendations for six specific areas of activity: Licensing, Planning, Enforcement, Transport, Community Safety and Management and Partnership and is designed to deliver the following key benefits:
· An effective balance between evening and economy businesses and residential uses in Leeds city centre;
· Effective planning for future evening economy capacity in Leeds city centre, to ensure that the evening economy does not …overheat‘ and its impacts begin to outweigh its benefits;
· A clear framework for the consideration of planning and licensing applications in the city centre;
· A policy to ensure that a major role of the evening economy within the wider Leeds economy is sustained;
· A safe and effective evening economy transport system for Leeds;
· Effective partnerships to engage the public and private sectors in managing the evening economy;
· A socially balanced city centre residential community, with access to a range of essential shops and services;
· Successful cleansing and maintenance regimes to ensure that the environmental quality of the city centre is protected and enhanced.
5. IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 Implementation of the strategy involves the co-operation of all the parties identified in the action plan. The police have already begun to implement some of the recommendations (Policy area 5.0) and are working with Leeds City Licensing Association to ensure compliance and readiness with the new licensing legislation (Policy area 1.0). Similarly, significant progress has been made by the Council particularly in terms of its readiness for the new licensing legislation (Policy area 1.0) and with regard to community safety initiatives (Policy area 5.0). Progress is also detailed in Appendix 1.
PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com
5.2 In order to further to action plan, each theme has a champion as follows:
· Policy Area 1: Licensing ÷ Licensing Section, Legal and Democratic Services, Leeds City Council · Policy Area 2: Planning ÷ Planning, Development Department, Leeds City Council · Policy Area 3: Enforcement ÷ Enforcement Team, City Services, Leeds City Council · Policy Area 4: Transport ÷ City Services, Leeds City Council · Policy Area 5: Community Safety ÷ Superintendent, Leeds City Centre Division, West Yorkshire Police · Policy Area 6: Management and Partnership ÷ City Centre Management who will also monitor progress on behalf of the Leeds Community Safety Partnership, the City Centre Management Initiative and the Council and assist with the co- ordination of activities.
6. COMMUNITY SAFETY
6.1 The proposals contained in the report are consistent with the Government‘s action plan to tackle alcohol related crime, produced in 2000, which describes a range of initiatives to help tackle alcohol-related problems. It provides a context for developing new ideas and innovative approaches, as part of local strategies to address alcohol- related crime, disorder and nuisance. The action plan has three objectives:
· To reduce under age drinking · To reduce public drunkenness and · To prevent alcohol related violence
6.2 These actions are being taken forward through a range of different Government initiatives and legislation, including the Licensing Act 2003 previously noted at Executive Board on 15th October 2003 and 21st July 2004, the Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003 and the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.
7. COUNCIL POLICIES
7.1 The strategy is consistent with the Council Plan Priorities for:
· Community Safety ÷ particularly, ”increasing public sense of security£. · Competing in a Global Economy ÷ particularly, ”creating a city centre of European distinction, developing the city‘s international image and profile and developing a cultural infrastructure of national and international reputation£. · Looking after the Environment ÷ particularly, ”extending the Streetscene project£ and ”improved enforcement arrangements£.
7.2 The policy is consistent with planning policy for the city centre contained in the Unitary Development Plan, which seeks to promote the development of a city centre which supports the aspiration of Leeds becoming a principal European city and maintaining and enhancing the distinctive character it possesses.
PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com 8. RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
8.1 With regard to licensing, Executive Board have already been appraised on the predicted financial implications associated with implementing the Licensing Act 2003 (Executive Board 15th October 2003).
8.2 Changes to City Centre planning policies (Policy Area 2.0) and the development of any supplementary planning guidance will be taken forward as part of the new planning system - the Local Development Framework. This is a resource intensive process and priorities across the city have yet to be agreed. The consideration of how Section 106 funds (Policy Areas 2.8 and 2.9) can be used to support the evening economy work and what priority this has as compared to competing demands for section 106 - eg public realm improvements, is also tied in with work on the LDF.
8.3 Enforcement activities consistent with the study‘s recommendations are already taking place. Further work is required with regard to public convenience provision/mobile pissoirs.
8.4 The report‘s action plan estimates the cost of specific initiatives ÷ also identified in the appendix to this report.
9. RECOMMENDATION
9.1 Members are requested to:
· note and approve the contents of this report.
· note the recommendations from the study and progress to date.
· endorse the use of the document to assist better management of the evening and night-time economy in Leeds City Centre; in particular to enable officers of the Council to work with our partners to further progress the recommendations.
· Agree that the City Centre Divisional Community Safety Partnership will co-ordinate the work needed to progress recommendations further.
10. BACKGROUND PAPERS
Report to Executive Board, Licensing Act 2003, 15th October 2003
Report to Executive Board, Licensing Act 2003 ÷ Progress on Implementation ÷ 21st July 2004 and 17th November 2004.
PDF createdG: \CCM\Te witham FinePrint Info\reports\E xpdec fBoard\EveningFactory trial Econ voersionmy 11.02.05 http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date
1.0 LICENSING ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: CAROLINE ALLEN, LEGAL SERVICES WITH PAULINE FOSTER, CCM AND CLAIRE McCALL, COMMUNITY SAFETY
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required
1.1 It is recommended that the licensing The recommendation to set up a Key city Council Awaiting High District wide consultation committee be required to produce a licensing committee, which has including publication of on the Council‘s draft licensing policy, which should be responsibility for developing a licensing Environmental key statement of Licensing formulated with consideration to the policy along these lines, has been made Health, Planning, government Policy complete. following: by the University of Westminster (1) for Social Services, guidance and consideration by the Government in the Transport Policy regulations. Feedback highlighted the amendments to the proposed Licensing and City Centre need for special The licensing policy should complement Bill. Management and …cumulative impact‘ spatial planning policies for Leeds city Community policies in certain areas of centre with respect to entertainment uses Safety. External the City , Headingley and (A3 and D2 uses). partners include the City/Headingley - The policy should be sent out for wide the Police and corridor. Further consultation to local businesses, transport Fire authorities consultation held and operators, the police, fire authorities, special policies for the residents and other stakeholders. identified areas included - A local stakeholder‘s forum should be in the final Policy. set up to discuss issues associated with licensing and inform the work of Final Policy approved by the licensing committee. full Council January 2005.
Feedback also raised issues re fear of crime in Leeds City Centre relating to alcohol related crime ÷ key partners co-ordinating on various actions through City Centre Divisional Community Safety Action Plan. Addressing matters of ordered dispersal: problematic venues; late
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required night transport provision (see 5.3 Community Safety).
1.2 Within the Council‘s licensing policy, Evidence from other cities in the UK and As above. As above. As above. The ODPM parliamentary consider setting an upper capacity limit for Europe (1) suggests that one of the select committee evening economy uses, which sets a limit most significant factors contributing to recommendation in in terms of the number of people with difficulties in the evening economy is the respect of upper capacity which selected areas within Leeds city pressure of sheer numbers of people in limits was not taken centre can reasonably cope. This a town or city centre late at night. The forward into the Licensing recommendation was made in the ODPM evidence suggests that every area has a Act 2003. The Guidance Parliamentary Select Committee's report point at which the concentrations of (S182 of the Act) strongly on the evening economy but its licensed premises and people begin to recommends against the implementation should be subject to the erode the quality of the customer, visitor imposition of quotas final outcome of the Licensing Bill. and resident experience and the surrounding capacity Capacity can be identified in relation to the 'cumulative effect' of these premises limits of an individual fire regulation standards for individual begins to undermine their economic venue. However, premises. Limits should be defined for benefits. capacity will be a matter small areas, such as a street or a which will be a relevant collection of 2-3 blocks. The ODPM Parliamentary Select factor for certain Committee‘s report on the evening applicants to address in It is recommended that upper capacity economy recommends that this their operating schedule limits are set in relation to the following requirement to set an upper capacity and for licensing factors: limit should apply to all local authorities, authorities to consider in order to allow them to proactively when determining - Public transport provision (proximity of manage the evening economy, rather applications. It is taxi ranks and night bus stops); than wait until capacity has already been intended that the factors - The predominant character of the area exceeded. The report recommends that identified in 1.2 as being - whether primarily office, retail, paragraph 4.14 of the draft Licensing Bill relevant will be referred to entertainment or residential; is amended to allow for upper capacity in the policy as matters for - Proximity of residential units to limits to be set. Cities such as Paris and licensees to address. evening economy uses (actual and New York, which have experienced planned); significant growth in entertainment uses The cumulative impact - Policing resources for the area in certain districts, have introduced policy does also go some (including wardens and Community policies to prevent saturation. These way to meet this Safety Officers); and include the introduction of a code in recommendation - Street patterns and building types in Paris, which states that licensed venues the area. cannot be within a distance of less than 75 metres from one another and specific
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required quotas for licensed venues in each borough. In New York, new liquor licences are not granted for new bars within 500ft of another bar. Policies in relation to 'capacity limits' are also common and have been introduced in New York and Berlin. In Leeds, it is considered more appropriate to consider 'capacity' rather than distances between bars, given the concentration of bars in certain areas has already been established.
1.3 The licensing policy should state that Evidence from cross-cultural As above. As above. As above. N.B. reference to business plans for all licensed premises comparisons suggests that the ”business plans£ should are required to include reference to: relaxation of licensing hours alone will now be read as ”operating - Licensing hours - these should be not provide the solution to current schedules” in accordance within the framework of the licensing conflicts or create a different drinking with the Licensing Act. policy culture, but that the most important - Developed through public consultation issue is how licences and licensed The Regulations are now and should consider proximity of premises are controlled, managed and available which set out residential units (both actual and regulated (1). Under the new licensing the prescribed application planned). bill, operators of all entertainment forms and the format of - Measures to ensure customers can get premises will be required to submit a the operating schedule, home quickly and safely at the end of business plan, including proposed which is disappointing as the evening. Licences beyond 12pm opening hours. This will offer an there is limited space for should not be granted unless the opportunity for operators to demonstrate applicants to demonstrate business plan can demonstrate the their responsibilities, including ways in how they will achieve the ability of the premises to meet this which potential negative impacts of the licensing objectives. requirement. For example, the premises can be mitigated. premises could set up a direct link with However, we are to a private hire company and give door The proximity of residential and recommend a risk staff responsibility for promoting the entertainment uses has been raised as assessment proforma service. an issue by licensees during approach which will - Capacity limit - as determined by fire consultation and the council has contain reference to many regulations. received numerous complaints from of these measures where - Detailed design of internal and residents about noise. The new appropriate and external spaces to show the proportion licensing bill, and the requirement for a reasonable. of 'vertical drinking' space and location business plan to be submitted, offers an
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required of chairs and tables. opportunity to address issues of noise - A designated individual, responsible and opening hours in existing and new for noise levels and receiving premises. The introduction of noise complaints; attenuation measures can also be - A strategy for the responsible sale of included as planning conditions (see alcohol on the premises - including a 2.4), however, in order to ensure commitment to the avoidance of drinks tensions between licensed premises and promotions. residential uses are monitored regularly, - Door staff - number of staff and it would be most effective to address required training and qualifications. these issues through the licensing - Measures to encourage customers to system. leave the premises as quietly as possible at the end of the evening. This might include terminating music Good practice examples in relation to Close liaison is required 30 minutes before closing time, during noise attenuation strategies and with Planning Services to which time only non-alcoholic measures from Copenhagen, ensure that where beverages will be served. Good Manchester and New York could be necessary these are management practices in relation to usefully introduced in Leeds. considered at the flyposting and leafleting. planning application In Amsterdam, bars are required to stop stage. - Measures to address the issue of selling alcohol an hour before closing, in noise attenuation. All operators order to allow customers to leave over a applying for a new premises licence longer-time period, thus reducing noise beyond 11pm, regardless of proximity outside the premises at closing time and to residential uses, should seek to relieving pressure on night transport. install the following: Licences in Amsterdam and Copenhagen also specify decibel levels - triple glazing and air conditioning, at different times of the evening and allowing all windows and doors to be night and there is a facility to have a closed after 11pm; decibel limiter installed in sound equipment. - sound limiters, linked to sound amplification equipment, with specified decibel limits for different times of the In New York, cabaret licences for music day; and venues specify the particular responsibilities of licensees, including - acoustic lobbies or double doors at the following: entrances and exits, to act as a physical barrier between the inside of
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required premises and the external - to ensure that the crowd awaiting environment. admission to or leaving the premises does not cause excessive noise or litter or behave in a manner that would disturb the public peace or safety; - to have an indoor waiting area as a condition of their "Certificate of Occupancy" and to utilise that area to its maximum capacity at all times when crowds are awaiting admission; and to designate at least one individual who will be responsible for receiving complaints concerning the operation of the cabaret.
1.4 If the Licensing Bill is amended to allow for The Licensing Bill does not currently As above. As above. As above. This recommendation was local control over licensing hours, it is allow the local authority to determine made subject to the final recommended that a phased approach to licensing hours, however, there is a outcome of the Licensing opening hours should be adopted. As with significant lobby in favour of amending Bill. The current position capacity limits, the mix of opening hours this provision. A phased approach to is that it is clear from the should be considered for small areas, such opening hours would provide policy Licensing Act and the as a street or collection of 2-3 blocks. It is backup to assist the Council in guidance that the Council recommended that a policy for a phased managing concentrations of will be unable to take this approach should take the following entertainment land uses effectively. forward. approach: Figure 4 maps closing hours across the city and demonstrates that venues that The identification of appropriate opening are open after midnight are distributed hours for each small area with across the city centre, although there consideration given to factors including; are particular concentrations around Millennium Square, Call Lane/Corn - surrounding land uses Exchange and Merrion Street/Vicar - capacity of the area Lane. Controlling the opening hours of - existing noise levels late night entertainment land uses in - likely forward destinations of users of individual areas will assist in limiting the entertainment provisions potential negative impacts of - transport provisions entertainment uses. For example, a - existing opening hours potential reduction of large numbers of
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required - likely potential conflicts with people vacating premises at the same surrounding area time, reduction in the number of people requiring transport provisions or - Creation of policies stating the travelling across the city at any one time appropriate mix of opening hours and the control of the use of within each area in terms of entertainment premises in a way proportions e.g. 40% to close before appropriate to the individual location. 12 p.m., 40 % to close before 2 p.m. and 20% post 2 a.m. - Different closing hours for weekdays and weekends.
It should be noted that this recommendation is subject to the final outcome of the licensing bill.
1.5 It is recommended that a Minimum Pricing Minimum Pricing Agreements are used As above. As above. As above. The Council is unable to Agreement is included as part of the terms in a number of locations including promote or acquire a and conditions attached to entertainment Nottinghamshire. Consultations with The minimum pricing licences. The structure of a Minimum Leeds Nightlife Association, the City's agreement for licensed Pricing Agreement needs to be formulated Alcohol Task Group, Police Department establishments. through consultation and agreement and Licensing Department indicated However, the licensing between relevant parties including existing strong support for a Minimum Pricing policy seeks to promote operators, Police Department and the Agreement to be put in place as soon as the responsible sale of Licensing Department but may include: possible. Potential benefits of such an alcohol and gives agreement include: examples as to how this - No alcoholic drinks to be sold under a can be demonstrated. specified price - Encouragement of responsible A commitment to selling - No alcoholic drinks to be given as part behaviour by operators; alcohol responsibly - of an admission deal - Limits the levels of price wars responsibility clause has - No alcoholic drinks deals to be offered between operators which have a been added to the LCLA via a voucher system or a "buy one get negative impact on operators code of practice. x many free" deal. overall, but particularly on smaller In addition, the agreement should include operators, and the local leisure Responsible authorities a commitment to the provision of free market; and will be able to call for a drinking water and the provision of - Potential to limit excessive alcohol review of a premise cheaper soft drinks, including tea and consumption and the associated licence if problems occur coffee, as alternatives to alcohol. - negative impacts such as violence as a result of irresponsible and negative environmental drinks promotions.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required impacts.
1.6 All applications for premises licenses Consultation with council officers in the As above. As above. As above. The general principle should be referred for decision to the joint licensing department has suggested behind this is supported planning and licensing working group, there is scope to gather advice on and welcomed. There will which would consider whether appropriate applications for licences from a number need to be a means of planning permission has been granted for of different departments within the prioritising applications to the proposed use within the license Council at an early stage. Good practice enable ”high risk£ application and consider areas of overlap from other international cities, where applications to form the on conditions, in cases where co- there are high concentrations of basis of early discussion ordination for enforcement purposes could entertainment uses, suggests that and negotiation between be considered. Applications should also be invoicing the Planning, Environmental Planning, Environmental referred to the following departments and Health and Building Control Health and Licensing both consultees: Departments, in particular, can help to at the planning stage and mitigate problems that might arise in subsequently at the relation to the licensed venue (1). licensing stage. - the planning department - in order to Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder ensure that permission has been Act is a material consideration in The Licensing Policy granted for the appropriate use (see planning applications and applications strongly recommends that potential changes to the use classes for licensed premises - which could both applicants speak to the order - 2.3) and to consider areas of be rejected on the grounds that they responsible authorities in overlap on conditions, in cases where would lead to increases in crime and advance of preparing their co-ordination for enforcement disorder. In Paris, complaints received application so that any purposes could be considered; by the police in relation to violence and recommendations may be - Environmental health - officers should antisocial behaviour are recorded and built in at the initial stage. develop a formal process by which to used to support decision making on assess whether developers should be extending licensing hours. Applicants are required by required to provide an environmental statute to serve notice of impact assessment with the their application on the application, to determine the probable responsible authorities, impact of a new venue and to ensure which includes planning, the applicant is proposing adequate environmental health, mitigation measures; and police and the fire - building control - officers should be authority. asked to assess the building and A memorandum of business plan for the licensed understanding is currently premises, in order to determine being devised between whether there is compliance with (1) Central Cities Initiative, University of licensing and the building regulations and, in particular, Westminster (2002) Licensing Reform: responsible authorities.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Timescales Priority Progress/Action area / Costs Required performance requirements relating to A cross-cultural companion of rights, the transmission of noise. responsibilities and regulations.
The police and fire service should be consulted in order to assess previous complaints and incidents in relation to the venue, as well as gather views on the suitability of proposed mitigation measures for anti-social behaviour and fire hazard. 1.7 It is recommended that resources be The licensing bill will have a significant Planning and As above. As above. The Licensing Section allocated to substantial training and impact on the working practices of staff Environmental Cost estimate: increased in staff development for staff in the licensing in licensing departments across the Health. –12,000 pa numbers from 11 to 21. department, and other appropriate country and if new measures are to be Measures to ensure businesses and organisations, to adapt to effective, staff will need to receive suitable training are requirements under the new licensing bill. training in order to adapt. already in place. A diploma and organisations, to adapt to Increase in staff 11 - 22. requirements under the new licensing bill. A diploma in licensing is currently being considered by some universities, for example the University of Westminster, and Leeds City Council should consider this as an opportunity for ongoing staff development, if it is introduced.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date
2.0 PLANNING ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: IAN ANDREWS, CHIEF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OFFICER, ROB MATLEY, CCM AND CLAIRE McCALL, COMMUNITY SAFETY
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required 2.1 The Council should promote a sustainable The Council is committed to promoting Medium High Any planning policy mixed-use policy in relation to the balance mixed use in the city centre, as stated in changes will need to be of uses in the city centre. In order to their UDP, and this is consistent with taken forward as part of ensure the balance between the variety of national policy guidance (eg PPG1, an Area Action Plan for uses does not shift in favour of PPG3, PPG6). However, it is important the city centre that the concentrated entertainment uses, the that the Council considers the Council is proposing to Council should consider the proximity of sustainability of its approach, and in undertake as part of its other licensed premises, residential uses, particular, the sustainability of the mix of Local Development the character of the area and the capacity uses proposed. Framework (LDF). of late night transport services and the police as material considerations in relation to new planning and licensing Cross-cultural research has applications for evening uses. demonstrated that problems in relation to the nighttime economy are associated with the concentration of licensed It is recommended that the Council premise (1). Although Leeds is not specifies, in consultation with local considered to have reached 'crisis' Medium stakeholders, the primary use of each point in terms of the number of late night sub-area as either commercial entertainment uses, certain retail/office/entertainment) or mixed use. areas of the city are attracting more such This would enable suitable licensing and uses than others and the planning decisions to be made in each Council might wish to introduce a sub-area. proactive policy to avoid an over- concentration of entertainment uses in the future.
In several case studies considered in this report, including Amsterdam, Berlin and New York, broad zoning of urban areas helped Councils to make decisions about suitable concentrations of entertainment uses, balance of uses
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required and licensing hours of venues. 2.2 If the Use Classes Order is amended, it is The ODPM has recognised that there is Long NA It is unclear when the Use recommended that Leeds City Council widespread concern that the Classes Order is to be considers a percentage quota for different inclusion of pubs and bars with other reviewed. The current types of entertainment uses in each area uses such as restaurants and cafes in policy will be of the City (depending on its agreed the A3 use class is contributing to the reconsidered at this time. primary designation as mixed use or increase in the number of licensed The introduction of commercial), covering the following uses: premises in some areas and that such quotas is a policy change changes in use do not require planning that will be picked up as a - bars/pubs permission. part of the Area Action - night clubs Plan to be produced as - restaurants and cafe s In response, the ODPM issued a an element of the Local statement on 4 March 2003 indicating Development Framework. It should be noted that within the that it is the Government's intention to proposed changes to the Use Classes change the Use Classes Order so as to Order, create a separate class for pubs and hot food takeaways would not be bars. The effect of this change distinguished from restaurants and will be to require any proposal to change therefore the use of an existing building into Council should lobby the ODPM for a pub or bar to apply for planning clarification on this issue within the permission and thus be subject to proposed revisions. potential new conditions.
Case study examples considered in Section 6, such as Amsterdam and New York, suggest that where entertainment uses have become saturated, the authorities are attempting to limit the number of new bars and clubs, but other uses such as restaurants are considered more acceptable. The revision of the Use Classes Order could provide an opportunity to introduce quotas of different types of entertainment uses. 2.3 When assessing an application for Several licensees in the city centre have Short Detailed work already residential use in the city centre, the expressed concern about the granting of undertaken as to how to Council should refer to its noise policy planning applications for residential use control transmission of (see 6.5) and consider the following: in close proximity to existing external noise into
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required entertainment uses. The council has residential and - the sound insulation of the building. received numerous complaints from transmission of noise Existing or future entertainment uses residents about noise from entertainment between uses. In new in proximity to the residential unit uses in close proximity to new residential developments now look would impact upon the quiet units. towards 2 phase enjoyment of residents, therefore the However, the Council is committed to assessment based on Council should include conditions promoting mixed use in the city centre, attenuation of the shell requiring effective noise insulation to as stated in their UDP, and this is and then attenuation of be included within all residential consistent with national policy guidance the fit out with noise developments. It should also seek to (eg PPG1, PPG3, PPG6). In addition, limitation levels if introduce noise attenuation measures the demand for city centre residential necessary ÷possibly in the entertainment premises nearby, units is high. imposed under the PEL.. either through applications for new Licensing officers working licences or applications for planning In the absence of national policy on protocols permission under the changes to the guidance on the evening economy, there use class order (see 2.2). is a need for strict controls to be included - The design of the residential unit in the granting of planning proposed. Courtyard housing applications for residential use, where offers residents more protection there are established entertainment against noise and should be uses in the vicinity. promoted in the city centre, where Cross-cultural comparisons have shown possible. For vertical mixed-use that the design of individual buildings schemes, buildings which have a and the overall urban form and layout of buffer zone of offices between the street can influence the level of residential and entertainment conflict between residential and uses, again offer more protection; entertainment uses (1). and - relationship to the character of the area - wide boulevards will have greater capacity for evening uses than narrow historic streets. 2.4 When considering an application for an The proximity of residential and Short High Already do this and have A3 or D2 use, the Council should refer all entertainment uses has been raised as done for some applications to the Environmental Health an issue by licensees during consultation time.Where noise issue Department, in order for them to assess and the council has received numerous seen as relevant, the application. EH should require all complaints from residents about noise. application is not applicants to produce a noise report. In The introduction of noise attenuation registered until noise response to the report, the Council should measures can also be included as attenuation report seek to include conditions relating to planning conditions and the proposed submitted
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required noise attenuation measures (as described revision of the Use Classes Order will in 1.3 above). This will, however, only offer an opportunity to introduce new address the issue for new premises. planning conditions for all existing bars and pubs. If the Use Classes Order is amended (see 2.2), there will be an opportunity to introduce conditions for premises that are required to submit a new planning application for an A3 use. In this case, it is recommended that upon application for permission to change the use of an existing building into a pub or bar, the Council includes conditions relating to noise attenuation measures. 2.5 A schedule of planning application An approved schedule of consultees will Short High Currently only the consultees for different land use help to promote communication and Environmental Health is components should be prepared to be improved co-ordination of the consulted as a matter of used as a standard check list. This should consultation process. It will also course. There is a need include not only internal departments but encourage a broader spectrum of to set up a system with external organisations as well. appraisal Licensing, the Police, and possibly others. In particular, all applications for Consultation with council officers in the Short High Intend to draft proposals entertainment uses (ie A3, D2, Sui planning and licensing departments has for discussion with Generis) should be referred to the suggested there is scope for improved partners following Council departments and a joint coordination between the planning, working group should be established licensing, building control and between these departments and other environmental health departments early agreed consultees, such as the on in the application process. city centre Management team, the police and the fire service, to ensure a consistent Good practice from other international approach: cities, where there are high - the licensing department - in order to concentrations of entertainment uses, consider areas of overlap on suggests that co-ordination between the conditions, in cases where co- planning, licensing, environmental health ordination for enforcement purposes and building control departments can could be considered; help to mitigate problems that might arise in relation to the entertainment use - environmental health - officers should (1). In particular, in Copenhagen, the
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required be asked to provide an environmental Environmental Protection Agency carries impact assessment to determine the out an environmental impact assessment probable impact of a new venue, to upon receipt of applications for licensed ensure the applicant is proposing premises, and submits a adequate mitigation measures; and recommendation to the licensing department. building control - officers should be asked to assess the building and business plan for the licensed premises, in order to determine whether there is compliance with building regulations and, in particular, performance requirements relating to the transmission of noise. 2.6 A schedule of standard terms and In order to ensure all appropriate issues Short This could be done ÷ conditions that should be considered for are properly considered and appropriate agree resourcing developments within the city centre conditions attached. Well help provide a should be developed. These could include degree of measure for both applicant separate use headings and other more and planning officers considering the general mixed-use applications. applications. 2.7 In association with the Waterfront Recognising locations where residential Completed Already done-based on Strategy, planning policies should include land uses are likely to concentrate, such nodes- nodes being the promotion of pockets of appropriate as waterfront locations, allows policies to reviewed leisure development along the waterfront encourage and facilitate the appropriate corridor, such as cafe s, restaurants, and scale, nature and pattern of development health and fitness facilities, to help from the outset. animate public spaces and provide The inclusion of pockets of appropriate linkages between residential land uses, entertainment/leisure uses will animate the waterfront, the city centre and existing public spaces and areas within entertainment offer. residential developments. It will also encourage use of waterfront areas for leisure purposes to improve public enjoyment of this environment and provide linkages between this area and the remainder of the city centre 2.8 It is recommended that planning policy The benefits of such policies and Need to consider whether and city centre initiatives give initiatives may include: Medium Medium appropriate, likely to consideration to, and place focus on, - economic development- improved succeed, feasible, and independent operators and businesses diversity in entertainment and leisure capable of being within the city centre. Consideration provision within the city centre; monitored and enforced.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required should be given to: - enhanced distinctiveness of Leeds Any resulting planning - promotion of smaller format units within city centre, helping to promote its policy will need to be developments to provide appropriate - identity to a national and taken forward as part of units and opportunities for independent international audience; and- the Area Action Plan. operators e.g. 15% of all A3 units per inclusion of more social and development (where the A3 component is economic groups. greater than 15,000 sq.ft).to be less A precedent to introduce plot ratios than 2000 sq. ft; exists in Paris, where the intention has - the specification of plot ratios, which been to support smaller-scale define the maximum authorised commercial and crafts activities. This building density, to promote the could be usefully applied to Leeds, in retention of smaller format uses order to ensure there is suitable space in where they already exist; the city centre for smaller independent businesses to operate. - the opportunity for Leeds Development Agency to provide assistance to independent operators Such conditions could fund measures to to help them enter and establish limit conflicts between land uses within themselves in the local market; and the city centre through placing a duty on the developer. the potential for a proportion of Section The inclusion of management 106 agreements to be tied in with local agreements would encourage a economic development strategies, transparent and clear system in which sustainability policies and initiatives which developers can work. help support smaller independents and This system helps prevent penalising local operators. existing land uses within the city centre as a result of planning policies and development trends. 2.9 It is recommended that the Council Medium No action to date explores the possibility of using management agreements, under Section The use of S106 will be 106, for the creation of contingency funds considered as a part of by developers who have been granted TBC the new Local planning permission for new development Development Framework within the city centre. Contingency funds and associated could include provision of payment of Supplementary Planning funds to mitigate conflicts with Guidance. The surrounding land uses during the programming of this and construction period and place a duty on resource implications is
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time scales Priority Progress/Action area Required the developer to fund appropriate the subject of a separate correction measures in the event of report to Executive conflicts with surrounding land uses. An Board. example is a conflict arising between a residential development and an existing night-club or bar use where the contingency fund could be used to fund or part fund mitigation measures at the night-club/bar premises in terms of noise attenuation. The Council should explore the potential for contingency funds to be maintained for a certain number of years, capped at a specified limit, in order to be available for conflicts which take a while to emerge.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date 3.0 ENFORCEMENT ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: GRAHAM WILSON, CITY SERVICES, ROB MATLEY, CCM AND CLAIRE McCALL, COMMUNITY SAFETY
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs 3.1 It is recommended that the Council seeks The licensing department has four full- Mid 2005 High This was considered within to identify funding resourcing to integrate time enforcement officers who carry out the best value review of its enforcement teams. In particular, it is planned and unplanned inspections of environmental proposed that the Council: premise at different times of day or enforcement. It concluded - develop a multi-disciplinary night and check the validity of door that there was no added enforcement team, consisting of staff. The enforcement team has only value in developing a planning, licensing, and building been in operation on a full-time basis multidisciplinary team. control, environmental protection, since 2002. Both the planing and It did identify the need to vehicle licensing and markets licensing department have suggested Co-ordinate enforcement enforcement officers and that increased resources for activities so as to improve professionals. enforcement and increased co- Closer working- Regular ordination between the two teams meetings now take place would help to ensure conditions placed dealing with different on A3/D2 developments are being themes e.g. fly posting in implemented and adhered to. The student Freshers week Council has also indicated that there are problems of private hire soliciting trade and private hire vehicles using taxi ranks, which need additional enforcement resources.
3.2 - Sets up a 24-hour complaints hotline The city of Westminster, which has a Environ –80,000 Low Already have out of hours and rapid response team to deal with high concentration on entertainment Health/CCM noise nuisance team that particular issues, such as noise, fly- uses, has developed a multi-disciplinary covers the city, as well as posting and graffiti, building on existing enforcement team, consisting of the ASBU, graffiti removal services such as the out of hours noise professionals from different teams (remove hate crime services operated by Environmental backgrounds such as planing, licensing, graffiti within 24 hours) Health Department and building control and environmental protection. The City Council also has a 24-hour complaint hotline and rapid response teams to deal with particular issues, such as noise, fly posting and G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs graffiti.
3.3 Develop a …top 10 premises‘ enforcement Manchester have developed a …top 20 Police,/Comsafety/ To be agreed High This is a new initiative. It scheme (number of premises to be premises‘ enforcement scheme, PCT/CCM/LNLA/L requires the terms of included to be determined through whereby owners of identified venues icensing reference to be agreed, consultation with the police and current are required to meet with a committee together with the enforcement teams), whereby owners of and the Council, in order to discuss the expectations upon the 10 identified venues are required to meet with problem and draw up an action plan. worst clubs be clear. The a committee consisting of the police, identification process for magistrates and the Council‘s licensing 10 worst premises needs department, in order to discuss the agreeing. problems and draw up an action plan. Initial scoping meeting Within the context of the new licensing bill, between agencies Dec 04. licensee should be required to submit anew business plan, addressing the problems identified by the licensing committee.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date 4.0 TRANSPORT ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: KEITH DARCH, CITY SERVICES, WITH DES BROSTER, VEHICLE LICENSING, DAVE GILSON, TRANSPORT POLICY, SUPERINTENDENT PETER NICHOLSON, WEST YORKS POLICE AND CLAIRE McCALL, COMMUNITY SAFETY
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs 4.1 It is recommended that the Leeds At present, ordinary bus routes from Leeds City March 05 High No 1 route operates until Nightlife Association or the Evening Leeds city centre run until 11.30pm and Licensing –25,000 3am Economy the Night Rider service operates on Association, BID (see 6.1) should: Friday and Saturday nights up to 2.30am Leeds City 4.1a - take responsibility for advertising and on four specific routes to destinations in Council, promotion of night bus services; Garforth, Pudsey and two separate Metro routes to Otley. A 24-hour bus service has recently been piloted on the No.1 and 12 routes, which are to be discontinued, as the levels of patronage were not satisfactory.
4.1b - commission an origin-destination Consultation with the Director of First Leeds City Late 2005 High CCM able to fund survey survey and customer research to Buses suggested that, in order to make Council, –12,000 work (2004/05) proposed consider the most viable night bus the night buses successful, a more Metro. to establish unmet and routes visible and higher frequency service was latent demand- CMc co- needed and this would only be viable in ordinating moving this the first instance if the service were forward. subsidised
4.1c seek to secure existing night bus routes Leeds City Early 2006 Medium Dependent upon results of and introduce new routes in partnership Council, survey work. with First, Arriva, Metro and the Council‘s Metro. transport department;
4.1d - work with Leeds Supertram and train Leeds City Long term Low Current network situation companies to investigate the potential Council, makes further to operate later evening services, as a Metro. development difficult at matter of priority. present time.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs 4.2 It is recommended that the City Council Representatives from the West Yorkshire Leeds City Council Done Medium Work already done to considers the feasibility of coach drop-off Playhouse and the Grand Theatre and improve coach points at points, close to the theatres in the east of Opera House, who attended the Playhouse. the city. consultation workshop, suggested that there was a need to address access to Ongoing High New coach point is being the theatres, in particular space for promoted on Neville coach parking or drop-off. Street.
Medium Additional pick up points are being sought.
4.3 It is proposed that the following initiatives Consultation with the highways are considered in relation to hackney department indicated that demands on cabs and private hire vehicles and taken kerbside space in the city centre is high, forward by Leeds City Council in making it difficult to assign substantial partnership with Metro, First the Hackney space for taxi-ranks. The Leeds Forum: Supertram will have a significant impact on kerbside space. It is therefore considered that the issue needs to be assessed holistically, taking into consideration the tram, buses and taxi ranks.
4.3a - dual use of bus stops, to allow bus Police, –28,000 High CMc convening meeting to stops to be used as taxi ranks late at Leeds City Medium take forward. night; Council, Metro Police have identified Corn Exchange as site for pilot scheme. 4.3b - the identification of kerbside space Problems associated with hackney cabs Leeds City Council Long Medium Suitable site being sought. for a large 24 hour taxi rank in the include a lack of a large designated 24 centre of town, preferably near to hour taxi rank in the centre of the city, NB. Sites should have night bus stops; poor customer experience whilst waiting CCTV coverage to ensure for taxis and a lack of customer safety. knowledge about the location of taxi ranks.
4.3c - a planning requirement for large new Private hire vehicles are not allowed to Leeds City Council Short Medium G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs entertainment uses to set aside wait at taxi ranks. They are often seen dedicated space for a taxi-rank and as a nuisance. Entertainment uses could private hire pick-up; assist by taking a strong stance against private hire and could assist customers by giving booking permission.
Good practice from other cities, such as Leeds City Council –5,000 As 4.3d - advertising and promotion of the Amsterdam, suggests that a well-known available location of new taxi ranks; and central destination for night time On-going transport close to entertainment uses, helps to get people home quickly and 4.3e - encouraging evening economy safely at the end of the evening. Leeds City Short-medium Medium operators, through the new licensing Licensing policy, to set up a direct link with Association, private hire companies (see 1.3). Leeds City Council
Adequate community safety measures Police, High Deployment of Appropriate should be considered for all taxi ranks Leeds City Council resources to police the and private hire pick-up areas. sites. Increase CCTV signage around ranks where appropriate. 4.4a It is proposed that an independent review On street car parking restrictions apply July 05 Medium To be incorporated within of car parking availability, quality and until 6pm in the city centre, after which –15,000 review of parking strategy safety is undertaken, in order to ensure parking is free when permitted. One as part of 2nd LTP. that the car parking provision in the city multi-story car park in Leeds recently centre is of the highest quality possible won an award for safety. However, the Low Identification of secure and that the locations of car parks are signing and safety status of the late parking in process. considered to be safe and easily opening car parks is considered to be accessible. unclear and this is considered to be a major disincentive for people considering coming into Leeds city centre in the evening. There is also a concern about car related crime.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/ Required estimated costs This should include a customer survey to Leeds City 2005/06 Medium Identification of secure ascertain views on and usage of existing Council, Private –8,000 pa parking in process car parks and ideas for future car park operators improvement.
4.4b It is also recommended that a promotional exercise is undertaken, in order to raise awareness of existing safe and convenient car parks.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date 5.0 COMMUNITY SAFETY ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: SUPERINTENDENT PETER NICHOLSON, WITH PAULINE FOSTER, CCM, TONY GOODALL, DAT AND CLAIRE McCALL, COMMUNITY SAFETY
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Progress/Action Required area scales/esti mated costs 5.1 It is proposed that joint management and Consultation with Leeds police and LCC Community 3 mths Joint management and operational operational arrangements are set up Leeds City Council's community safety Safety, Metro, arrangements between community between community support officers, team suggested that the city would Police support officers, street wardens and street wardens and the police. benefit from increased co-ordination police achieved and on- going between community support officers, the police and the street wardens employed by the council. 5.2a It is recommended that the shifts and In Amsterdam, extra police and security Leeds City 3 mths PCSO shifts been reviewed twice. geographical coverage of the police, resources are deployed between Licensing City Centre police team to increase by community safety officers and street 10pm and 7am over weekends, with a Association, West 3 as of April 05(Safer City funds). wardens should be considered in order to particular focus on areas at closing Yorkshire Police, Additional police are deployed into city ensure the most effective use of times. Pressure on police resources in Leeds Health centre on Fri/Sat night to combat resources across the city centre and in Leeds is high and the effective use Authority ASB/violence. the suburbs. of community safety officers and City Stats currently being gathered from . Wardens could help to improve A&E to establish where assaults are community safety taking place to deploy officers more effectively & to identify groups of people who may be more vulnerable to assaults. This information will be further analysed 5.2b Liaison with a partnership of –55,000pa entertainment operators (see 6.2) could also help to identify additional need and entertainment operators might wish to consider paying for additional resources, if required. 5.3 It is suggested that the community safety Leeds Community Safety stated that the Designated Public Places Order which strategy for the city centre seeks to focus city centre suffers from a widespread bans alcohol except in licenced on the main issues within the city centre, perception of poor safety in the premises in Leeds City Centre such as alcohol abuse and street crime. evenings. Leeds CID identified the main implemented on 1st Nov 2004 - aim to The strategy should also seek to identify issues for the police in Leeds as being reduce incidents of violent assault to ways in which public perceptions of the robbery, drugs and dwelling burglary. make the city centre safer to the G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Progress/Action Required area scales/esti mated costs safety of the city centre could be The CID considers violence to be an public. improved through advertising and the economic threat to the city centre and Extensive media campaign linked to media. stated that most incidents of violence in the implementation of the DPPO and the evening are drink-related, something fines. that is increasing with the rise in A3 Dispersal Order now in place in City developments and low-price drinks Centre to deal with ASB. promotions. Dramatic reduction in city centre crime figures, linked to DIP (drug Intervention programme) e.g. 80% reduction in monthly robbery figures. Police …Christmas Crackdown‘ ÷ operational order to address increased seasonal crime and disorder matters relating to retail crime; alcohol abuse; robbery; theft from the person/vehicles
5.3a Community Safety Strategy ÷ focus on Leeds C/S/P Alcohol strategy being developed by to alcohol and street crime Leeds Health target Binge drinking, under age Authority drinking and linked to health.
5.3b Media Campaign to improve public Leeds C/S/P & Police –8,000 On-going media campaigns. perceptions of safety Community Safety Xmas lights campaign to promote key community safety messages.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Consultant Recommendations and Progress to Date 6.0 MANAGEMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND PARTNERSHIPS: ACTION MANAGERS ÷ LEAD: KAREN BUTLER, CCM , STEPHEN HAWKINS, LCLA AND LCC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH -TBC
Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs 6.1 It is recommended that the Leeds Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) have —30,000pa The newly formed LCLA Nightlife Association and the Retail and been extremely successful in the US, as a offers an opportunity to commercial Business Action Group means of financing local improvements. Good progress this (RACBA) seeks to facilitate the practice (see previous section on the New York recommendation. The development of a Business Improvement case study) suggests that BIDs are most LCLA code of practice District (BID), which has a clear focus on effective when they have a clear and defined requires members to the evening economy. The BID should focus, which an evening economy BID would manage their premises concentrate on integrating policing and provide. The Local Government Bill, published in a professional night time economy initiatives, building on in November 2002, confirmed the Government‘s manner. the innovative …Let‘s Dance Safely‘ intention to introduce enabling legislation for The Association of Town scheme, on promoting diversity in the BIDs in April 2004. A number of pilots BIDs are Centre Management has evening economy (see 6.2 below) and on currently underway in different locations across set up a national working integrated street management and the country, providing an opportunity for other group to look at the cleansing initiatives. cities and towns to learn important lessons feasibility of BIDS for etc before embarking on a BID. evening economy. Leeds CC Manager is represented on the group, and is exploring possibility of a post to develop work on a BID. To co-ordinate with the BID, the Council Entertainment Management Zones are could consider the establishment of an proposed in the draft London Plan and are Entertainment Management Zone, to be being piloted in the London Borough of designated in the UDP. This would Camden, where there is a high concentration of provide the opportunity to attach specific entertainment uses. conditions to planning permission within the Zone, particularly in relation to noise mitigation measures. Requirements could also be placed on entertainment venues within the zone to adopt specific management practices and provide funding for additional policing or transport G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs resources.
6.2 In order to promote a more diverse The consultation workshop indicated that the Leeds Medium to Significant funding is customer base in Leeds in the evening, it evening economy is currently dominated by Cultural long required to open the Art is proposed that the following initiatives young people and is very alcohol-orientated. Partnership Gallery as proposed and are considered and promoted: However, there is scope to diversify the evening Leeds CCM is not available. A recent economy offer to attract a wider range of people Cultural survey of the public - Extension of the City Art Gallery and into the city centre. venues wanted the library next Henry Moore Institute opening hours Retailers door open Mon-Wed til 8 on a Thursday or Friday evening (until Leeds is an important regional cultural and not Thurs & Fri and any 10pm) for a period of 6 months, tourism centre and is home to the Royal change of hours would accompanied by extensive advertising Armouries, the West Yorkshire Playhouse, have to be in line with and promotion; Opera North, the Henry Moore Institute, the library due to - Increased promotion at a national and Northern ballet Theatre and the City Art Gallery security issues. This international scale of the broader (3). Between 1997 and 2001, there was a 5% proposal will be looked range of cultural attractions in Leeds, increase in the number of residents visiting art at as part of the building including the West Yorkshire galleries, museums and theatres (4), which development. Playhouse, Opera North and the demonstrates the potential of this sector to Joint promotion of the months, accompanied by extensive make a strong contribution to Leeds‘ evening major Arts organisations advertising and promotion; and night time economy. Sadler‘s Wells Theatre of Leeds is now taking - Increased promotion at a national and in London undertook a targeted advertising place and there is a international scale of the broader campaign on the number 38 bus, which stops supplement of the range of cultural attractions in Leeds, outside the theatre. Leedscard mag out including the West Yorkshire shortly dedicated to Playhouse, Opera North and the There is no art house cinema in Leeds and only them. Northern Ballet Theatre, linked to one multi-screen cinema. However, there is Family events continue other promotions such as clubbing reason to believe there might be latent demand and the showing of breaks, family events, transport; for an art-house cinema, in particular. England matches proved - Market research and inward a family attraction. investment strategy to attract an art- Leeds has a population of 725,000 and a large New for 2004 are Opera house cinema to Leeds; student population. Comparable cities, such as Breaks, Theatre breaks, - Market research to determine latent Manchester, have several cinemas and art- Clubbing. Breaks for the demand for twilight shopping, which house cinemas …Silver‘ generation in could be taken forward as a co- addition to regular ordinated 6-month pilot through The Tourism Strategy (6) states that the late classical music. Concert RACBA; night and Sunday opening for shops should be season, romantic, - Promotion of linkages between retail considered in Leeds. 82% of residents clubbing, shopping, G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs shopping (twilight shopping trails) and interviewed in 2001 stated that they primarily family, golfing and evening entertainment offers e.g. visit Leeds city centre …most often‘ to go football breaks. promotions on pre-theatre meals, city shopping (4). The …Leeds on Sunday …shopping centre events linked to retail, and campaign launched in summer 2001 has so far The LCLA would like to promotions of the restaurants and bar led to an increase in average sales of 23% year become more involved offer within retail stores such as on year by stores trading. (5) This suggests in free street and open Harvey Nichols; there might be potential for introducing …twilight air events by promoting - Continued promotions of year-round shopping‘, which needs to be investigated them in member‘s family event in Millennium Square, further. Consultation has suggested that venues and encouraging building on the success of recent retailers are currently reluctant to pilot twilight complementary fringe events including the temporary ice shopping, without a commitment from the events. rink; majority of retailers. - Support for the Leeds West Indian Carnival and other free street and The recent creation of …Millennium Square‘ by open-air events, which attract a the Millennium Commission and Leeds City diverse mix of people; Council has been very successful and the - An inward investment strategy to square now hosts a range of events including a attract more family based leisure popular temporary ice rink. Ice cube. Other operators and more restaurants to family-friendly open-air events could be Leeds, encouraging a diverse price- promoted in this location to strengthen its image range and international cuisine; and as a destination for families and children. - Attraction of budget hotels and youth hostels to encourage a wide cross- section of people to stay in the city centre. Northern Ballet Theatre, linked Restaurants in Leeds city centre are already a to other promotions such as clubbing significant attraction for residents and workers. breaks, family events, transport; Between 1997 and 2001, there was a 2% - Market research and inward increase in the number of resident visiting investment strategy to attract an art- restaurants (4). However, consultation has house cinema to Leeds; suggested that there is a lack of diversity in - Market research to determine latent price and cuisine. demand for twilight shopping, which could be taken forward as a co- ordinated 6-month pilot through RACBA; - Promotion of linkages between retail shopping (twilight shopping trails) and G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs evening entertainment offers e.g. promotions on pre-theatre meals, city centre events linked to retail, and promotions of the restaurants and bar offer within retail stores such as Harvey Nichols; - Continued promotions of year-round A greater range of short family event in Millennium Square, break packages have building on the success of recent been devised by the events including the temporary ice Tourism Service in 2004 rink; than ever before - Support for the Leeds West Indian capitalising on the Carnival and other free street and cultural attractions of the open-air events, which attract a city. diverse mix of people; Short breaks are - An inward investment strategy to publicised in Visit Leeds, attract more family based leisure the citys main short operators and more restaurants to breaks on-line on the Leeds, encouraging a diverse price- council website aswell range and international cuisine; and as on a great british - Attraction of budget hotels and youth cities website. hostels to encourage a wide cross- With the Arts @ Leeds section of people to stay in the city Group the Tourism centre. Service is investigating the feasibility of launching breaks with the Northern Ballet Theatre. Increase national and international promotion in 2004 short break advertising and direct mail campaigns focus on the themed short breaks. National marketing activity is undertaken in part the Yorkshire G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs Tourist Board (cultural and heritage campaigns) Visit England (cultural cities campaign) and British Cities Marketing Board (BCMB). International marketing targeting overseas visitors includes media relations and a joint marketing iniatitive with England‘s North Country, Bradford City Council and Jet2 (feedback in July indicates traffic from Holland 50:50 inbuond/outbound, 73:27 inbound from Venice - exceeding targets). On this basis, a second campaign is planned for Autumn 2004. Recent media relations - BBSC Holiday 2004, Livewire Magazine, The Lady, Bliss for Brides Anglofile. 40+ Group good old days. Budget Hotel Development. Hotel occupancy study.
6.4 It is recommended that the City Council Consultation has indicated that there is a lack of LCC City pursues the provision of public public conveniences in Leeds city centre and Services conveniences in Leeds City Centre as a complaints have been received from shop G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs key priority. The following short and long- owners regarding street urination. Leeds City term Council is currently investigating both short and solutions should be investigated: long-term solutions to this problem. In - the provision of public toilets within Amsterdam, mobile plastic 'pissoirs' are moved new city centre developments; into selected locations to provide extra public - new on-street provision of public conveniences for males in order to reduce street toilets, concentrated in areas of urination. This has also been piloted significant retail and entertainment successfully in the West End. activity negotiations with entertainment businesses to allow public access to conveniences within venues - an advertising campaign to increase public awareness of the options available; and - the provision of temporary on-street facilities, such as mobile 'pissoirs', funded through sponsorship from evening economy operators and office occupiers.
6.4 b On - street public toilets Leeds City Medium to Council long –tbc 6.4 c Negotiations with entertainment Leeds City Short businesses Council Leeds Nightlife Association
6.4d Public conveniences advertising Leeds City Medium campaign Council –8,000 pa
6.4e Mobile Pissoirs Leeds City Medium Council –tbc Licensees
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs 6.5 It is proposed that the City Council, The impact of noise can be a material Medium develops a noise policy statement in consideration in the determination of planning 6.5a relation to evening economy uses, helping application. PPG24 suggests that area specific to provide a degree of certainty about the noise policies may be useful in some areas in which particular types of circumstances and that £where it is particularly development will be acceptable and those difficult to separate noise-sensitive development in which special measures may be from noisy activities, plans should contain an required in order to mitigate the impact of indication of any general policies which the local noise. planning authority propose to apply to in respect of conditions or planning obligations.£
6.5b In order to inform the preparation of the The use of noise mapping is attracting greater policy statement, it is recommended that emphasis throughout Europe and a report the Council seeks to develop a noise-map summarising the lessons learned from a pilot of the city centre, which would indicate project in Birmingham can be accessed at noisy and quiet street or areas, helping to www.defra.gov.uk/environment/noise/birmingha inform licensing decisions. It should be m/report/. noted that the character of different areas, Proactive approaches to addressing noise as identified in 2.1, would help to provide issues have been found in Copenhagen, Paris an indication of the viability of certain and Berlin. In Copenhagen, the Environmental areas for new entertainment venues. Protection Agency produces a …noise map‘ that The Council could also adopt a proactive documents noise levels on a street-by-street communications strategy in relation to basis. It has also introduced sanctions, noise, which would provide detailed removing the right of a premises to play information on complaints procedures for recorded music, which has been found to be residents, as well as acceptable levels of particularly effective. noise. In Paris, the Ministry of Spatial Planning and the Environment developed a proactive 6.5c The Council should seek to identify communications strategy relating to conflicts Short funding for improvements to sound arising from noise disturbances and launched a –12,000 insulation for appropriate existing grant programme for improvements to windows residential schemes affected by noise of residential properties. from nearby late night entertainment venues. In Berlin, different fines for noise pollution are levied on businesses, depending on the time of day. Licensed venues also have an appointed representative responsible for noise pollution, G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05when the landlord is not present.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com
–12,000
–tbc Policy Recommendation Comments/justification Partners Time Priority Progress/Action area scales/esti Required mated costs 6.5d Suitable sanctions for businesses that do Medium to not adhere to agreed noise levels should long be considered. It is recommended that a combination of fines and the removal of the right to play recorded music is considered and potentially piloted. 6.6 It is recommended that the City Council Consultation with Council officers suggested LCC Medium to low None to date investigates the opportunities for that there is a significant opportunity to enhance long enhanced communication and data information sharing between departments, using –tbc exchange between departments, using IT software. existing or new IT software, in order to improve information sharing between departments, especially between the planning and licensing departments. 6.7 It is recommended that targets for Leeds is experiencing steady growth in the Leeds City Medium to Medium to The Leeds Property convenience retail within the city centre resident population within the city centre and Council / long High Forum are currently be set by the Development Department in existing planning policies and guidance are Developmentt –tbc formulating similar the Council. The Council should encouraging increased residential density in the Department proposals to discuss recognise the importance of convenience city centre. Such continued growth will lead to with officers of the retail provisions within the city centre and an increase in demand for convenience retail Development encourage such development as offer, for which there is an under-provision Department. appropriate. In particular smaller format, within city centre at present. Improving the late opening convenience stores should convenience retail offer within the city centre be encouraged in suitable locations. may lead to linked trips encouraging people to remain within the city centre for longer and take advantage of other city centre provision e.g. providing linkages to evening entertainment offers.
G: \CCM\Team Info\reports\Exec Board\Evening Economy 11.02.05
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: David Feeney Tel: 247 4539
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT MEETING: EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 February 2005 SUBJECT: Local Development Framework ‘ Leeds Local Development Scheme Electoral Wards Affected: Specific Implications For:
All Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 1. Following reforms to the planning system, the City Council is required by the Secretary of State/ODPM, to submit a Local Development Scheme (a three year rolling project plan for the preparation of the Local Development Framework) by 28 March 2005 for approval by ODPM.
2. Rather than being a single …plan‘, the new system allows for a more flexible approach in the production of a …portfolio‘ of Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Documents. A key feature of the new system also is increased emphasis in public involvement and stakeholder engagement in the planning process and for the City Council‘s approach to be set out as part of a Statement of Community Involvement. Integral to the new system also are new technical requirements for the preparation of a Strategic Environmental Assessment/Sustainability Appraisal of planning documents at different stages, together with the preparation of an Annual Monitoring Report ÷ to report on progress against LDS milestones and the performance of specific policies. Within this context the City Council‘s Planning Delivery grant settlement, will in part be based upon performance against these milestones.
3. In seeking to meet this target a Local Development Scheme has been developed to provide continuity between the …old‘ development planning system and the …new‘ and to take forward City Council and Vision for Leeds priorities and objectives for regeneration & sustainable development. Consequently, the Local Development Scheme makes provision to …save‘ existing Adopted UDP policies under the transitional arrangements as well as detailing a series of key Development Plan Documents including a Core Strategy, Action Area Plans and Supplementary Planning Documents for preparation.
4. In reflecting City Council and Vision for Leeds priorities and objectives, following consideration by Development Plan Panel, it is recommended that Executive Board approve the attached LDS for submission to ODPM.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
1.1 Following consideration by the Development Plan Panel of the preparation of a draft Local Development Scheme (LDS) and the recommendations of the Panel meeting on 18 January 2005 to approve the LDS (which is attached to members copies of this agenda and is available upon requested from the clerk named on the front page of this agenda), this report seeks formal Executive Board approval of the LDS, for submission to the Secretary of State. Once approved, following consideration by the Secretary of State, the LDS will form an initial three year work programme for the City Council‘s preparation of it‘s Local Development Framework (LDF), which will be reviewed on an annual basis.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act, received Royal Assent on 13 th May 2004. This sets the framework for the modernisation of planning in the UK as part of a …plan ÷ led‘ system. The Act and other supporting legislation, places expectations on local authorities to plan for sustainable communities. As part of the new system, Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) and Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) will replace the existing system of Unitary Development Plans and Regional Planning Guidance. At a local (Leeds MD wide level), the Local Development Framework provides the spatial planning framework for the use of land within the city and a means to deliver the land use objectives of the Community Strategy (Vision for Leeds).
2.2 The Government (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister - ODPM) requires that key Local Development Framework milestones are achieved by March 2007 (PSA6 Target). A significant feature of the new system also, is that the City Council‘s performance against these targets will be measured (as with all local authorities). Within this context, the future Planning Delivery Grant settlement will include an assessment on progress with the LDF, monitored against the Local Development Scheme milestones via the required Annual Monitoring Report. Consequently, the City Council‘s final settlement in relation to the Planning Delivery Grant will be determined on the basis of both planning application processing performance and LDF progress.
2.3 Within this overall context, a first target (March 2005), is the requirement for local planning authorities to submit a Local Development Scheme (LDS) to the Office of Deputy Prime Minister (Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber), within 6 months of the formal Commencement of Part 2 of the Act (28 September 2004). In meeting this requirement, Executive Board approval is therefore sought to approve the attached LDS to submit to the Government Office.
3. SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME
3.1 The LDF is not a single …plan‘ but the name given to the portfolio of Local Development Documents (which is contained within the Local Development Scheme), local planning authorities need to produce under the new system. This approach is intended to allow greater flexibility for local authorities in responding to changing local circumstances, strengthening community and stakeholder involvement in the planning process and the achievement of environmental, economic and social objectives ÷ at the same time, through the use of Sustainability Appraisals.
3.2 Within the context of City Council corporate and partnership working, the modernisation of the planning system provides Leeds with the opportunity to build on it ‘s excellent reputation as an aspiring City Region and Core City, to provide a planning policy framework for the District which is up to date and appropriate to a major city and regional capital. Consequently, to ensure a smooth transition from the …old‘ planning system to PDF created thewith …new FinePrint‘ arrangements, pdfFactor yit trialis critical version that http://www.fineprint.com the Development Planning context is maintained, as a basis to contribute to the City‘s priorities for development, the environment and regeneration aspirations.
3.3 As part of this approach, the Local Development Scheme makes provision under the LDF transitional arrangements to ”save£ existing UDP policies for an initial three year period following their adoption and also beyond this initial three year period where appropriate. This approach therefore seeks to maintain a planning policy context as new policies are proposals and gradually introduced.
3.4 In terms of taking the Local Development Scheme forward, the following …drivers for change … have also been recognised. These include:
· Regional Planning Guidance and its replacement the Regional Spatial Strategy (First Draft anticipated April 2005) · The Core Cities and wider Regional Agenda (including Investment Planning) · The Vision for Leeds and in particular the ability to facilitate the delivery of the spatial implications of 'going up a league' 'closing the gap‘ and the …development of Leeds as the regional capital‘ · The Council and Corporate Plan · Area Management · Urban Renaissance and Regeneration · The Local Transport Plan Review · Leeds Economic Strategy · Environment Policy · Leeds Housing Strategy.
Resourcing
3.5 In responding proactively to Corporate Plan and Vision for Leeds objectives, the LDS sets out an ambitious programme for the preparation and monitoring of a series of Local Development Documents (see the summary Gantt Chart in Section 5 of the LDS). In taking this work forward the Development Department has been working closely with the Government Office, City Council Departments, the Leeds Initiative and other partners. Continued close Corporate and partnership working will therefore be essential in resourcing and delivering the work programme. The delivery of the LDS programme, the achievement of aspirations for increased community involvement and in undertaking new technical requirements (Strategic Environmental Assessment/Sustainability Appraisal, Data capture for the Annual Monitoring Report), does however have budget implications.
3.6 For example, the production/publishing costs for the preparation of the Local Development Documents in the attached LDS, is likely to be in the region of –635,000. In addition, increased community involvement, whilst a very positive step to which the City Council is committed, will also have resource implications in terms of hiring venues and in the preparation of consultation/exhibition material. A feature of the new system also, will be a greater frequency of Public Examination through the production the Statement of Community Involvement and Development Plan Documents. This means that resources will need to be made available to provide a venue and to cover the costs of a programme officer and Planning Inspector. Consequently, the budget implications of the LDF and will need to be met, if the LDS milestones are to be realistically achieved.
4. CONCLUSION
4.1 This LDS provides consolidation and development of a local development framework work programme. Subject to Members‘ comments, the final version will need to be PDF created submittedwith FinePrint to the pd SecretarfFactoryy trial of State. version T hehttp://www.fineprint.com Secretary of State may direct the Council to make such amendments to the scheme as he thinks appropriate and if such a direction is received the Council must comply with this.
4.2 The regulations specify a period of 4 weeks from the date on which the scheme is submitted to the Secretary of State during which any of the following may happen:
· the Council receives from the Secretary of State notice that he does not intend to give a direction, · the Council has received a direction and has either complied with it or received notice that it has been withdrawn, · the Council has received notice that the Secretary of State requires more time to consider the scheme and either has subsequently received notice that the Secretary of State does not intend to give a direction or a direction has been complied with or withdrawn, · the four week period has ended and the Council has not received either: (a) notice that the Secretary of State does not intend to give a direction (b) a direction (c) notice that the Secretary of State requires more time to consider the sche me.
4.3 If one of the above takes place then the Council as local planning authority can bring the Local Development Scheme into effect by formal resolution of the Executive Board and must specify in that resolution the date on which the scheme shall have effect.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 The Executive Board is recommended to:
i) approve the Local Development Scheme as attached at Appendix 1 for submission to the Secretary of State pursuant to Section 15 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. ii) resolve that, the scheme shall be brought into effect as from 1 April 2005, subject to one of the requirements set out below having been met. Namely that either · during a period of 4 weeks starting on the day the Council submits the scheme to the Secretary of State the Council receives from the Secretary of State notice that he does not intend to give a direction, or · the Council has received a direction and has either complied with it or received notice that it has been withdrawn, or · the Council has received notice that the Secretary of State requires more time to consider the scheme and either has subsequently received notice that the Secretary of State does not intend to give a direction or a direction has been complied with or withdrawn, or · the 4 week period has ended and the Council has not received either: (a) notice that the Secretary of State does not intend to give a direction (b) a direction (c) notice that the Secretary of State requires more time to consider the scheme.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 1
LEEDS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME
1. Introduction
1.1 The Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act, received Royal Assent on 13 th May 2004. This sets the framework for the modernisation of planning in the UK, as part of a ”Plan led£ system. The Act and other supporting legislation, places expectations, on local authorities to plan for sustainable communities. As part of the new system, Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) and Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) will replace the existing system of Unitary Development Plans and Regional Planning Guidance. At a local (Leeds MD) level, the Local Development Framework provides the spatial planning framework for the use of land within the city and a key mechanism to deliver the spatial objectives of the Community Strategy (Vision for Leeds).
1.2 The Government (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister ÷ ODPM) requires that Local Development Framework milestones are achieved by March 2007. As part of this and as a first target under the new system, it is necessary for local authorities to submit a Local Development Scheme (LDS) to the ODPM (Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber). In meeting this requirement, this document is the Local Development Scheme of Leeds City Council.
Components of the new Local Development Framework
1.3 The Local Development Framework is not a single …plan‘ but the name given to a portfolio of Local Development Documents, local planning authorities need to produce under the new system (for ease of reference, a Glossary of Terms for the new documents required under the new system has been included in Appendix 1 of this Local Development Scheme). This approach is intended to allow greater flexibility for local authorities in responding to changing circumstances, strengthening community and stakeholder involvement in the planning process and the achievement of economic, environmental and social objectives ÷ at the same time, through the use of Sustainability Appraisals.
1.4 The components of the Local Development Framework, Local Development Document portfolio can be summarised as follows:
Local Development Documents are generally of two types, Development Plan Documents (DPDs) ÷ that will need to be subject to independent testing i.e. Examination in Public by an Inspector (and have the weight of Development Plan status defined by clause 38 of the Act) and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs), which are not subject to independent testing and do not have Development Plan status (they should however be subject to rigorous community involvement procedures).
Development Plan Documents include:
i) A Core Strategy (CS): to set out the vision, spatial strategy and core policies for the spatial development of the local planning authority area, ii) Site Specific Allocations of land, iii) Area Action Plans (AAPs): where needed in key area of change, and, iv) A Proposals Map: with inset maps as necessary. These Development Plan Documents form the statutory Development Plan, together with the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1.5 In addition, other important documents to be included in the Local Development Framework portfolio include: · A Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), to be prepared specifying how a local authority intends to involve stakeholders and communities in the process of producing LDDs (the SCI will also be subject to independent testing), · A Local Development Scheme (LDS), setting out details of each of the LDDs to be produced, the timescale and arrangements for production.
1.6 Other important features of the new system include: · New arrangements for the independent testing and examination of DPDs, · All policies and Proposals in DPDs will be subject to Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), to ensure they reflect sustainable development principles and environmental legislation, and, · Local authorities will also need to produce Annual Monitoring Reports, setting out progress in terms of producing LDDs and in implementing policies. The first Annual Monitoring Report to be required under the new system is due December 2005, covering the reporting period 1 April ÷ 2004 ÷ 31 March 2005.
Local Development Scheme ‘ Scope and Purpose
1.7 The Local Development Scheme (LDS) sets out how Leeds City Council intends to produce its Local Development Framework (LDF). The Local Development Scheme serves two key roles:
i) Under the new planning system, it provides a starting point for the local community to find out what Leeds City Council‘s planning policies are for the District, and sets out the current documents which form the Development Plan for Leeds Metropolitan District,
ii) It sets out a detailed programme for the preparation of Local Development Documents over a three year period, including timetables, which will tell people when the various stages in the preparation of the Local Development Documents will be carried out.
1.8 This is the first Local Development Scheme to be prepared by Leeds City Council. It will be kept under review and amended when appropriate. A key area, which will need to be kept under review and incorporated as part of the preparation of the Local Development Framework, will be the outcome of the Unitary Development Plan Public Local Inquiry. Following the close of the Inquiry in February 2005, the Inspectors Report is anticipated in October/November 2005. Upon receipt, the City Council will need to consider the need for further Modifications prior to adoption. The work programme implications arising from this will need to be covered in the first review of the Local Development Scheme.
1.9 The Local Development Scheme is set out as follows:
2. Overview & Supporting Statement · A brief statement setting out how the LDF will be structured, how the evidence base will be managed, how monitoring and review will be undertaken.
3. Schedule of Proposed Local Development Documents · A table showing each Local Development Document to be produced, its role and position in the chain of conformity.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4. Transitional Arrangements · Details of policies carried forward under the Local Development Framework Transitional Arrangements.
5. Overall Programme · The overall programme for the preparation of Local Development Documents, in the form of a Gantt chart setting out timetables and key milestones for the production of each document.
6. Profiles of each Local Development Document · A brief profile of each Local Development Document setting out its role, geographical coverage, status, timetables for production, broad indication of resource requirements and approach to involving stakeholders.
2. Overview & Supporting Statement
2.1 The preparation of the Local Development Scheme and Local Development Framework, provides major opportunities for Leeds MD. An important focus of this work will be the need to deliver positive outcomes and to facilitate wide public and community engagement as part of the planning system. Central to this approach is the need to take forward the spatial implications of the Community Strategy (Vision for Leeds) for …going up a league‘ and …closing the gap‘. These strategic objectives in turn are focussed upon realising the potential of Leeds as a competitive regional capital at of European and international significance, whilst maintaining, enhancing and developing sustainable communities across the District. As a consequence of these objectives and within the context of the emerging regional and ”Core Cities£ agenda, key priorities for the Local Development Framework are for the enhancement and development of the City Centre as the hub of a thriving City Region, the sustainable regeneration of significant areas of the City (the Aire Valley, East and South East Leeds and West Leeds - to achieve economic, environmental and social benefits for communities), together with the development of a series of Supplementary Planning Documents to amplify policy and implementation in key areas. This is an ambitious and demanding programme but one that is considered essential to take the City, its communities and many partners forward in securing longer term benefits.
2.2 The Local Development Framework for Leeds, will comprise of the Local Development Documents identified in the schedule included in Section 3. of this Local Development Scheme and in the individual profiles of Local Development Documents included in Section 6. These documents will be prepared as part of a phased programme, which will be subject to regular monitoring and review, as well as a formal annual review as part of the Local Development Scheme. A key aspect of the new planning system is the need to be flexible and responsive to changing circumstances as well as being proactive as part of a plan ÷ led system. As a consequence, it is possible that there may be injections and revisions to the schedule of Local Development Documents, before the formal review of the LDS in December 2005. For example the preparation of Village Design Statements and Town Centre Strategies is largely dependent upon the capacity of communities and partners (with the support of the City Council) to undertake such work. It is possible therefore that the need for Supplementary Planning Documents to cover such areas of work may therefore arise during the course of the year. Such changes will therefore need to be considered within the context of the overall LDF programme and in discussion with stakeholders.
2.3 In taking this work forward as part of the overall Development Plan for the District, it is recognised that there will be a need for a combination of …saved policies‘ (for three years ÷ under the transitional arrangements), policies to be saved for more than three years PDF created (wwithhere FinePrint these are pd fnotFactor subjecty trial to v ersioninitial re http://www.fineprint.comview as part of the first Local Development Scheme) and the need to develop and implement …new‘ planning policies, in response to emerging or possibly unforeseen planning issues.
2.4 Owing to the timing of the Leeds UDP Review Public Inquiry and the likely receipt of the Inspectors Report (October/November 2005) a number of Local Development Documents will need to be finalised following the receipt of the Report. A good example of this is the Core Strategy where strategic policies for housing as part of the UDP Review will have a bearing upon the overall spatial distribution of development. Linked to the UDP Review also are implications concerning the need to prepare Supplementary Planning Documents relating to specific housing proposals. The need and timing of the preparation of such SPDs will therefore need to be reviewed in the context of the UDP Inspectors Report Recommendations and any subsequent Modifications.
Statement of Community Involvement
2.5 The Statement of Community Involvement will be prepared at the start of the Local Development Framework process, once a methodology and approach has been satisfactorily developed, agreed and adopted. In the absence of an …adopted‘ SCI framework, individual Local Development Documents will be advanced through extensive public consultation and engagement and in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Local Development Framework regulations. Once completed, the Statement of Community Involvement will set out and identify the processes by which the community will be engaged in consultation on each type of document and at every stage of it ‘s preparation. The SCI will also identify how the community will engage in the consideration of major development control decisions.
2.6 In providing a framework to review previous and current consultation activity in Leeds and the requirements for consultation and public engagement as part of the LDF, the City Council appointed consultants to prepare a draft Statement of Community Involvement (completed February 2005). This will be used as a basis to develop an SCI through the formal stages of preparation, as an early priority as part of the LDF.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) & Sustainability Appraisal (SA)
2.7 All Local Development Documents (Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Documents) will be subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessment/Sustainability Appraisal, in accordance with the LDF regulations and the European Directive 2001/42/EC. These are tools to ensure that LDF strategies and policies take into account environmental, economic and social issues as part of an integrated approach. For greater efficiency and effectiveness, the City Council intends to combine assessment and appraisal as part of one approach. In developing this work external consultants were appointed to develop a methodology to be developed and used as part of the LDF process.
Core Strategy 2.8 The Core Strategy will be the principal document in the Local Development Framework and will contain the City Council‘s vision and spatial strategy for the District. The Core Strategy will be informed by the Adopted UDP, UDP Review, Vision for Leeds (Community Strategy) and the emerging Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber. The Core Strategy will need to identify the development needs for the District and their spatial distribution. In the preparation of the Core Strategy a ”Key Diagram£ will be used to illustrate the strategy.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Area Action Plans 2.9 A key priority for Leeds and an integral part of the UDP Review and Vision for Leeds, is the need to secure the continued renaissance and regeneration of the City and it ‘s communities. Consequently, a key priority of the Local Development Framework, are a series of Area Action Plans for specific geographical areas of Leeds. The focus of such Plans will be to promote the continued and sustainable renaissance and development of the City Centre, as the hub of the City region and the regeneration of major inner city and suburban areas of the City to promote the development of sustainable communities within these areas. These are comprehensive and ambitious programmes of work, which will entail the need to work closely with a wide range of stakeholders and communities. Supplementary Planning Documents 2.10 The preparation of the Local Development Framework for Leeds includes a range of Supplementary Planning Documents, covering a range of interrelated areas, which are intended to amplify strategic, thematic, and area based planning objectives for the District. The range of issues to be covered by Supplementary Planning Documents, reflect the breadth of spatial planning issues and challenges evident in the City. These include the redevelopment of Eastgate (Harewood Quarter) within the City Centre, an Advertising Design Guide, a detailed Householder Design Guide, Highways Design Guide and Residential Guide for Community Safety to cover detailed development control issues. Whilst the LDS identifies a schedule of proposed SPDs, it is recognised that the preparation of SPDs is a dynamic process. For example, there are a number of Village Design Statements, (led by communities); together with a range of other planning documents anticipated e.g. detailed design guidance and …Master Plans, which are at different stages of preparation. Depending on progress, resources, particular circumstances, and timescales, it is likely that these in turn, will need to be injected into the SPD/LDS programme as they are developed and the LDS updated accordingly.
Monitoring 2.11 The preparation of Local Development Frameworks is a continuous process, with monitoring and review key and integral aspects. As part of this process an Annual Monitoring Report will inform the Local Development Scheme each year. As part of this, both existing and where appropriate new, monitoring systems will be developed to ensure that not only the delivery of the Local Development Framework is monitored but also to ensure that the evidence upon which the Local Development Framework is based is still relevant and up to date and prepared within the context of relevant indicators. Such evidence will need to include housing land and employment information. 2.12 An Annual Monitoring Report will be prepared each year, (to be submitted to the Government Office), covering the period 1 April ÷ 31 March. The first Annual Monitoring report under the LDF will be produced in December 2005. This will cover the period 1 April 2004 ÷ 31 March 2005. Dependent on the stages reached in the process, the Annual Monitoring Report will report on the following areas: · Set out how the City Council is performing against timescales and milestones set out in the Local Development Scheme, · Provide information on the extent to which policies within Local Development Plan Documents are being achieved, · Advise on the need to revise and update the Local Development Scheme. Evidence Base 2.13 Linked to monitoring and the preparation of Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Documents, an important aspect of the Local Development Framework is that individual policies and proposals are soundly based. As part of a wide range of projects, PDF created programmeswith FinePrint and pd finitiatiFactorvyes trial promoted version bhttp://www.fineprint.comy the City Council and it‘s many partners a wide range of technical information is available concerning environmental, economic and social issues in Leeds. The preparation of the Local Development Framework will therefore draw upon this material where appropriate and supplement this with additional survey material and technical studies where necessary and where resources permit. 2.14 In the preparation of the Adopted UDP, UDP Review and related strategies, a number of surveys, technical studies and monitoring activities have been undertaken. These include regular housing and employment land monitoring, a comprehensive Urban Capacity Study (June 2003) and an annual City Centre audit. In the preparation of the Local Development Framework, this material will be used and reviewed as necessary and supplemented by further surveys and technical studies where required in support of the production of specific Development Plan Documents. 2.15 In anticipating the evidence base requirements of the Local Development Framework, a report identifying the spatial implications of the Community Strategy (Vision for Leeds) has been undertaken (July 2003), together with baseline information and indicators as part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment/Sustainability Appraisal methodology (February 2005). This work in turn will be therefore used to inform the preparation of Local Development Documents. Preparation Arrangements and Resources 2.16 In reflecting the objectives of the Community Strategy (Vision for Leeds) and City Council corporate priorities, resources will be drawn from across the City Council to prepare the Local Development Framework. Close working with a range of stakeholders and partners (including the Leeds Initiative) will also be an important feature of the preparation of the Local Development Framework. Subject to the availability of resources, the nature of technical work to be undertaken and the requirements of specific timetables, it is also likely that external consultancy support will be used to deliver key tasks and projects. 2.17 The preparation of the Local Development Framework will be led by the City Council‘s Development Department, primarily through the Planning and Economic Policy Service but with support from across the Department including the Strategy and Policy and Economic Services Divisions. Given the nature of the issues to be address through the Local Development Framework however, this will require on going and close working with a range of City Council Departments including Neighbourhoods and Housing, City Services and Learning and Leisure. 2.18 In providing technical support and a co-ordinating role within the City Council, an Officer Working Group has been established (reporting to the Economic Competitiveness and Transport Board) to oversee work in relation to the Local Development Framework. A key focus for the preparation of the Local Development Framework also, will be through a members ”Development Plan Panel£, with responsibilities for making recommendations to the City Council‘s Executive Board and Full Council (consistent with delegation arrangements and …Executive‘ and …Council‘ functions). Risk Assessment 2.19 The preparation of the Local Development Framework allows for a flexible approach to the preparation of a range of planning documents. The Schedule of Local Development Documents identified in Section 3 of this Local Development Scheme, covers a range of work, which in part reflects the complex spatial planning issues in Leeds. In managing this programme of work, an analysis of risks has been undertaken, together with the measures to managing them. This is set out in the following table:
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com RISK IMPACT MITIGATING ACTION Secretary of State directs LDS · Slippage to LDS · Close liaison with Government amendments. Office on emerging LDS New national and Regional policies · Unforeseen additional work · Monitoring of changes to and guidance (Planning Policy injections into LDS work national policy. Statements & Regional Spatial programme causing slippage. · Active participation in regional Strategy). planning agenda to respond to changes early. · Re-evaluate priorities. Implications of UDP Review · Slippage to LDS programme · Monitoring of changes to Inspectors Report. due to unforeseen additional national policy. work. Volume of work (managing · Programme slippage. · Monitoring of progress against potentially competing timescales and programme objectives and re- tasks, higher levels of prioritise as necessary. representations than anticipated) ÷ · Realistic & flexible timetables. LDF programme too ambitious. · Use of additional resources through and corporate partnership working. Inadequate financial resources to · Unable to progress work. · Regular monitoring of budgets undertake specific areas of work. · Potential impact on quality & and costings. …soundness‘ of planning · Secure additional financial documents. resources via Planning Delivery Grant. Lack of in house skills to undertake · Programme slippage. · Develop skills and competencies new areas of technical work. · Potential impact on quality & through training initiatives. …soundness‘ of planning · Close working with partners who documents. have the necessary skills. · Use of external consultants ÷ subject to resources. Staff turnover · Potential programme slippage. · Monitoring of progress against programme objectives and re- prioritise as necessary. Recruit to vacant posts. Planning Inspectorate unable to · Delay to examination/reporting. · Close liaison with Government meet the timescale for examination · Key programme milestones not Office & Planning Inspectorate and report. met. to highlight any early warning of potential issues/problems. Failure of planning documents to · Unable to adopt document. · Ensure documents are sound meet tests of soundness. and meet technical and consultation requirements Legal Challenge · LDD quashed. · Ensure LDF is compliant with · Impact on work programme Planning Act, Regulations and through additional work. guidance.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3. Schedule of Proposed Local Development Documents
Document Status Brief Description Chain of Stakeholder & Consultation Consultation Date for Conformity Community on Issues & on Preferred Submission Engagement Options Options & to Secretary (To be Proposals of undertaken State/Propo consistent with sed SPD LDF Adoption by Regulations, emerging SCI & LCC. SCI once adopted).
1. Core Strategy Development To set out vision, Regional · June ÷ · Jan ÷ · Oct/Nov. Plan Document objectives and Spatial See Project Nov. 2005. March 2006. district spatial Strategy. Proforma. 2006. development strategy (and will incorporate a Key Diagram). 2. Area Action Plans Development To address spatial With Core See Project City Centre City Centre City Centre Plan planning and Strategy, Proforma 1. City Centre Documents regeneration issues saved policies · April ÷ · Sept. ÷ · Aug. 2. Aire Valley and opportunities in (Adopted UDP Sept. 2005. Oct. 2005. 2006. 3. EASEL (East & a co-ordinated way. & UDP Review South East Leeds ÷ once See Project Aire Valley Aire Valley Aire Valley Regeneration): adopted) and Proforma - Harehills Regional · Aug ÷ Dec · Jan. ÷ · Oct. - Richmond Hill Spatial 2005. March 2006. - Gipton Strategy. 2006. - Osmondthorpe See Project EASEL EASEL EASEL - Seacroft Proforma - Halton Moor. · Jan ÷ Sept. · Sept. ÷ · May 4. West Leeds 2005. Nov. 2005 2006. Gateway See Project West Leeds West Leeds Regeneration Proforma West Leeds Area. · Sept. ÷ · Oct. ÷ · July Oct. 2005. Dec. 2006 2006.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3. Statement of Non Framework & With See Project · March ÷ · Oct. - Nov · Sept. Community Development Requirements for regulations Proforma April 2005. 2005 2005. Involvement Plan Document Community Engagement on Local Development Documents and major planning applications 4. Minerals & Waste Development To set out specific Regional See Project · Nov. 2007 · Feb. ÷ · Nov. Plan policies, with the Spatial Proforma ÷ Jan April 2008. Documents context of national Strategy. 2008. 2008. & regional guidance. 5. Eastgate Supplementary To co-ordinate the With Adopted See Project · Jan. 2005 · Feb ÷ · April ÷ Redevelopment Planning redevelopment and UDP. Proforma March May 2005 Document regeneration of a 2005 key Leeds City Centre site. 6. Waterfront ‘ Supplementary To provide specific With Core See Project · 2003. · March · June/July Biodiversity Planning guidance on Strategy, Proforma 2005. 2005. Guidance Document biodiversity issues saved policies in relation to (Adopted UDP Waterfront areas. & UDP Review ÷ once adopted) and Regional Spatial Strategy. 7. City Centre Public Supplementary To provide specific Adopted UDP See Project · March ÷ · June ÷ · Nov. Realm Contributions Planning guidance on public and Core Proforma April 2005. July 2005 2005. Document realm contributions Strategy. arising from development proposals 8. Sustainability Supplementary To provide specific With Core See Project tbc tbc tbc Assessments Planning guidance on Strategy, Proforma Document completing saved policies Sustainability (Adopted UDP Assessments in & UDP Review support of ÷ once Development adopted) and proposals. Regional
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Spatial Strategy.
9. Sustainable Design Supplementary To provide specific Core Strategy See Project tbc tbc tbc & Construction Planning guidance in relation and saved Proforma Document. to sustainable policies design and (Adopted UDP construction and UDP techniques and Review ÷ once methods in relation adopted). to development proposals. 10. Public Transport Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · April ÷ · April ÷ · Oct. Improvements ‘ Planning guidance to and saved Proforma June 2006. June 2006. Developer Document developers on policies 2006. Contributions public transport (Adopted UDP contributions and UDP arising from Review ÷ once development adopted). proposals. 11. Designing for Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · Sept. 2005. · Sept. · Nov. Community Safety ‘ Planning guidance to and saved Proforma 2005. 2006. A Residential Guide Document developers on the policies Community Safety (Adopted UDP requirements and UDP associated with Review once development adopted). proposals. 12. Householder Design Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · Sept. 2005. · Sept. · Jan. Guide Planning guidance to and saved Proforma 2005. 2006. Document householders and policies developers on the (Adopted UDP design and UDP requirements for Review ÷ once domestic adopted). extensions.
13. Highways Design Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · May ÷ July · May ÷ July · Dec. Guide Planning guidance to and saved Proforma 2005. 2005. 2005. Document developers on policies detailed aspects of (Adopted UDP
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com highways design & UDP Review ÷ once adopted). 14. Tall Buildings Policy Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · Jan. 2005. · March ÷ · Sept. Planning guidance to and saved Proforma May 2005. 2005. Document developers on the policies design and (Adopted UDP integration of high & UDP Review buildings. ÷ once adopted). 15. Advertising Design Supplementary To set out design Core Strategy See Project · Jan 2005. · Feb. · May Guide Planning requirements and and saved Proforma 2005. 2005. Document standards for policies Advertising material (Adopted UDP on land and & UDP Review premises. ÷ once adopted). 16. Trees and Supplementary To provide Core Strategy See Project · June ÷ July · June ÷ · Jan. development Planning guidance to and saved Proforma 2005. July 2005. 2006. Document developers to policies encourage more (Adopted UDP appropriate tree & UDP Review planting across the ÷ once district. adopted).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4. Transitional Arrangements 4.1 In anticipating the need to prepare Local Development Frameworks and within the context of changes to national planning policy, the City Council embarked upon an early and selective review of the Adopted UDP (2001). In managing the period of transition between the …old‘ planning system and the …new‘, the City Council will look to the incorporation of …saved policies for 3 years or more (policies that the Council are seeking to save for more than 3 years are included in Appendix 2), together with the development of new policies, as part of the Core Strategy and related Local Development Documents. 4.2 These LDDs are in the LDS Programme (March 2005) to replace UDP policy on the following timetable:
1. Statement of Community Involvement ÷ will replace section 4.8 of Chapter 4 of the UDP in April 2006.
2. Core Strategy ÷ will replace Chapter 3 and relevant repeats of Strategic Aims, Strategic Goals & Strategic Policies in Chapters 5 ÷ 13 of the UDP in December 2007.
3. City Centre Area Action Plan ÷ will replace Chapter 13 of the UDP in July 2007.
4. Aire Valley Area Action Plan ÷ will replace sections of Chapter 15 ”East Leeds£ of the UDP concerning Aire Valley.
5. East & South East Leeds (EASEL) Area Action Plan ÷ will replace sections of Chapter 15 ”East Leeds£ of the UDP concerning Gipton, Harehills and Seacroft renewal & regeneration and provide new guidance covering Osmondthorpe, Richmond Hill and Halton Moor.
6. West Leeds Area Action Plan ÷ may replace elements (to be confirmed) of Ch 23 ”West Leeds£.
7. Proposals Map to be updated to reflect the above changes, at the same time as each DPD is adopted so as to illustrate geographically the application of the DPD policies.
4.3 The City Council will request the Government Office to allow the parts of the Adopted UDP not replaced by LDDs by 29th September 2007 to be saved until they are replaced by further LDDs. Over the next year, the City Council will draw up proposals for further LDDs, which will be inserted, into the LDS Programme from December2005/January 2006. These will include the following: 8. Thematic Policies 9. Locational Policies 10. Generic Development Control Policies 11. Site Specific Allocations
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com A full listing of adopted UDP and proposed (Review) policies for ”saving£, under the transitional arrangements is, set out in Appendix 2. Further work during the course of 2005/6 will identify priorities for replacing the thematic chapters of the UDP having regard to policy drivers such as new Planning Policy Statements, the emerging regional strategy and local community strategy objectives.
4.4 In order to maintain spatial planning and policy continuity and priorities identified via extensive community engagement activity, the City Council wishes to retain a series of Supplementary Guidance (until these are superseded by the Core Strategy and future Supplementary Planning Documents). The list of Supplementary Planning Guidance to be retained is included within Appendix 3 of the Local Development Scheme. In addition, the City Council has also produced a series of planning documents on a range of topics, which it is felt add value to customers and stakeholders in the City. Whilst it is recognised that these have no formal status under the Local Development Framework, these are listed for information and to indicate that this material is still available.
5. Overall Programme
5.1 The following Gantt chart sets out an initial three year programme for the preparation of the Local Development Framework, in providing a summary schedule of Local Development Documents. In recognising the transition between the UDP and the LDF, the Gantt chart also includes the Adopted UDP and UDP Review process and the timing of saved policies. For reference the Gantt chart also includes details of the preparation of the Regional Spatial Strategy. This work is being undertaken by the Yorkshire & Humber Assembly and does not formally form part of this Local Development Scheme. The preparation of the RSS of the will however have policy implications for the Leeds LDF, it is therefore useful to show the RSS timetable, as a basis to anticipate and seek to programme in any revisions to the LDS.
(Gantt Chart detailing LDDs to be inserted).
6. Profiles of each Local Development Document
6.1 The following series of profiles detail the overall content and scope of Development Plan Documents, the Statement of Community Involvement, Supplementary Planning Documents and the Annual Monitoring Report.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document Core Strategy details · Role and content: Set out spatial vision and core principles for future development of Leeds; provide a key diagram depicting areas of change and constraints. · Chain of conformity: emerging Regional Spatial Strategy and spatial priorities identified as part of the Vision for Leeds (Community Strategy). · Geographical coverage: Covers all of Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering and wider Scoping - 24 weeks to Development Plan Panel early June 2005. · Production: · Pre-Submission Consultation ÷ preparation of issues and alternative options - 22 weeks to Nov 2005. · Pre-Submission Public Involvement ÷ public participation on preferred options - 10 weeks from early Jan 2006 to March 2006. · Preparation of Submission Documents - 24 weeks to Oct 2006. · Submission of DPD to SoS Oct/Nov 2006. · Examination: · Pre-examination consideration of representations, Spring 2007. · Pre-examination Meeting (February 2007). · Examination period (May 2007). · Receipt of Inspector‘s binding report - Nov 2007. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of Core Strategy - Jan 2008. · Monitoring, as part of the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements, including the City Centre Audit. By general indicators of i) economic competitiveness (GDV), ii) socio/economic polarity, iii) attractiveness of the environment Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: Preparation for Production lead by Planning Policy Team ÷ Development Department, with input from wide variety of Council services. · Resources: Staff time, Access Database, Meeting rooms/halls, presentation facilities, Website space, document printing, Advertising budget. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements - will include i) placing written material for comment ii) placing material on Website, iii) meetings with stakeholders, iv) conferences/events, v) use of newspapers, vi) use of local radio/TV.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2. (i). DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document Area Action Plan ‘ City Centre details · Role and content: To provide a co-ordinated approach to the spatial planning and if appropriate, expansion of the City Centre, ensuring that the City Centre continues to deliver economic, environmental and social objectives at the heart of the City Region. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP saved policies, spatial priorities identified as part of the Vision for Leeds, the emerging LDF Core Strategy and the Regional Spatial Strategy. · Geographical coverage: City Centre. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Initial data and evidence collection (December 2004 ÷ February 2005). · Key questions & Issues Report to Development Plan Panel (March 2005). · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation with stakeholders (April - June 2005). · Initial preparations, indicative options & City Council approval of consultation documents/sustainability appraisal (July - September 2005). · City Council approval of consultation documents and formal public consultation on issues and preferred options (Sept. ÷ Oct. 2005). · Consider representations and discussions with community and stakeholders in preparation of submission DPD (Feb. - July 2006). · Submission of DPD to SoS (Aug. 2006). · Examination: · Public Consultation period on submission DPD and on any site allocation representations (Sept. - October 2006). · Pre-examination consideration of representations (November ÷ December 2006). · Pre-examination Meeting (December 2006). · Examination period ÷ including target date for examinations March - April 2007). · Estimated receipt of Inspectors binding report (June 2007). · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of DPD and revised proposals Map (Sept. 2007). · Appropriate mechanisms to be established to monitor on an annual basis. This will include the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements such as the City Centre Audit. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: for Production · Preparation and production led by Policy Team ÷ Development Department with involvement and input from across the Development Department and key City Council Departments. · Resources: staff time, access to and acquisition of data, development of Access databases and project management software to manage the process, advertising and communications and communications budget. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2. (ii). DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document Area Action Plan Aire Valley details · Role and Content: To provide a co-ordinated approach to the sustainable regeneration of the Aire Valley Regeneration Area, including its spatial planning within the context of the city-region, compatible with the significance of the area in terms of its potential to contribute to the growth and success of the regional economy; to establish a framework for the implementation of the Strategic Vision; to ensure that the importance of the regeneration of the Aire Valley to the communities of East and South East Leeds is fully recognised in securing connectivity and linkages and to contribute to the regeneration/renaissance objectives of the City Council and the Local Strategic Partnership. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP saved policies, the spatial priorities identified as part of the Vision for Leeds, the emerging LDF Core Strategy, the Regional Spatial Strategy and the Regional Economic Strategy. · Geographic Coverage: 1000 ha of land immediately SE of the City Centre, extending from the Royal Armouries and Clarence Dock eastwards towards the M1 (junctions 44 and 45), including the cross Green Industrial Estate, Hunslet and Stourton. Timetable · Production milestones: · Pre-production: · Data collection and evidence preparation, pre-submission consultation with stakeholders and community groups 2003 ÷ June 2005). Preparation of issues report to Development Plans Panel July 2005. · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation with stakeholders. Preparation of initial options and City Council approval of consultation documents/sustainability appraisal Aug./Dec 2005. · Formal public consultation on major issues and preparation of preferred options Jan./March 2006. · Consider representations and discussion with community and stakeholders in preparation of submission DPD April/Aug. 2006). · Submission of DPD to Secretary of State: October 2006. · Examination: · Public consultation period on DPD submission and on any site allocation representations: October ÷ December 2006). · Pre-examination consideration of representations Jan. - Feb. 2007). · Pre-examination Meeting (March 2007). · Examination period, including target date for Public Examination June - July 2007. · Estimated receipt of Inspectors Report October 2007. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of Proposals Map January 2008. · Appropriate mechanisms to be established to monitor on an annual basis. This will include the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements with Departments and stakeholders as appropriate. Arrangements · Preparation and Production: Planning & Economic Policy (Development for Production Department), in conjunction with Department of Neighbourhoods and Housing. · Resources: staff time, access to and acquisition of data, development of Access databases and project management software, advertising, public consultation, advertising, communications and graphics production budget required. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2. (iii). DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document Area Action Plan ‘ East and South East Leeds (EASEL)* details · Role and Content: To provide a co-ordinated approach to the spatial planning of neighbourhoods within East and South East Leeds Regeneration Area; to help provide a framework for the achievement of sustainable communities in this part of the city and to assist with the delivery of the regeneration/renaissance objectives of the City Council, the Local Strategic Partnership, Leeds East Homes and Leeds South East Homes. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP saved policies, the emerging LDF Core Strategy, spatial priorities identified as part of the Vision for Leeds, the Regional Spatial Strategy. · Geographic Coverage: The neighbourhoods and communities of Harehills, Burmantofts, Gipton, Seacroft, Halton Moor, Osmondthorpe and Richmond Hill. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Data and evidence collection. · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation with stakeholders. Consultation with stakeholders, consultation with community groups and preparation of initial options: January ÷ September 2005. · Preparation of initial options and City Council approval of consultation documents/sustainability appraisal May / June 2005. · Formal public participation on issues and preparation of preferred options: (September ÷ November 2005). · Consider representations and discussions with community and stakeholders in preparation of submission of DPD: December 2005 ÷ April 2006. · Submission of DPD to Secretary of State: May 2006. · Examination: · Public consultation period on DPD submission and on any site allocation representations: May ÷ July 2006. · Pre-examination consideration of representations: Aug. ÷ Oct. 2006. · Pre-examination Meeting (November 2006). · Examination period, including target date for examinations: February 2007. · Estimated receipt of Inspectors Report: April 2007. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of Proposals Map: July 2007. · Appropriate mechanisms to be established to monitor on an annual basis. This will include the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements with Departments and stakeholders as appropriate. Arrangements · Preparation and production: Planning & Economic Policy (Development for Production Department), in conjunction with Department of Neighbourhoods and Housing, other Council Departments, Leeds East Homes and Leeds South East Homes. · Resources: staff time, access to and acquisition of data, development of Access databases and project management software, advertising, public consultation, advertising, communications and graphics production budget required. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements. * This Local Development Document Proforma current sets out a single AAP for the EASEL area. The detailed scope and partnership arrangements of EASEL are still evolving and this Proforma may therefore be subject to change. A key aspect of this relates to the nature of the proposed AAP. Depending on project requirements, funding arrangements, resources and practicalities “ this may result in a series of AAPs for EASEL rather than one.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 2. (iv). DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document Area Action Plan ‘ West Leeds details Role and Content: To provide a co-ordinated approach to the spatial planning of neighbourhoods within the West Leeds Gateway Regeneration Area. To provide a framework for sustainable communities in this part of the city and to assist with the delivery of the regeneration/renaissance objectives of the Council, and Leeds West Homes.
Chain of conformity: Adopted UDP saved policies, the emerging LDF Core Strategy, spatial priorities identified as part of the Vision for Leeds and the Regional Spatial Strategy.
Geographical Coverage: Covering the area bounded by the Armley Gyratory & the Clydes Estate to the East, Heights Estate to the West, Tong Road/Wortley Moor Road to the South and Leeds/Liverpool Canal to the North. The area includes the communities of New Wortley, Upper Wortley, Lower Armley, Armley Town Street, the Aviaries and the adjacent commercial areas along Stanningley Road, Tong Road and Carr Crofts. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Commission consultants to develop the regeneration framework. (Dec. 2004 “ Feb. 2005). Data collection and evidence preparation, pre-submission consultation with stakeholders, local residents and community groups. (Feb. “ March 2005). · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation with stakeholders, preparation of initial options for development framework by consultants. (March ÷ July 2005). · Preparation of initial options and City Council approval of consultation documents/sustainability appraisal Sept. ÷ Oct. 2005. · Formal consultation with stakeholders, local residents and community groups on initial options in preparation for selecting preferred options (Oct. ÷ Dec. 2005). · West Leeds Gateway Regeneration Board, Development Plan Panel and Council Executive consider representations and discussions with community and select preferred options (Feb. - March 2006). · Preparation for submission of DPD April. ÷ May 2006), Submission of DPD to Secretary of State (July 2006). · Examination: · Public consultation period on DPD submission and on any site allocation representations (July - Aug. 2006). · Pre-examination consideration of representations (Oct. ÷ November 2006). · Pre-examination Meeting (December 2006). · Examination period, including target date for examinations (March ÷ April 2007). · Estimated receipt of inspectors Report: May 2007. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of Proposals Map July 2007. · Appropriate Mechanisms to be established this will include the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements with Departments and stakeholders as appropriate.
Arrangements · Preparation and Production led by Regeneration Team- West Leeds Area for Production Management, with input from Neighbourhood and Housing, Development Department and other Council Departments, Leeds West Homes, and private sector partners. · Resources : Staff-time, access to and acquisition of data, and project management software, advertising and communications and graphics production budget required · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3. STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
Statement of Community Involvement
· Role & Content Set out standards for involving the community in the preparation, alteration & review of all LDDs and planning applications; · Chain of Conformity: Goes beyond the minimum consultation requirements of the T&CP (LD) (E) Regs 2004 · Geographical coverage: Has no spatial coverage. It guides process and will need to inform consultation requirements in the preparation of different Local Development Documents. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering via Leeds Leadership Programme Project ÷ Sept. ÷ Dec. 2004. · Appointment consultants to develop SCI Methodology Nov 2004 ÷ Feb 2005. · Production: · Initial Preparation involving development of methodology - 4 months to Development Panel March 2005. · Preparation of Initial Draft - April 2005. · Pre-Submission Consultation May - June 2005. · Representations on proposals. · Preparation and Submission of SCI (including 6 weeks consultation). · Submission of DPD to SoS September 2005. · Examination: · Public consultation period, Oct./Nov. 2005. · Pre-examination consideration of representations Dec. 2005 ÷ Jan. 2006. · Pre-Examination Meeting February 2006. · Examination period May 2006. · Receipt of Inspector‘s binding report July 2006. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SCI ÷ August / September 2006. · Regular review in response to changing circumstances ÷ i.e. new emerging stakeholder groups. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: for Production · Initial preparation & devising of methodology by external consultant. Drafting of SCI & supporting papers, management of consultation and defending at public examination by Planning Policy Team ÷ Development Department. · Resources: Planning Delivery Grant for consultancy work, Staff time, Access Database, Meeting rooms/halls, presentation facilities, Website space, document printing, Advertising budget · Consultation will include i) placing written material for comment ii) placing material on website, iii) meetings with stakeholders, iv) conferences/events
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Document £Thematic, Policies ‘ Minerals & Waste details · Role and Content: To provide thematic, spatial and site specific policies for Minerals and Waste in the District. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP and UDP Review saved policies, the LDF Core Strategy, and Regional Spatial Strategy. · Geographic Coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Policy review, data and evidence collection September ÷ October 2007. · Production: · Preparation of issues and options in consultation November 2007 ÷ January 2008. · Public participation on preferred options February ÷ April 2008. · Representation on preferred options May ÷ July 2008. · Preparation of Submission DPD and Submission to SoS November 2008. · Examination: · Representations on submitted DPD. · Pre-examination Meeting: March 2009. · Examination period and target date for examination June - August 2009. · Estimated receipt of Inspectors‘ Report December 2009. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of any necessary changes to the Proposals Map March 2010. · Appropriate mechanisms to be established to monitor on an annual basis. This will include the Annual Monitoring Report and related monitoring arrangements with Departments and stakeholders as appropriate. Arrangements · Preparation led by Sustainable Development Unit (Minerals Team) and for Production Planning & Economic Policy, in conjunction with the Department of City Services and key stakeholders as appropriate. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements once adopted.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Eastgate Redevelopment details · Role & Content: To provide a framework to guide development of this major City Centre site to ensure it is sustainable, maximises benefits to the city, complements & integrates with the city and delivers high quality urban design. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP and UDP Review saved policies, the LDF Core Strategy, and Regional Spatial Strategy. · Geographical Coverage: Two main areas of land bounded by New York Rd. (A64M) to the north, Vicar Lane & Harewood Street to the west, Eastgate/St Peters Street (A61) to the east, and George Street to the south. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · September 2004 ÷ October 2004. Agreed scope, content and procedures for SPD. · Production: · October - December 2004. First draft SPD and Draft Scoping for accompanying Sustainability Appraisal produced for internal consultation. · January 2005 Draft Scoping of Sustainability Appraisal issued formally for consultation. · January ÷ February 2005, preparation of second draft SPD & Sustainability Appraisal to issue for formal consultation mid February 2005 (4-6wks). · March ÷ April 2005 collation of consultation responses, preparation of consultation report, amendments to draft SPD and Sustainability Appraisal. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · April ÷ May 2005. Adoption and publication of SPD · Monitoring and review to be carried out in accordance with guidance. Arrangements · Planning Services/external consultants in consultation with Planning & for Production Economic Policy. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and emerging Statement of Community Involvement requirements (prior to adoption).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 6. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Waterfront Biodiversity Guidance details · Role and Content: To provide a framework to inform, guide and assess new development at waterfront locations to ensure that biodiversity issues are fully considered and addressed. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP polices: N8 (Strategic green corridors), N9 (Other corridors), N39 (culverting or canalisation of watercourses), N49 (protection of bio and geo diversity), N50 (protection of designated nature conservation sites), N51 (wildlife enhancement), N52 (derelict land and wildlife), CC1 (City centre planning obligations), LD1 (Landscape design), · Geographical coverage: City wide along river and canal corridors. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Partnership group comprising representatives from English Nature, Environment Agency, Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, British Waterways and LCC have been involved with development of the document. Habitat survey carried out along City Centre waterways in 2003. · Production: · Draft document/sustainability appraisal issued for initial public consultation March 2005. · Consideration of consultation responses April/May 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD June/July 2005. · Annual monitoring with 3 yearly review. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: for Production · Partnership group led by the City Council · Environment Agency has contributed –2,000 towards preparation and printing of draft and final documents. Any additional resources to be provided by Sustainable Development Unit ÷ Development Department. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements and consistent with emerging Strategic Environmental Assessment/Sustainability Appraisal requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 7. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document City Centre Public Realm Contributions details · Role & Content: Approach methodology and rationale to securing Section 106 contributions to provide for City Centre Public Realm Improvements. · Chain of Conformity: Accords with Central Government Circular 1/97 and developing national legislation, good practice guidance, Core Strategy and saved AUDP policies. · Geographic coverage: Leeds City Centre (AUDP boundary) and any area, which may subsequently form part of the City Centre. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: November 2004 - December 2004. Evidence gathering and research. · Production: · Develop Options: January 2005 ÷ February 2005. Assess scope to progress against evolving national legislation. Progress reliant on Planning Gain reform. Draft Circular issued November 2005. · Stakeholder and community consultation: March ÷ April 2005. Progress within context of progress on national legislation on Planning Gain. · Assess and evaluate consultation responses: April ÷ May 2005. · Prepare Draft SPD and carry out Sustainability Appraisal ÷ produce report on consultation responses: May ÷ June 2005. · Draft SPD, Sustainability Appraisal Report & Consultation Statement issued for Public Consultation: June ÷ July 2005 (6 weeks). · Consideration of consultation responses: August ÷ September 2005 (8 weeks). · Finalise SPD: October 2005 (4 weeks). · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: November 2005. Access database required for the recording and monitoring of Section 106 contributions. Financial controls need to be in place. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: Policy Team - for Production Development Department to lead on production with involvement from Central Area Team (Planning Services), City Centre Management, Sustainable Development Unit, Civic Architect, Legal Services and Finance Section. · Resources: Staff time research and production, use of database and project management software, technical expertise in undertaking Sustainability Appraisal. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements and stakeholders to be identified via City Centre Management & Leeds Initiative. Clear accountable and audit system needs to be in place, consistent with policy and operational requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 8. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT Document details Sustainability Assessments
· Role & Content: Provide detailed guidance on the need for sustainability assessments in the submission of major applications for development. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP and UDP Review (once Adopted). · Geographical coverage: Leeds MD Timetable · TBC following receipt of UDP Review Inspectors Report. Arrangements · TBC following receipt of UDP Review Inspectors Report. for Production · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements. Post Production TBC following receipt of UDP Review Inspectors Report.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 9. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Sustainable Design & Construction details · Role and Content: To replace existing Supplementary Planning Guidance (Sustainable Development Design Guide 1998) in providing guidance to developers to encourage more sustainable buildings · Chain of Conformity: With Adopted UDP Policies: N12 (Urban Design), N13 (Building Design), BD5A (Energy/ Water conservation) · Geographical Coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Production: · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · TBC following receipt of UDP Inspectors Report. Arrangements · TBC following receipt of UDP Inspectors Report. for Production · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 10. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Public Transport Improvements & Developer Contributions details · Role & Content: Provide guidance on how developer contributions will be required to ensure new development is adequately served and made accessible by public transport. · Chain of Conformity: Accords with national policy guidance, emerging Regional Spatial Strategy, Core Strategy & saved policies (AUDP & RUDP once adopted) · Geographical coverage: Leeds MD Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Start of period of preparation: June 2002 (input from internal departments and external specific consultation bodies). · Stakeholder & Community engagement: Jan ÷ Feb 2003. · Assessment of responses: Feb 2003 ÷ Nov 2004. · Production: · Prepare Draft SPD/Sustainability Appraisal Report & Consultation Statement: Dec 2004 ÷ Mar 2006 (dependent on guidance on Planning Gain reform ÷ draft circular anticipated early 2005). · Draft SPD, Sustainability Appraisal Report & Consultation Statement issued for Public Consultation: April ÷ June 2006 (6 weeks) · LPA consideration of consultation responses: August/September 2006 (8 weeks) · Finalise SPD: October 2006 (4 weeks) · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD: November 2006. · Monitoring and review mechanisms (including contributions to the AMR): No of consultations; No of applications approved where contributions acquired; Total amount of contributions acquired (breakdown by Land Use); monitor and review accordingly cost of transport schemes specified in SPD; monitor and review accordingly completion of transport schemes specified in SPD; monitor and review accordingly introduction of new transport schemes specified in the Local Transport Plan. Produce quarterly reports and feed in to Annual Monitoring Report. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: Preparation lead for Production by Policy Team with input from wide variety of Council services · Resources required to produce the LDD: Staff time from several sections, MS Access database, meeting rooms/halls, presentation facilities, Website space, document printing, advertising budget. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 11. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Designing for Community Safety ‘ A Residential guide details · Role and Content: To give guidance on how good design and physical security can compliment the environment and create safe, sustainable communities and to reinforce and expand upon community safety principles as set out in the Neighbourhoods for Living SPG. · Chain of Conformity: Policy N12 of Adopted UDP. · Geographical coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering ÷ Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation ÷ April 2005. · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal issued for public consultation ÷ May 2005. · Consideration of consultation responses ÷ by September 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD ÷ November 2005. · Customer and staff satisfaction with the document. · Robustness of document through appeal decisions.
Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: ÷ to be project for Production managed within Planning Services · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements. · Resources required to produce the LDD, including specifying resources committed from external stakeholders ÷ dedicated project manager, draft document already produced, graphics and publishing costs (to be delivered within existing budget) · Approach to involving stakeholders and the community ÷ customer consultation and through customer focus group
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 12. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Householder Design Guide details · Role and Content: To give guidance on the design of householder proposals · Chain of Conformity: Policy N13 of Adopted UDP. · Geographical Coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering, Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation ÷ April 2005. · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal issued for public consultation ÷ September 2005. · LPA consideration of consultation responses ÷ November 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD ÷ January 2006. · Customer and staff satisfaction with the document. · Robustness of document through appeal decisions. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements:÷ to be project for Production managed within Planning Services, assisted by Sustainable Development Unit. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements. · Resources required to produce the LDD, including specifying resources committed from external stakeholders ÷ dedicated project manager, design advice, graphics and publishing costs. · Approach to involving stakeholders and the community ÷ customer consultation and through customer focus group
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 13. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Highways Design Guide details · Role and Content: Set out standards for the provision of highways to serve both residential and industrial developments · Chain of Conformity: Policy T2 saved policy UDP. · Geographical Coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal issued for public consultation (May- July 2005). · Consideration of consultation responses ÷ August/September 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and Publication ÷ December 2005. · Annual Review. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: Production to for Production be led by Highways Development Services · Resources: To be confirmed · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 14. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Tall Buildings Policy details · Role and content: To provide guidance for developers and designers regarding the design of tall buildings. · Chain of Conformity: With Adopted UDP Policies N12 (Urban Design), N13 (Building Design), CC4, CC6, and CC7. · Geographical Coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering and research (literature and Parliamentary reviews, and Leeds specific info including visual surveys), Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · First written draft/guide for testing November 2004. · Internal professional review and consultation (including Urban Renaissance) Mid to end November 2004. · External professional/ public structured workshop event January 2005. · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation: March 2005. · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal issued for public consultation (May 2005). · Complete and review consultation responses: July 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD: End of September 2005. · Annual monitoring and review every 3 years Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: Project led by for Production Sustainable Development Unit and across Development Department. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 15. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Advertising Design Guide details · Role and content: Guide type and quantity of advertising. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP Policy BD1. · Geographic coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · Production of initial draft completed, to be subject of review by January 2005. · Start of period of preparation, community involvement and consultation, January 2005. · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal ÷ as appropriate, issued for public consultation February 2005. · Consideration of consultation responses, April 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adoption and publication of SPD, May 2005. · Annual monitoring and review every 3 years. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: for Production · Project to be led by Sustainable Development Unit. · Estimated 3 weeks of officer time to revise draft plus 3 days for Graphics production. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements. Pilot consultation in conjunction with Statement of Community Involvement development.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 16. SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Document Trees and development details · Role and content: To provide guidance on tree retention, protection and new planting both in the city centre and across the district. · Chain of Conformity: Adopted UDP Policies N23 (Open Space), N26 (Landscape Schemes), N30 (Environmental Improvement), N41 A & B (Forest of Leeds), CC13 (City Centre Public Spaces), LD1 (Landscape Schemes), LD2 (Road Schemes) · Geographic coverage: Leeds MD. Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Initial preparatory work undertaken as part of City Centre Urban Design Strategy, Neighbourhoods for Living Supplementary Planning Guidance and City Centre Arboretum project. · Further evidence gathering Sept. 2004 ÷ April 2005. · Production: · Complete preparation, initial community involvement and consultation April 2005. · Draft SPD/sustainability appraisal issued for formal public consultation June - July 2005. · Consideration of consultation responses by October 2005. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Adopt and publish revised SPD by January 2006. · Annual monitoring and review every 3 years. Arrangements · Production Process and management arrangements: for Production · Project to be led by Sustainable Development Unit, Development Department. · Consultation: to be consistent with minimum consultation requirements (contained in the LDF regulations) and Statement of Community Involvement requirements.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 17. ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
Document Annual Monitoring Report details · Role and Scope: Annual Monitoring Report to report on performance 1 April 2004 ÷ 31 March 2005. · Chain of Conformity: Not applicable, statutory requirement of Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Timetable · Production Milestones: · Pre-production: · Evidence gathering, initial work undertaken to review and capture data sets, consistent with draft ODPM indicators, July ÷ November 2004. · Preparation of …pilot‘ AMR December 2004, for reporting period 1 April 2003 ÷ 31 March 2004. · Production: · Review of data sets and gaps in context of Regional Spatial Strategy AMR and final AMR guidance/indicators. · Involvement of key City Council stakeholders in development of indicators, consistent with Local Development Scheme targets and Policies, December 2004 ÷ March 2005. · Preparation of AMR April ÷ October 2005. · Report findings to Development Plan Panel and Executive Board as appropriate. · Adoption, Monitoring & Review: · Submit AMR to Government Office Yorkshire & the Humber December 2005. · Monitor and review suite of indicators in accordance with Regional Spatial Strategy and Local Development Scheme requirements. Arrangements · Production process and management arrangements: for Production · AMR production to be led by Planning & Economic Policy with support from across the Development Department and other Council services as appropriate.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 1
Local Development Framework - Glossary of Terms
AAP Area Action Plan These plans will focus upon implementation, providing an important mechanism for ensuring development of an appropriate, scale, mix and quality for key areas of opportunity, change or conservation.
AMR Annual Monitoring Authorities are required to produce AMRs to assess the Report implementation of LDS and the extent to which policies in LDDs are being achieved.
DPD Development Plan The Documents that a local planning authority must Document prepare, and which have to be subject to rigorous procedures of community involvement, consultation and independent examination. Should include the following elements: · Core strategy · Site specific allocations of land · Area Action Plans (where needed); and · Proposals Map (with inset maps, where necessary)
LDF Local Development The LDF will contain a portfolio of LDDs, which will provide Framework the local planning authority‘s policies for meeting the community‘s economic, environmental and social aims for the future of their area where this affects the development of land.
LDD Local Development LDDs will compromise of DPDs, SPDs, SCI, and the Document SEA/SA.
LDS Local Development The LDS sets out the programme for preparing the LDDs. Scheme PPS Planning Policy Government statements of national planning policy, being Statement phased in to supersede Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPGs). RSS Regional Spatial The RSS, incorporating a regional transport strategy, Strategy provides a spatial framework to inform the preparation of local development documents, local transport plans and regional and sub-regional strategies and programmes that have a bearing on land-use activities. SA Sustainability Appraisal The RSS, incorporating a regional transport strategy, provides a spatial framework to inform the preparation of LDDs, local transport plans and regional and sub-regional strategies and programmes that have a bearing on land-use activities. SCI Statement of Document explaining to stakeholders and the community, Community Involvement how and when they will be involved in the preparation of LDF, and the steps that will be taken to facilitate this involvement. SEA Strategic Assessment of the environmental impacts of polices and Environmental Assessment proposals contained within the LDF. SPD Supplementary SPDs are intended to elaborate upon the policy and Planning Document proposals in DPDs but do not have their status.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 2
SCHEDULE OF ” SAVED竡 POLICIES
The entire UDP Adopted 2001 is saved from commencement of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 28/09/04 and it is intended that the Review Policies be saved on adoption. Over time, LDF documents will replace sections of the UDP. Where the preparation of replacement LDF documents has been agreed, these are listed with anticipated adoption/replacement dates. Those policy groupings in the table without replacement LDDs listed, will be saved beyond 3 years from Sept. 2004. A Programme for the replacement of these groupings will be prepared as the LDS is rolled forward, monitored and reviewed in December 2005.
Key: Ch = UDP Chapter. These are for Volume I of the UDP unless stated otherwise. Policy grouping. These are thematic or spatial & reflect common sense divisions. List of Policies & Paras. These are for Volume I of the UDP unless stated otherwise. UDP Review Proposals. Identifies the policies/paras. subject to proposed changes.
Ch Policy Grouping List of Policies & Paras UDP Review LDF Replacement When Proposals Documents 3 UDP Strategy Strategic Goals SG1-4, Aims Core Strategy Dec 07 SA1-9 & Principles SP1-8 4 Allocations & Use Pols GP1-3, paras. 4.1.1-4.3.4 4 Development Pol GP5, paras. 4.3.5-4.3.7 Considerations 4 Carry Forward LP Policies Pol GP6, Sec 4.4 4 S106 Benefits Pol GP7, Sec 4.5 4 Enforcement Pol GP8, Sec 4.6 4 Monitoring & Review Sec 4.7 4 Community Involvement Pol R4, Sec 4.8 Alts to Pol R4 & Sec Statement of April 06 4.8 Community Involvement 4 Sustainable Development Pols GP9 & GP10, Sustainability tbc Sec 4.9 Appraisal Guidance 5 Environment Aims Pol SA1, paras. 5.1.1-6 Core Strategy Dec 07 5 Greenspace Pols SP1, N1-N11, Section 5.2 5 & Design & Conservation Vol I - Pols N12-N22 & N28, A3 paras. 5.3.1-10 & 5.3.16; Vol II - Pols BD2-15, BC1-9, Paras A3-1.1 - A3-2.8
5 & Landscape Design Vol I - Pols N23-27, paras. A3 5.3.11-15; Vol II - Pols LD1- LD2, Sec A3.3
5 & Archaeology Vol I - Pol N29; Vol II - Pols A4 ARC1-8, Secs A4.1-3 5 Environment Improvement Pols N30-31, paras. 5.3.18-38 5 & Green Belt Pols N32-34 - Pols GB1 - 26, Delete Pol N34 & A5 Sec A5 related paras. 5 Countryside Pols SP2, N35-N37A & N40-44, Paras 5.5.1 - 5.5.9 & 5.5.12-22 5 Flood Risk Pols N38 & N39, paras. 5.5.10- Pols N38A, N38B, 11 N39A & N39B, paras. 5.5.10a-f & paras. 5.5.11a-e 5 & Minerals Vol I - Pols N45-N46B, Paras A6 5.5.23 - 5.5.31; Vol II - Pols GM1-8 & EM1-9, Sec A6
5 & Waste Disposal Vol I - Pols N47-N48B, paras. Pol N47 & paras. A7 5.5.32-35; Vol II - Pols 5.5.32-34, Pols RECYC1-11 & WD1 - 12, Sec WM1-18, Sec A7 A7 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5 & Nature Conservation Vol I - Pols N49-53, Sec 5.6: Sec A8 A8 Vol II - Sec A8 5 Renewable Energy Pol 54 & Sec 5.7 5 Air Quality Sec 5.8 6 Transport Strategy SA2, SP4 & Policy T1 SA2, Policy T1 Core Strategy Dec 07 6 New Developments Policy T2 & T3 6 Encouraging Sustainable Policy T2B, T2C & Travel Modes T2D 6 & Non-vehicular users Policy T4 - T8 Policy T7 -7B A9c (Policy T4 - T8, A9C) 6 Public Transport Proposals Policy T9 - T17 Policy T9, 10A, 14 - 17 (Policy T9 - T17) 6 Highway Proposals Policy T18 - T23 Policy T18 - 21 (Policy T18 - T23) 6 & Car Parking Policy T24 - 28 Policy T24a, A9A A9a& (Policy T24 - 28, b A9A & B) 6 Coach & Lorry Parking Policy T29 & 29A Policy T29A 6 Leeds Bradford Airport Policy T30 Policy T30 6 Rail & Canal Freight Policy T31 7 Housing Strategy SA3, SP3, SP5, Paras 7.1.1-7 & Policy SA3 paras. Core Strategy Dec 07 7.4.1-12 7.1.1-2 7 Housing Land Requirement Pols H1-H8, Sections 7.2, 7.3, H1-H5, Sections 7.1 7.4.13-25 & 7.5 - 7.5 7 & Social Housing Needs Vol I - Pols H9 - H14, Section Alts to Paras 7.6.19- A5 7.6; Vol II - Pol GB17, Paras 20 A5.10.5-8
7 & Student Housing & HMOs Vol I - Pols H15, H18 & H19, Pols H15, H15A & A10 Sections 7.6.28-31 & 7.8.1-6; H18, Sections Vol II - HMO1, Paras A10.1-6 7.6.28-31c & 7.8.1- 6, Deletion of Pols H19 & HMO1 7 Travellers & Show People Pol H16 7 Housing Renewal Pol H17, paras. 7.7.1-5 7 & Residential Institutions Vol I - Pols H20A & H20B, A11 paras. 7.8.7-9; Vol II - Pols RI1-RI6, paras. A11.1.1-5.1
7 Housing Development Pol H21, paras. 7.8.10-11 Standards 8 Economic Strategy Policy SA4, SP6, E1 & E2 Core Strategy Dec 07 8 Background (scale of Section 8.2 - 8.3 employment change & emp. land to be provided)
8 Employment Allocation Policy E3 & E4 8 Windfall Sites Policy E5 8 Physical Constraints Policy E6 8 Non Employment uses on Policy E7 Policy E7 Employment sites 8 Key Employment Sites Policy E8 8 Transport Related Policy E10 Development 8 B1 Business Uses Policy E12 - E19 8 Science Park E21 8 Economic Priority Areas Policy E22 - E22A 8 Rural Economy Para 8.8.1 9 Town Centres Focus of SA 5 and SP7 Core Strategy Dec 07 Development 9 City Centre regional centre S1 Core Strategy Dec 07
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 9 & Town Centres Vol I - S2, S3, S3a and S4; A12 Vol II - SF1A-SF10B and SF11- SF12 and SF13-15
9 Out-of-centre controls S5 and S9 9 Food shopping need S6 9 Local Centres and S8 and S9 neighbourhood shopping 10 Leisure Strategic Aim SA6 Core Strategy Dec 07 10 Leisure facilities LT1 and LT2 10 Tourism LT3-LT5B 10 Waterways LT6-LT6B 10 & Hotels Vol I - LT7; Vol II - HO1 - 9 A13 11 Urban Regeneration Pols R1-R3, secs 11.2 & 11.3 Core Strategy Dec 07 Area Initiatives & Pols R1-R4, Ch11 Core Strategy Dec 07 Regeneration 12 Access for All Aims Pols SA8 & A1, Secs 12.1-3 Core Strategy Dec 07 12 New Schools Pol A2, sec 12.4 12 Health Facilities Sec 12.5 12 Community Uses Sec 12.6 12 Safety & Security Pol A4, sec 12.7 13 City Centre Aims Pol SA9, sec 13.1 Core Strategy Dec 07 13 City Centre Pols SP8 & CC1-30, secs 13.2-7 Alts to various City Centre Action Jul 07 paras. Plan 14 Aireborough, Horsforth & Site allocations & proposals Various alterations Bramhope 15 East Leeds Site allocations & proposals Various alterations Parts of Ch 15: Mar 07 EASEL Action Plan & Dec & Aire Valley Action 06 Plan 16 Garforth Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 17 Morley Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 18 North Leeds Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 19 Otley & Mid Wharfedale Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 20 Pudsey Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 21 Rothwell Site allocations & proposals Various alterations 22 South Leeds Site allocations & proposals Various alterations Parts of Ch 22: Aire Dec 06 Valley Action Plan 23 West Leeds Site allocations & proposals Various alterations Parts of Ch 23: West Leeds Action Plan
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com APPENDIX 3
SCHEDULE OF RETAINED SUPPLEMENTARY AND £OTHER, GUIDANCE
Supplementary Planning Guidance
1. PPG6 ÷ Town Centres & Retail Development (7 October 1996), to be reviewed following adoption of Core Strategy. 2. Leisure Developments & Other Key Town Centre Uses (13 October 1997), to be reviewed following adoption of Core Strategy. 3. Sustainable Development Design Guide (30 March 1998), to be replaced by Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document once adopted. 4. Greenspace Relating to New Housing Development (6 July 1998). 5. Guidelines for Assessing Developer Contributions to Leeds Supertram) (6 July 1998), to be replaced by Public Transport “ Improvements “ Developer Contributions, Supplementary Planning Document once adopted. 6. Holbeck Urban Village Planning Framework (29 March 1999), to be replaced by an updated following consultation. 7. Development of Self - Contained Flats (4 May 1999). 8. Leeds City Centre Urban Design Strategy (18 September 2000). 9. Section 106 Contributions for School Provision (1 February 2001). 10. Bramhope Village Design Statement (12 October 2001). 11. Telecommunication Equipment (2001). 12. Leeds Supertram Design Standards Guide (March 2002). 13. Bardsey Village Design Statement (28 May 2002). 14. East Keswick Village Design Statement (June 2002). 15. Pool Village Design Statement. (date tbc) 16. Thorp Arch Village Design Statement (February 2005). 17. Leeds Waterfront Strategy 2002 (10 July 2002). 18. Neighbourhoods for Living (December 2003). 19. Revised Affordable Housing Policy Guidance (February 2003). 20. Greening the Built Edge (Adopted UDP Policy N34) (2004). 21. Sustainable Urban Drainage (June 2004). 22. Otley Conservation Area Appraisal (June 2004). 23. Chapeltown Conservation Area Appraisal (2003). 24. Roundhay Conservation Area Appraisal (September 2004). 25. Beeston & Holbeck Planning Framework (January 2005) 26. Adel Village Design Statement (March 2005)
Other Guidance
In addition to the above Supplementary Planning Guidance documents …saved‘ under the transitional arrangements, the City Council also wish to retain a series of …best practice‘ and guidance notes. Whilst it is recognised that such documents have no formal status as part of the Local Development Framework, the City Council considers that such documents provide a detail source of information on a range of planning matters for its many customers. The date in brackets indicated when the guidance was …adopted‘ by the City Council.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Conservation Design Guides 1. Caring for Ancient Monuments. 2. Caring for Conservation Areas. 3. Ancient Monuments in Leeds (October 1995). 4. Listed Buildings in Leeds (February 2003). 5. Historic Buildings in Leeds ÷ Understanding Listing. 6. A guide to the Preparation and Usage of Stone (1977). 7. Use of Magnesian Limestone as a Building Material (September 1978).
Design Guides 8. Farm Buildings (December 1992). 9. Site Development Guide (March 1995). 10. Design Aid ÷ Shops & Shopfronts (December 1992). 11. Design Aid ÷ Shop Front Security (December 1992). 12. Urban Design Content of Submissions for Planning Applications (September 2000).
Landscape Design Guides 13. Development Site Tree Surveys (September 2000). 14. List of Landscape Consultants (December 1995) 15. Nature Conservation (March 1999). 16. Tree Protection on Development or Demolition Sites (September 2000). 17. A Landscape Submission Checklist for Planning Applicants Application Forms (September2000). 18. Protected Trees and Buildings: Guidance on Subsidence Investigations. 19. Woodland Management Plans Required by Planning Condition.
Minerals Design Guides 20. Access to Construction (June 1994). 21. Aftercare Schemes (June 1994). 22. Choosing the Right Trees (June 1994). 23. All Muck and Bullets (September 1998). 24. Development of Contaminated Sites (June 2000).
Town Centre Strategies 25. Towards a Plan of Action for Morley Town Centre (1997) 26. Morley Town Centre Action Plan (September 1999). 27. Towards a Plan of Action for Otley Town Centre (1997). 28. Otley Town Centre Action Plan (2000). 29. Towards a Strategy for Wetherby (November 2000). 30. Wetherby Town Centre Action Plan (September 2001). 31. Towards a Plan of Action for Armley Town Centre (October 1998). 32. Armley Town Centre Action Plan (January 2004). 33. Towards a Town Centre Strategy for Pudsey 34. Pudsey Town Centre Action Plan (March 2004).
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: G. Robertson
Tel 2476753
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 FEBRUARY 2005
SUBJECT: ENHANCEMENTS TO THE URBAN TRAFFIC CONTROL COMPUTER CONTROL SYSTEM (01968)
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For : ALL Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Board ü Eligible for Call In ü Not eligible for Call In Decision
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report asks for authority to enhance the Urban Traffic Control computer system at a cost of –287,000 works and –63,000 staff, and to employ a consultant on a partnership contract to effect the enhancement and development of the system over a five year period. · The UTC section is responsible for approximately 500 traffic signals, which are monitored and controlled by 8 separate computers and 3 CCTV systems. These need rationalising to be efficient in minimising traffic congestion. The recent Traffic Management Act has emphasised the duty of local authorities to be proactive in tackling congestion. · A national standard for Urban Traffic Control, control systems, called UTMC, has been developed by DfT. This uses the latest technology to tackle congestion, defines standards to allow competitive tendering and is future proof. It also can include additional features such as congestion/queue detectors and new communication technology, which has potential for saving revenue. · A key feature will be providing the public with traffic information. This will be done via a traffic website, which will also support text messaging, and incorporate CCTV images, congestion information and car park usage, · It is proposed that this enhancement should be accomplished by setting up a 5 year partnership to install the initial stage and advise on future developments and cost saving exercises. · This report is linked to the report also submitted at this time …New Leeds Traffic Management & Car Park Variable Message Sign‘, which provides the signs to go on street which will be connected into the enhanced system. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To obtain authority to enhance the Urban Traffic Control, control system at a cost of –287,000 equipment/consultant fees and –63,000 staff costs, and to employ a consultant on a partnership contract to effect the enhancement, development and maintenance of the system over a five year period.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 The Leeds Urban Traffic Control section is responsible for approximately 500 traffic signals in Leeds, representing on-street assets estimated at –35m. About 320 signals are connected to the control centre in Merrion House. The complexity of the system and the varying requirements of differing locations and technologies has resulted in these signals being monitored and controlled by 8 separate computer systems and 3 CCTV systems.
2.2 The control centre is staffed 7am to 7pm on weekdays, 9am to 5pm on Saturdays, and at other times when traffic conditions demand it. Staff monitor traffic conditions via some 150 CCTV cameras, handle faults and alter traffic signal timings in response to identified traffic problems.
2.3 In order to maximise the potential of the existing road network for all users there is a need to enhance the computer control system in a way that will combine and simplify operations. Minimising traffic congestion is vital to maintain Leeds as a prosperous and vibrant city as pressure on the road network increases. The recent Traffic Management Act has emphasised the duty of local authorities to be proactive and successful in tackling congestion.
2.4 Proposals have been developed and discussed internally. Consultations have taken place with a number of local authorities who have implemented similar systems. Some cognisance has been taken of traffic signal control developments in Europe. In addition a consultant was appointed to investigate the options and develop the proposals more fully (attached as Appendix 1).
2.5 Leeds Urban Traffic Control acts as agent for Calderdale Borough Council for the maintenance and control of their traffic signals. Calderdale Officers have been appraised of these proposals and discussions will take place regarding the potential benefits should Calderdale want to avail themselves of them and make a proportionate contribution.
3.0 PROPOSALS
3.1 The proposed enhancement of the Urban Traffic Control system is comprehensive:
3.1.1 It will require all systems included to incorporate …UTMC compatible‘ technology. This refers to the national standards developed by the Government to tackle traffic congestion by using efficient technology. Key features are interoperability of equipment and flexibility for the future. The DfT is promoting this technology as the long term direction for Urban Traffic Control systems.
3.1.2 Interoperability of items from different suppliers opens the way for significant cost savings in procurement as part of this contract and for any future developments.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.1.3 Of particular interest is the new communication technology. Implementing radio/mobile phone methodology has potential for saving large revenue sums. A full evaluation of options would be included as part of the current proposals.
3.1.4 The major operational change will be combining all existing systems to allow control from one computer with a graphic based display.
3.1.5 Additional facilities will include the control system for new car park/traffic management variable message signs. This is the subject of a report to Executive Board …New Leeds Traffic Management & Car Park Variable Message Signs‘ which is being submitted at the same time as this report.
3.1.6 The proposals include a website that will display traffic information, car park occupancy, and CCTV images from major routes and the facility for getting information via text messaging.
3.2 The proposals will provide a range of benefits:
3.2.1 More efficient control of the traffic signals in Leeds which will help tackle congestion. The effect of incidents in the road network will be alleviated more efficiently. The attached consultants report estimates that congestion in Leeds costs the community over –50m each year. A 1% reduction in this equates to a benefit of over –500,000 per annum.
3.2.2 Vastly improved provision of information to the public. The combination of variable message signs on street, interactive website, and texting facility will provide information to facilitate road users choosing a time or a route that is less congested. In the event of an incident (minor or major) the variable message signs can be used to display vital information. Co-ordination will be required with the Leeds Evacuation Team regarding use in the event of a major emergency.
3.2.3 Enabling competitive tendering is cost effective within this project and is expected to save –60,000 in the parallel proposals to purchase car park signs/Variable Message Signs. It is estimated that it could save the Council up to –500,000 when the time comes to review and replace the traffic signals outstation equipment and communications system.
3.2.4 Urban Traffic Contol‘s implementation of bus priority will be aided due to the flexibility within the proposals.
3.2.5 Whole life costs will be economical: the modular computer architecture will make any future computer replacements cheaper; individual items can be replaced and competitively tendered; as the new DfT sponsored industry standard this technology has an expected lifetime greater than its components.
3.2.6 A comprehensive analysis of benefits is given in the consultants report (Appendix 1, table 4.2).
3.3 It is proposed to undertake this procurement as follows.
3.3.1 Quality and price criteria will be used to enter into a partnership contract with a suitable consultant.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3.2 The contract will be for 5 years of which the first 3 will be to effect the enhancement and implementation of the system and the last 2 will be to provide maintenance and advice on future developments.
3.3.3 The partnership will include an optional clause allowing the renewal of the contract for a further period of up to 5 years should the council wish to do so.
4.0 CONSULTATIONS
4.1 Technical consultations have taken place as in 2.4 above.
5.0 COMMUNITY SAFETY
5.1 The proposals contained in the report have no implications under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
6.0 PROGRAMME
6.1 In line with the Leeds City Council‘s contract procedure rules, it is hoped to advertise for expressions of interest from suppliers in March 2005. It is hoped that the partnership could be set up in time for work to commence in the autumn of 2005.
6.2 Work would commence on the initial installation of the system, which would take 12 months for the major components, with other components added in the following 12 months. The partnership agreement would include an element of ongoing work on the website and system improvements over the life of the contract.
7.0 CAPITAL FUNDING AND CASHFLOW
Previous total Authority TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST to Spend on this scheme 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's LAND (1) 0.0 CONSTRUCTION (3) 0.0 FURN & EQPT (5) 0.0 DESIGN FEES (6) 0.0 OTHER COSTS (7) 0.0 TOTALS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Authority to Spend TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST required for this Approval 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's LAND (1) 0.0 CONSTRUCTION (3) 0.0 FURN & EQPT (5) 0.0 DESIGN FEES (6) 63.0 30.0 23.0 10.0 OTHER COSTS (7) 287.0 100.0 110.0 77.0 TOTALS 350.0 0.0 0.0 130.0 133.0 87.0 0.0
Total overall Funding TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST (As per latest Capital 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON Programme) —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's
Supported Capital Expenditure 350.0 130.0 133.0 87.0 Total Funding 350.0 130.0 133.0 87.0 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 7.1 Funding: Initial discussions with suppliers have indicated the following costs: Equipment/ Consultants fees Staff Total 2005/6 –100,000 –30,000 –130,000 2006/7 –110,000 –23,000 –133,000 2007/8 –77,000 –10,000 –87,000
Total –287,000 –63,000 –350,000
7.2 The estimated total cost of the scheme can be met from the Integrated Transport scheme 99609 within the approved Capital Programme and is eligible for 100% Government funding. (There is a possibility that Calderdale BC would contribute to these costs.)
7.3 The partnership arrangement for the final 2 years will be an additional cost of –25,000 fee each year which will be funded from the accrued savings within the UrbanTraffic Control revenue budget.
7.4 Staffing: There are no additional staffing implications associated with these proposals.
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENTS
8.1 Should the scheme not proceed then the Council will be significantly hampered in its task of reducing traffic congestion. The public will not have access to CCTV and live traffic information on the Web or via texting.
8.2 No major problems with installing the system are anticipated. Similar systems are working well in other cities in the UK.
8.3 UTMC protocols have been designed by DfT to be future proof and interoperable. Future developments in Urban Traffic Control Control will be UTMC compatible and could easily be incorporated.
9.0 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNCIL POLICIES
9.1 Ethnic minorities, women and disabled people: There are no specific implications for ethnic minorities, women or disabled people.
9.3 Environmental Policy: The scheme specifically addresses congestion/queues in Leeds. Any reduction in congestion will result in reduced emissions and benefit the operations of bus services.
9.4 Local Transport Plan: The proposals contained within this report are in accordance with the objectives of the Plan.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 The Executive Board is requested to:
i) approve the enhancement and development of the Urban Traffic Control, computer system at a total cost of –350,000;
ii) give authority to incur expenditure of –287,000 for equipment/consultants fees and –63,000 staff costs; and
iii) approve entering into a partnership contract with a consultant to effect the above enhancement, development and maintenance over a period of 5 years.
PDF createdG:Shared/Admin/ with FinePrintWordproc/Comm/2005/E pdfFactory trialxec v Board/UTCersion http://www.fineprint.com Computer Enhancement Exec Board Appendix 1.
”Leeds UTMC Strategy£, Report by Simon Jones, Consultant
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds UTMC Strategy
Final Report
Preliminary Draft October 2004 Second Draft incorporating Client Comments November 2004 Third draft incorporating further comments November 2004 Final Report December 2004
Prepared for; Prepared by;
Urban Traffic Management and Control Simon Jones Leeds City Council Traffic System Consultant 2 Rossington Street 5 Windmill Road Leeds Bramham LS2 8HD WETHERBY LS23 6QP
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Contents
1 Introduction ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.1 UTMC Management and Operation...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2 Car Park Monitoring and Traffic Management System...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.3 UTMC Communications...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4 Traffic Information on the Web ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2 Strategy Aims and Requirements ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1 Improved Management and Operation of UTMC Systems...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.2 Replacement of Car Park Monitoring and Guidance System ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Exploiting Communication Opportunities (UTMC)...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4 Sharing Travel Network Information ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3 Strategy Implementation...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1 Main Components...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2 Existing Common Database Products...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3 Design and Study Work ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.4 Contract Preparation...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4 Costs and Benefits of Strategy ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1 Budgetary Costs ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2 Benefits of Strategy...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Introduction
A strategy for the future development of the Leeds UTMC system is being developed in response to several factors which can be summarised as; 1. Developing difficulties in the management and operation of an increasing range of independent control and monitoring instations including 3 separate CCTV systems;
2. A requirement to expand and replace the obsolete car park monitoring and VMS control system;
3. Opportunities presented by the development of the UTMC standard and solutions to update the instation to outstation communications network;
4. External pressures to provide CCTV images to the web; and
5. Increasing congestion requiring more efficient implementation of diversion strategies/traffic management signing. UTMC Management and Operation The UTMC group is responsible for nearly 500 traffic signal installations in Leeds and, under an agency agreement, for traffic signals in Calderdale. Of the Leeds sites, 320 are connected via communication circuits to the control centre. This large and complex traffic monitoring and control infrastructure is linked to a total of 8 separate and independent instation computers (table 1.1) operated by control centre staff. The replacement of the Ferranti RMS is already programmed allowing the number of instation computers to be reduced by one. With the growth of this system, maintaining an awareness of the status of every traffic signal site has become impractical without the integration of some of the data from each of the systems. The development of a new priority control software module (SPRUCE) will increase the complexities in system management and operation. Table 1.1; Instation Monitoring and Control Systems Existing PEEK UTC System Ferranti Remote Monitoring System (to be replaced) Siemens Remote Monitoring System Monitron Remote Monitoring System Car Park Monitoring Control System Kolara Fault Management System Desk Log (Spreadsheet) Corporate Network terminal Programmed SPRUCE Replacement Car Park Monitoring and Traffic Management System, incorporating additional full function VMS for traffic management. The UTMC group provides a revenue earning service in response to inquiries from solicitors representing members of the public who ask for details of traffic signal operation at the time of a road traffic accident or alleged traffic offence. The operating status and timings in force at traffic signals must currently be deduced by comparing the UTC logs with other data, a process which is time consuming, requires a level of expertise and does not always give
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 1 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
definitive answers. The provision of this service would be greatly facilitated by the introduction of a more comprehensive data logging system based on the stage confirmations generated by controllers of sites under UTC. Car Park Monitoring and Traffic Management System A system for monitoring the number of vacant spaces in the city‘s main car parks and providing information on VMS to direct drivers to the available spaces was introduced some 13 years ago. Over that period the general condition of the street signs and other equipment has deteriorated through normal wear and tear. More fundamentally, the road network in Leeds has changed extensively, new multi-storey car parks have been built and some surface level car parks have been replaced by developments. It has not been possible for the system to be updated in parallel with the evolution of the city leaving it much less effective than it should be. UTMC Communications In common with most areas in the UK, the Leeds UTC system communicates with traffic signals via telephone circuits using proprietary equipment at each end. The technology employed is specific to the traffic control industry, is based on analogue communications developed over 30 years ago, has a low capacity for data transfer and is becoming more expensive relative to modern digital communications. The Department for Transport under the UTMC initiative have developed new standards employing internet based technology that are becoming standard through the IT industry. Communications to outstation equipment under the standard is completely digital, has much greater data transfer capacity and uses open protocols and non-specialised communication devices. The standard allows much greater flexibility in the choice of the communication medium from instation to outstation which can include the internet, private fibre optic cables, and radio networking systems. The advantages of an urban area introducing UTMC standard communications are; ¨ Communications to the street network can be shared by a variety of applications including UTC, Car park Monitoring and VMS display;
¨ On street communication devices can be purchased from more than one supplier which can lead to cost savings; and
¨ Higher communication capacity can be introduced without increasing existing revenue charges. Local authorities are being encouraged to develop migration plans for their street communications infrastructure to take advantage of these benefits. While some authorities are now developing their communications networks in accordance with UTMC standards, others are developing non compliant solutions that meet their specific requirements. Traffic Information on the Web The provision of up to date travel information on the web is a service that many local authorities are starting to provide. At a national level, the government aims to provide a one stop shop for journey information through the Transport Direct initiative. A ready source of real time traffic data for the Leeds road network is the CCTV traffic monitoring system which has 55 cameras at strategic locations in the city. In addition, the control centre has access to
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 2 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
115 cameras operated by Leedswatch. The primary function of the cameras is for the control centre operators to monitor traffic conditions and intervene when required. Making the CCTV images available to the general public would provide a source of information concerning current traffic conditions without any additional street infrastructure. This would help relieve congestion at critical times, as drivers can time their journey and plan their route according to what they see.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 3 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Strategy Aims and Requirements The Leeds UTMC strategy has four key aims listed in table 2.1 together with the associated requirements, and existing products that are relevant to those requirements. Improved Management and Operation of UTMC Systems Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the management and operation of the traffic control centre will make better use of the investment in the street infrastructure which is estimated to have a value of – 35m. Integrated Display for System Monitoring and Operator Intervention There is a need to simplify and unify the data presented to operators and the options available for operator intervention. The principal change necessary to achieve this aim is the integration of site status and monitoring information, currently held on separate autonomous systems to provide a single display for all traffic signals and other street devices. The display should be available in both tabular and graphical formats. The graphical display should take the form of a background road map with road names onto which icons representing street equipment are superimposed. The real time status of each site, taken from the appropriate instation monitoring system, should be included in the display. Preferably the information displayed should not only be related to traffic signal installations, but should include VMS and CCTV. For example the display would have icons at each of the camera locations. Running the mouse over the icon would give the operator an option of displaying the camera image as a window on the terminal or on a particular monitor. When facilities for semi-automatic congestion strategies are configured in the system (para 2.1.5), the status display should provide information to assist in the selection of strategies, and monitor the status of strategies in progress. Integration of information from different sources is a key function of the Common Database, which is a generic UTMC system component defined within the UTMC specifications. The role of a Common Database is to allow data to be gathered from other databases or directly from street equipment and stored centrally. The information can be made available to others through client terminals connected to the database server, corporate networks, the internet or other communication systems such as the SMS text messaging services. Common Databases linking information from UTC systems and remote monitoring systems have been developed for other local authorities. Existing capabilities are considered in section 3.2. Issuing commands from a fully integrated facility to a range of systems would allow an operator to intervene from the monitoring display directly. This function lies outside the normal scope of the Common Database and would require the development of new interfaces to the UTC system and the remote monitoring system, beyond the requirements for monitoring. A more straight forward requirement would be the ability to launch windows that are terminals to the servers for the UTC and remote monitoring systems. Logging of traffic signal controller operation A second principal requirement to improve UTMC management and operation is a facility to provide an accurate and accessible historical record of the stages operating at signals under UTC control. This would probably be best achieved by simply recording stage confirmation replies generated by the controllers. The facility would include data archiving and retrieval mechanisms that would allow operators to readily search the database according to a range of criteria. For sites controlled by the
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 4 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council Table 2.1; Leeds UTMC Strategy Aims and Requirements
Strategy Aims Principal Requirements Lower Priority Requirements Existing Products
Improved Management and 1. Some integration of discrete monitoring and 1. Real time data retrieval from traffic 1. Common Database products link to Operation of UMTC Systems control systems to provide a common GUI count sites. discrete systems and provide displaying site status and faults providing integrated status displays. (Making best use of the 2. Potential for control of temporary control facilities. infrastructure investment) traffic lights. 2. SPRUCE software will have g bit 2. Storage and retrieval of historical data for storage and retrieval for SPRUCE 3. Semi-automated congestion UTC sites sites. strategies. 4. Integration of SPRUCE into Common Database. Replacement of Car Park 1. A new car park signing and general VMS 1. Supply car park data via web links 1. Can purchase signs / instation / Monitoring and Traffic scheme appropriate to the current road and text messaging system. comms as a package from single Management System network. supplier (non UTMC). (Existing system is not 2. Replacement instation and communications 2. Can purchase signs / instation / maintainable and no longer system. comms from separate suppliers relevant to network) (UTMC). 3. Some Common Database products incorporate car park monitoring and sign control functions. Exploiting Communication 1. A communications strategy / migration plan There is currently no ”off the shelf£ UTMC Opportunities (UTMC) that can form the basis for future investment comms solution ÷ each area has to be in street communications infrastructure to considered on its own merits in the light support ITS. of current available technologies and costs. 2. An implementation plan and programme for upgrading existing communications where this would be beneficial. Sharing Travel Network 1. Setting up and operation of a web site with Transferring CCTV images to web is Information traffic monitoring CCTV images for LCC available as a function within most network. Common Database products. (CCTV images only to minimise staff input required)
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 5
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
proposed SPRUCE module, stage confirmation logging will be performed as a function of the new software. The system is not currently being designed to permit logging of all UTC sites. Stage confirmation data within the host UTC system is overwritten each second and must therefore be captured by the log each second if it is not to be lost. This requirement means that the logging software must have a ”real time敫 interface with the host UTC system. A UTMC standard for a ”real time敫 interface has been developed as part of SPRUCE development and would need to be part of any software developed to provide full logging of all UTC sites. Other than SPRUCE, there are no existing products that have this interface. The options for providing the logging facility are therefore; 1. Extend the functionality within SPRUCE to allow logging for all UTC sites; 2. Develop a stripped-down version of SPRUCE as a separate module whose function is monitoring and logging only; or 3. Develop logging software together with the necessary interface as a project separate from SPRUCE. Under options 2 and 3 it may be logical to remove the logging function from SPRUCE as it would simply be duplicating the logging of all UTC sites introduced by the new module. Count Data Retrieval and Storage Count data retrieval and storage is seen currently as a possible future requirement that may arise outside the UTMC group, in other City Council departments. However, the importance of such monitoring data may increase once local authorities start to respond to the requirements of the recently passed Traffic Management Act. The Act requires that local authorities must appoint a traffic manager whose responsibilities include identifying the causes of traffic congestion and monitoring the effectiveness of their own management of the road network. Retrieval of data from count sites using telemetry can be achieved as a function within existing Common Database products or as an independent separate system as supplied by the traffic counter manufacturers. For count sites in close proximity to traffic signals under UTC, it is possible to retrieve the data via the UTC communications system. Control of Temporary Traffic Lights Temporary traffic lights can create traffic congestion that may be unavoidable or alternatively the result of the timings being badly set. The Traffic Management Act gives local authorities the responsibility for addressing any cause of congestion including temporary lights. While this is not currently within the remit of the UTC section, it would be prudent to allow for future eventualities. Central monitoring and control of temporary lights over wireless telemetry is technically feasible but is not a feature of existing products. There are no known plans to develop such facilities. Until such facilities are developed it is recommended that this proposal is excluded from the strategy. Semi-Automated Congestion Strategies The automatic selection and introduction of control strategies to deal with congestion is a facility that could enhance the service provided by the Leeds traffic control centre. Such a system would require congestion to be detected automatically. There is currently very little detector infrastructure that could be used for this purpose. The West and South Yorkshire Real Time Passenger Information System will provide some data that can be used to alert the control centre to congestion when it occurs on bus routes. For the selection of congestion strategies to be automatic and to be triggered before the congestion becomes severe, it is likely that a major investment in additional street detection would need to be made. Strategy selection is a facility that is part of Common Database products and is therefore an established technology. The main localities where the technique has been used to date
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 6 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
have SCOOT detectors which provide a ready source of congestion information without the requirement for a comprehensive new detection network. Integration of SPRUCE with other monitoring / control systems The existing prototype SPRUCE software is scheduled to be replaced by a fully engineered product during the course of 2005. As for the existing control and monitoring systems, it will be a requirement for sites under the control of the SPRUCE module to have their operating status shown on an integrated display. Limited status data will form part of the information that is available from the host UTC system. For more detailed information to be available on the integrated display, it will be necessary to form a link between the proposed Common Database and the SPRUCE module. Road User Charging Road user charging has been implemented in the London Congestion Charging Scheme and other authorities are at various stages of developing urban road user charging schemes. While no plans exist yet for a scheme in Leeds, road user charging would form a natural extension of the current decriminalised enforcement activities of the council. Developing the monitoring and control capabilities of the Leeds UTMC system as proposed by the UTMC strategy would support the operation of any future road user charging scheme. Replacement of Car Park Monitoring and Guidance System To develop a new system to replace the existing Car Park Monitoring and Information System, a design study has been undertaken to establish the car parks to be monitored, the location of signs, the zoning of car parks and the design of the sign faces. The new system will include the central control software and the communication links from the centre to the car parks and signs. While it is possible to purchase a control and monitoring system together with the signs as a package from the sign manufacturers, authorities are starting to take advantage of the availability of UTMC compliant products that allow the signs and control systems to be purchased separately. Separate purchase under the UTMC standard has several advantages; ¨ There is no restriction in the supplier for the signs (provided they meet the UTMC interface specification;
¨ Greater competition in the supply of signs when the system is expanded;
¨ The purchaser has complete flexibility in choice of communication medium between centre and sign. A multi-purpose UTMC communications network could be used for this purpose;
¨ The control and monitoring system can (if required) be purchased and installed before the design of the signs is complete; and
¨ The control system can be integrated with the Common Database. Car park occupancy information can be provided to the general public using a range of media including the web to complement the information provided on VMS signs. Making this information available before travellers arrive in the city could allow them to better plan their mode of travel or route. Linking the control system to the Common Database or making it an integral part of the database would allow car park data to be distributed more widely.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 7 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Exploiting Communication Opportunities (UTMC) A communications plan is needed to ensure that street level telecommunications is considered strategically rather than on an ad hoc, project basis. When the existing and future requirements for communications for all applications including UTC, monitoring systems and VMS are viewed as a whole then the optimum communications solution is likely to differ compared with the solution for any single application. The range of communication solutions for traffic control being introduced by authorities is diverse as illustrated by table 2.1. Not all the solutions listed are UTMC compliant. Of the 3 non- compliant examples, 2 employ internet protocols and may become compliant as the standards evolve. All the solutions except Smartlink provide considerably greater bandwidth than is available on the circuits employed on the Leeds UTC system and offer greater versatility for sharing communication between different applications. Table 2.1; Communications Solutions for UTC with Other applications.
Location UTMC Media / Technology Comments Compliant? Northampton 7 DECT radio technology Siemens specific. (Siemens Smartlink) Portsmouth 7 Mesh Radio communications (IP Mobile comms to buses and based) signals Preston 4 BT leased circuits (xDSL) All sites within same exchange area (UTMC demonstrator) Sheffield 4 1. Private fibre in city centre. 2. Leased VPN from Powernet based on ADSL connections. 3. Wireless LAN York 4 Wireless LAN to fixed time UTC site. (UTMC Demonstrator) London 7 GPRS (IP based) Under development for traffic control.
IP over leased lines (Microsense‘s TCAM) Undergoing trials in London. A communications study would investigate what these technologies (both UTMC and non- compliant) can offer as a solution to Leeds‘ current and future requirements. Sharing Travel Network Information A facility for publishing images from traffic surveillance cameras to the web could be provided as standard facility within a Common Database. Images have to be taken from the CCTV matrix and converted to a digital format and are normally published as stills refreshed at intervals ranging from 6 frames per second to 1 frame every 5 minutes. To interface with the system in its current form would require a digital Codec to be interfaced with the matrix. If control of the cameras from the Common Database is required an interface based on the proprietary protocols embedded in the Coe system would have to be configured. Coe, who supplied the CCTV system approximately 4 to 5 years ago have indicated that the system control equipment is based on their Telecommand 16 which is now obsolete.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 8 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Upgrading to the current Telecommand ii would introduce a range of new facilities that could assist in the management of the system and would make it simpler to extract images to publish on the web. An upgraded system would have an IP interface that would allow CCTV images to be directed onto an IP network and into a Common Database. The other facilities include an audit trail that would log the usage of the cameras and a logon macro that would set monitors to preset cameras and positions as required by an individual operator or triggered by a message from the Common Database. An upgrade of the CCTV control software/hardware would therefore be likely to form part of the project to publish CCTV images on the web. The need to exercise editorial control over the images published on the web will require that published images are automatically restricted to preset camera positions with the lens zoomed out. Images will have to be either blanked or not updated when the camera is moved from the preset position.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 9 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Strategy Implementation Main Components Pursuing the Leeds UTMC strategy outlined in section 2 will entail an investment in both instation upgrades, street equipment and communications infrastructure. At this stage, the requirements at the instation are reasonably well defined and involve relatively modest capital funding in the region of – 200 to – 300k in comparison with costs for outstation equipment which could exceed – 1m when VMS, congestion monitoring and UTMC communications upgrades are taken into account. The communication and street infrastructure requirements require further study work and input from departments outside the UTC group. The UTMC strategy pursued by the UTMC group could be limited to the provision of central instation software and hardware together with centre to on street communications. These measures would address management and operational issues within the department, and provide a platform for future development of the street infrastructure in response to needs external to the group which may well include requirements generated by the Traffic Management Act. Limiting the scope of the strategy in this way decouples the decisions and programme relating to the more urgent instation investment from any commitment for major investment in the street infrastructure (VMS, counters etc) which is currently absent. The centrepiece of the strategy for the central instation is a Common Database, which has the potential to provide nearly all the functionality required. How far existing database products meet the Leeds requirements is considered in more detail in section 3.2. Car park monitoring and VMS control can form part of the database functionality, and it is recommended that this approach is adopted in Leeds as it supports the de-coupling of the instation and on street components of the system. Stage confirmation logging could also be integrated with the Common Database, but it would almost certainly be more cost effective to build on the work undertaken in the SPRUCE project to develop a comprehensive logging module separate from SPRUCE but utilising the software that has already been developed within the project. It is recommended that this option is investigated with the SPRUCE software developers. The main components of the strategy and their proposed phasing over 2 years are shown in table 3.1. Following installation of a Common Database there will be a continuing maintenance and operating responsibility in relation to the web site and to the data held in the database. It is likely that as requirements evolve, it will be necessary to adapt or extend the software in ways that cannot be defined currently. The most effective arrangement would be for these services could be provided by the Common Database supplier. Adherence to the UTMC standard will ensure that upgrades or expansion of the database ‘s scope or functions could be undertaken by either the modification of existing software by the supplier, or by the introduction of new software and hardware by a different supplier.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 10 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council Table 3.2; Strategy Components
Year 1 (2005/2006) Year 2 (2006/2007) Ongoing Services
Instation Facilities / Services
Common Database Common Database with Common Database facility - Common Database Services; ¨ common GUI for site status displays and faults; ¨ AVL Adapter ¨ Software support; ¨ car park monitoring and VMS control facilities; ¨ Semi automatic ¨ Website management; ¨ web display of CCTV. congestion / incident ¨ Database management and ¨ Adapters for RMU systems (3No), UTC & Fault report strategies support. system. ¨ SPRUCE Adapter ¨ Link to CCTV matrix. CCTV Control System Upgrade Coe system to Telecommand ii Upgrade
Stage Monitoring Software development based on SPRUCE Software support Facility
Street Infrastructure
UTMC UTMC Communications Study Implement recommendations UTMC communications network Communications e.g. dial up management
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 11
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Existing Common Database Products Existing Common Database Products are available from 3 suppliers which all claim to be UTMC compliant. This means that they use data objects defined in the UTMC data objects register and use CORBA to exchange data with other databases. Common Databases are in general at an early stage of development, each product having only a handful of applications. They continue to be developed in response to user demand. The facilities currently offered that are relevant to the Leeds requirements are listed in table 3.2. Further investigation of the capabilities of existing products and discussion of Leeds requirements needs to take place to establish how far they are addressed. To link a Common Database to another database or device that does not have a UTMC compliant CORBA interface requires an adapter to act as translator. Adapters have to be specifically programmed and require a detailed knowledge of the data objects resident in the non-UTMC compliant software. This knowledge may be available from the documentation for the software or has to acquired using a network "sniffer". Table 3.3 lists the Leeds central instation devices and identifies those for which adapters already exist in some form. Two of the products have interfaces with a PEEK UTC instation similar to the Leeds system. The Siemens Comet database is oriented towards users of Siemens products and does not yet have an interface to PEEK equipment. Of the 3 RMU instations in Leeds, only the Siemens RMU has existing interfaces. The development of an adapter for the Monitron RMU should be straight forward. An adapter for the Ferranti RMU will not be required because the planned removal of the obsolete Ferranti RMU will mean that existing Ferranti outstation monitoring units will be replaced by either Siemens or Monitron equipment linked to the existing Siemens or Monitron instation. The Kolara fault management system is current supported software and an adapter for it is under investigation currently by one of the suppliers. An interface to the ACIS Real Time Passenger Information System, currently being installed for Metro, is likely to be available by the time it is required for Leeds Design and Study Work To progress the strategy design and study work is required in 2 areas; 1. Development of requirements specifications for additional instation software modules which will include a Common Database incorporating a car park monitoring and guidance system and a UTC stage confirmation logger; and 2. An investigation of options for data communications between the centre and on street equipment and the preparation of a plan. The design work required to develop the on-street aspects of a Car Park VMS scheme is outside the scope of the UTMC strategy as defined in this document and would be the responsibility of a department within Leeds City Council. The development of requirements specifications will be undertaken internally within the UTMC group with support from a specialist consultant. The investigation of options for data communications requires communications expertise available from a handful of specialist consultants with experience of applying the UTMC standards. A preliminary assessment of options could be undertaken within a budget of approximately – 10k.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 12 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Table 3.2 Facilities in Current CDB Products
Instation Facility Mott Macdonald TENET Siemens (COMET) Integrated Equipment Status Display 4 4 Car Park Monitoring and Sign Control Norwich, Preston, Stockport York, Sheffield Only available via Siespace and only compliant for Software (UTMC compliant) VMS comms. Automatic Strategy Selection Preston York, Sheffield 4 Highways Agency Information via TIH Preston Under development 4 Integrated Fault logging Glasgow (UTC & FRAS) 7 (under development) 7 Real Time Count Data Storage and 4 York, Sheffield ? Retrieval Remote data Viewers Standard Facility Standard Facility 4 Public access via web Lancs demonstrator York 4 CCTV to web Matisse 7 4
Table 3.3 Adapters Developed in Current CDB Products
Instation Interfaces Mott Macdonald TENET Siemens (COMET)
Peek UTC System Glasgow York 7 Ferranti RMU 7 7 7 Siemens RMU Lancashire 7 4 Monitron RMU 7 7 (known to be feasible) 7 Kolara Fault System 7 (under investigation ÷ seems feasible) 7 ACIS RTPI System Matisse (limited) , Lancs York (waiting for commissioning by 7 under discussion Acis)
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 13
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 14
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Contract Preparation Competitive tendering will be required for the purchase of a Common Database and associated services. The other changes at the control centre, the CCTV upgrade and software developments based on SPRUCE can be purchased only from a single supplier and therefore cannot be part of a competitive tender. The Common Database Tender will include; 1. The supply of existing Common Database products adapted and configured for Leeds; 2. Special to project software to meet Leeds‘ specific requirements that are not met by current products; 3. The development of adapters for the remote monitoring instations, and the Kolara Fault Management System; 4. Software support; and 5. Web site and database management and operation services. While requirements in some functional areas can be specified completely during the preparation of tender documents over the next few months, facilities required in later years are less clear. For example, changes in technology, transport policy and legal responsibilities are likely to have an impact on the management and operation of the control centre over this period. However, evolving requirements in response to such influences is an issue for all highway authorities. Where there are requirements that are common between authorities using the same supplier, a collaborative approach is feasible. For example, Siemens have a user group for Comet which jointly funds development of new facilities and it is possible that similar arrangements will be introduced by the other suppliers. Alternatively, when an authority has a specific requirement not shared by others, it can be competitively tendered and if necessary, provided as a separate third party software module linked to the Common Database using UTMC protocols. This flexibility made possible by the UTMC standard, contrasts markedly with the traditional approach to UTC in which authorities are tied to their original system supplier for software modifications. Evolving future requirements do not therefore necessarily have to be accommodated within the initial purchase contract.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 15 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Costs and Benefits of Strategy Budgetary Costs Preliminary budgetary capital costs for new instation hardware and software that is not yet part of an existing programme, are given in table 4.1. Costs for UTC communications upgrades will be estimated as part of the communications study. Table 4.1; UTMC Strategy Capital Costs
Year 05/06 06/07
Common Database Common Database incorporating monitoring and 140k status displays, car park monitoring and guidance, web facilities Adaptors for PEEK UTC, Siemens and Monitron RMS 60k & Kolara Fault Management System AVL Adapter 20k SRUCE Corba interface / Adapter 30k Congestion / Incident Strategy Software 30k UTC Stage Confirmation Logging Software 25k (SPRUCE) Control Centre Upgrade 10k
Totals 235k 80k The annual costs for Common Database services and software support are expected to be in the order of – 50k per annum. Benefits of Strategy A tabulation of the expected benefits of the strategy is given in table 4.2. Implementing the strategy will allow the existing traffic signal infrastructure which has an estimated capital value of – 35m to be better operated and managed. Renewal of the Car Park Monitoring and Traffic Management System will provide a new and expanded car park guidance system that will reduce the mileage spent searching for vacant spaces. Exploiting communication opportunities will support the benefits provided by the on street infrastructure by helping to contain future revenue costs through a saving of in the region of – 250k per annum from potential future cost increases. Adopting UTMC standards will increase competition in the supply of equipment leading to savings in the purchase costs for instation equipment and VMS of – 50k to – 100k. The sharing of travel network information with the public will help guide their journey decisions and as a result reduce loading on congested areas during peak periods. Acting together, these measures will have a range of beneficial impacts as follows; ¨ Improved traffic signal safety;
¨ A reduction in network congestion valued at over –0.5m per annum;
¨ Improved journey times for public and private transport;
¨ Reduced pedestrian waiting times;
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 16 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
¨ Reduced vehicle emissions.
The strategy will also create a platform for the future expansion of increased real time monitoring that may be needed to perform the Authority‘s responsibilities under the Traffic Management Act.
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 17 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 18
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Table 4.2; Benefits of Leeds UTMC Strategy
Strategy Aims Expected Outcomes Benefits Improved Management 1. Quicker and more effective action to implement strategies to Reduced congestion. Estimated annual cost of congestion on principal and Operation of UTMC alleviate one-off causes of congestion road network in Leeds is –50 to 100m. On the basis of say 1% saving Systems would give rise to –0.5 to –1m per annum (–1500 to –3000 per day). 2. Faster, more efficient handling of faults by control room staff Improving the efficiency and reliability of signals will have a beneficial leading to shorter equipment downtime, increased availability impact on the safety of traffic signals, network congestion, journey times and improved traffic control efficiency. for public and private transport, pedestrian waiting times, and vehicle emissions. 3. More comprehensive and precise information available to the There will be a reduction in cost for investigating signal status in public (usually via solicitors) relating to traffic signal status. response to public enquiries. This information would be obtained at reduced cost in staff time relative to current systems. Improved precision will in some circumstances assist the investigation of traffic signal (Income from dealing with solicitor‘s inquiries is –4,000 per annum) faults.
4. Adopting the UTMC standard at the instation will provide the System benefits maximised cost effectively ÷ competitive tendering for flexibility to adapt to changes without radically altering the instation components valued –0.25 m to –0.5 m. existing system and to competitively tender for new instation components. Replacement of Car Park 1. A replacement Car Park Guidance System, relevant to the A reduction in vehicle mileage will have attendant benefits in reduced Monitoring and Traffic existing road network would reinstate the benefits of reduced loading on the network, reduced congestion and vehicle emissions. Management System time and mileage spent searching for vacant car park spaces during busy shopping periods. Assistance with car parking will help maintain the attractiveness of Leeds 2. Guidance given to traffic in the event of minor or major as a shopping destination. In a survey of the York CP System, 67% of problems in the road network respondents noticed the VMS signs and take action on the basis of the 3. Information given to public in event of an emergency; traffic information they provide. diversions implemented
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Leeds City Council Table 4.2; Benefits of Leeds UTMC Strategy
Strategy Aims Expected Outcomes Benefits Exploiting Communication 1. Greater flexibility in the purchase of outstation equipment Reduced capital costs for equipment. E.g. competitive tendering of 20 Opportunities (UTMC) leading to greater competition (e.g. VMS signs). Car park VMS signs at –300k could save 20% or –60k. 2. Enhanced communication capacity increasing the range and Improved communication capacity will support / enhance the benefits volume of real time data on equipment and traffic conditions yielded by the other strategy aims while minimising the revenue costs of available centrally. This data has the potential (in conjunction communications. with instation systems) to be used to inform the public, Current communication costs are –0.25 m per annum. A doubling of improve the operation of equipment or the control of traffic. capacity using current technology would cost a further –0.25m per annum. Under UTMC communications the increased capacity could be achieved at no extra revenue cost, but there would be additional capital costs. Sharing Travel Network 1. Data already available at the control centre (e.g. CCTV More efficient management of the network will reduce congestion. Information images) can be made accessible to highway network Better informed travel decisions could result in reduced network loading managers and the public. The data can be used to improve as travellers avoid congested parts of the network by altering their management of the network and to help the pubic make intended travel mode, route or time. The reduced loading would minimise decisions about their journey. the impact of unpredictable congestion. Eg peak spreading could save a significant proportion (say 1% to 5%) of network congestion valued at a total of –50 m to –100m per annum
Leeds UTMC Strategy Final Report 20
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: G Robertson
Tel 2476753
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE: 11 FEBRUARY 2005
SUBJECT: NEW LEEDS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT & CAR PARK VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGNS (01248)
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For : ALL Ethnic Minorities Women Disabled People
Executive Board ü Eligible for Call In ü Not eligible for Call In Decision (details contained within the report)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This reports asks for approval to procure and install 20 dynamic car park signs and 12 variable message signs in Leeds at a total cost of –593,000 works plus –142,000 staff. (40,000 staff previously approved).
· The existing car park signs were installed before the loop road circulation system was implemented. Consequently many are not in the right place to direct traffic. In addition the system is old and not fully functional.
· A new system would provide more noticeable, reliable and comprehensive provision of car park information. This would help tackle congestion by reducing the number of cars circulating in the network looking for a car park and also reducing the number of vehicles queuing for a space at a full car park.
· The 12 variable message signs would allow 4 lines of text to be displayed. They would be placed on major approaches to the city centre. Normally they would display car park information, however they could be used to advise drivers of congestion or road closures. In the event of an emergency they could also be used to inform and direct drivers appropriately.
· The system proposed has the capacity to include additional signs to cater for any new car parks or other traffic management needs that may arise.
· This report is linked to the report also submitted at this time …Enhancements to the Urban Traffic Control computer control system‘, which includes in its scope the computer hardware PDF createdand w ithso fFinePrinttware needed pdfFactor to controly trial av ersionnew signing http://www.fineprint.com system. 1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To obtain authority to procure and a new dynamic signing system to improve traffic conditions in Leeds by presenting up-to-date information to drivers.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 The existing system of variable car park signs was designed before the …Loop‘ traffic circulation system was implemented. They are old and not sufficiently noticeable for today‘s street environment. There is a need for more comprehensive signing with appropriately placed modern signs that would enable traffic queuing for full car parks to be redirected to ones with spaces.
2.2 There is also a need to be able to proactively and semi-automatically direct traffic if there is unusual congestion, a specific traffic problem or a major incident. This could be achieved by fully variable message signs which display a general message in 4 lines of text. They can also be used in liaison with the Leeds Evacuation Team the event of a major emergency.
2.3 A director‘s report on 22 March 2004 outlined the case for a new variable message signing system for Leeds, and gave approval to the expenditure of –40,000 staff costs to develop the proposals. Since then the systems used by other cities have been investigated. This process has shown that the best approach would be to use variable message signs in conjunction with implementing the DfT sponsored development of Urban Traffic Control systems known as UTMC technology (Urban Traffic Management and Control). This is the subject of a report to Executive Board entitled …Enhancements to the Urban Traffic Control computer control system‘ which is being submitted at the same time as this report.
2.4 The attached outline proposal (Appendix 1) provides information on the existing car park signing system in Leeds and the advantages of the more modern system proposed.
2.5 If this approach is used then the interoperability of UTMC systems allows signs for use in a new traffic management/car park signing system to be tendered for on a supply and install basis, so that the Council can select the most appropriate supplier for each type of sign and location. It is considered that this approach will serve road users best, ensure minimum cost signing at each location and be consistent with staged installation.
3.0 PROPOSALS
3.1 It is proposed to purchase and install 20 new car park signs and 12 variable message signs (see plan attached as Appendix 2).
3.2 These signs will be controlled by the proposed UTMC system. As well as the on-street display, car park and incident information will be available to the public on a UTMC website and via text messaging.
3.3 The proposals will provide a range of benefits:
3.3.1 Vastly improved provision of information to the public. The combination of variable message signs on-street, interactive website, and texting facility will provide information to facilitate road users choosing a time or a route that is less congested. In the event of an incident (minor or major) the variable message signs can be used to display vital information. Appendix 3 shows typical sign face displays.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 3.3.2 More efficient use of the road network in Leeds. Drivers will be able to divert to avoid incidents. Fewer drivers will queue for an already full car park, and fewer drivers will circulate searching for an empty car park. This will help reduce congestion. The work done by a consultant in connection with the UTMC proposals estimates that congestion in Leeds costs the community over –50m each year (see appendix 1 of the report mentioned above in 2.3). A 1% reduction in this equates to a benefit of over –500,000 per annum.
3.3.3 The sites for the variable message signs have been chosen with regard to the plans made by Leeds Emergency Planning Unit. In the event of an emergency information can be passed to all drivers entering through the cordon of signs informing them of the situation and instructing them to divert as appropriate.
3.3.4 The signing system will be capable of extension either for additional car parks or if extra variable message signs are deemed necessary later.
4.0 CONSULTATIONS
4.1 Leeds Emergency Planning Unit have been consulted.
5.0 COMMUNITY SAFETY
5.1 The proposals contained in the report have no implications under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
6.0 PROGRAMME
6.1 In line with the Leeds City Council‘s contract procedure rules, it is hoped to advertise for expressions of interest from suppliers in March. It is hoped that work can commence in the autumn of 2005.
6.2 Stage installation and commissioning is envisaged, with priority put on signs relating to car parks that cause significant traffic flow problems.
7.0 CAPITAL FUNDING AND CASHFLOW
Previous total Authority TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST to Spend on this scheme 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's LAND (1) 0.0 CONSTRUCTION (3) 0.0 FURN & EQPT (5) 0.0 DESIGN FEES (6) 40.0 15.0 25.0 OTHER COSTS (7) 0.0 TOTALS 40.0 15.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Authority to Spend TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST required for this Approval 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's LAND (1) 0.0 CONSTRUCTION (3) 593.0 120.0 200.0 200.0 73.0 FURN & EQPT (5) 0.0 DESIGN FEES (6) 102.0 25.0 35.0 25.0 17.0 OTHER COSTS (7) 0.0 TOTALS 695.0 0.0 0.0 145.0 235.0 225.0 90.0 PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Total overall Funding TOTAL TO MARCH FORECAST (As per latest Capital 2004 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008 ON Programme) —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's —000's
Supported Capital Funding (R) 735.0 15.0 170.0 235.0 225.0 90.0
Total Funding 735.0 15.0 170.0 235.0 225.0 90.0
Balance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
7.1 Funding: initial discussions with suppliers have indicated the following costs: works staff 2004/5 - –15,000 2005/6 –120,000 –50,000 2006/7 –200,000 –35,000 2007/8 –200,000 –25,000 2008/9 –73,000 –17,000
Total –593,000 + –142,000 = –735,000
7.2 The estimated total cost of the scheme can be met from the Integrated Transport scheme 99609 within the approved Capital Programme and is eligible for 100% Government funding.
7.3 There will be a slight increase in the revenue costs for line rental and maintenance, estimated at –7,400 pa.
7.4 Staffing: There are no additional staffing implications associated with these proposals.
8.0 RISK ASSESSMENTS
8.1 Should the scheme not proceed then the problems due to traffic looking for a car parking space will increase. Also there will be no way of informing drivers of any incident in the city centre. Leeds will be significantly less able to control traffic congestion.
8.2 No major problems with installing the signs are anticipated. There is flexibility in the exact locations.
8.3 The system is future proof in that additional signs can be added at a later stage. A standard communication protocol will be specified so that there is no worry of being tied to a single supplier.
9.0 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNCIL POLICIES
9.1 Ethnic miorities , women and disabled People: There are no specific implications for ethnic minorities, women or disabled people.
9.3 Environmental Policy: The scheme specifically addresses congestion/queues due to cars circulating or a minor or major incident. Any reduction in congestion will result in reduced emissions and benefit the operations of bus services.
9.4 Local Transport Plan: The proposals contained within this report are in accordance with the objectives of the Plan. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 The Executive Board is requested to:
i) approve the installation of car park and traffic management variable message signs as shown in drawing number TFS/49/3 (Appendix 2) at a total cost of –735,000; and
ii) give authority to incur the expenditure of –593,000 works plus –102,000 staff (–40,000 previously approved) for car park and traffic management variable message signs which can be met from the Integrated Transport scheme 99609 within the approved Capital Programme and is eligible for 100% Government funding.
.
Appendix 1. Internal paper: ” New Leeds Traffic Management/Car Park Dynamic Signing ‘ an outline of the proposal.竡
Appendix 2. Plan of proposed locations of signs
Appendix 3. Sample of a typical sign face as proposed.
G:Shared/Admin/Wordproc/Comm/2005/Ecec Board/Car park signs Exec Board.doc
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com New Leeds Traffic Management/Car Park Dynamic Signing ‘ an outline of the proposal
This report proposes a new system for Leeds city centre car park and traffic management information signs. This system would give reliable and prominent information about car park occupancy, make parking in Leeds easier, reducing queuing for full car parks, and reducing the need for traffic to circulate looking for a space. It would also provide variable message signs to advise drivers of parking availability or congestion/major incidents, and give the tools to re-route traffic in the event of a major disaster. This report outlines the limitations of the current system of variable message signs in use for car parks in Leeds, and outlines the advantages of a new type of information system.
1. The existing system There are currently about 20 variable message signs in the city centre. The signs give the names of car parks, with alternative messages for each car park of 'spaces', 'nearly full', and 'full'. These operate by means of moving triangles inside the sign.
The system was installed in 1994. The signs were designed before the city centre loop road that was in place. Hence the strategy behind the siting of signs is inappropriate for the current road system. Apart from poor siting, the existing signs do not have much impact ÷ this may be due to lack of confidence in the information as well as low impact signs.
The system was conceived to display the words …spaces‘ or …nearly full‘ or …full‘. Modern systems often give the number of spaces available, which increases driver confidence that the information is reliable. The 'Toblerone' display does not have the impact of a digital display. In addition the software on which the existing system is based is difficult to maintain, and is not functioning correctly at the moment. Some signs are currently blanked off, reflecting the fact that the signs themselves need updating. Some car parks have changed name, some no longer exist, while new car parks are now operating. Some of the old signs present maintenance problems. The existing system is working below 50% of its potential. Some car parks have changed their entry system, requiring alterations to the interface to the vehicle count.
There is a need to have signs sited to cover major radials, and located at the points where drivers make parking decisions. They need to direct drivers round the loop to the next car park with spaces.
2. Advantages of a more modern system There are some very sophisticated systems on the market and in use in other cities, using a digital display to indicate exact numbers of spaces. Use of such a display will make the signs more noticeable, and give the public greater confidence in their accuracy. A more modern display will be more consistent with the efforts made by other departments to portray Leeds as a vibrant and progressive city. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com It may be possible for certain car parks could indicate queue length (drivers currently are prepared to head there even when they know they are full). Flexibility for future changes to car parking could be in-built. Up-to-date car park information will be displayed on the internet and available on an automatic text message.
3. Major incidents The addition of VMS signs on each major approach to the city centre will allow a message to be given to the majority of vehicles entering the city centre. This could be used for extreme congestion or for informing and directing people in the event of a major incident. In normal circumstances they could display car park information or a general message ('Welcome to Leeds City Centre ÷ please drive carefully').
4. Proposal 4.1. It is recommended that Leeds CC purchase and install a totally new car parking system. · An opportunity to completely review the strategy behind sign locations and place signs in advance of decision points on the main radials and on the loop. · An opportunity to specify how the system should operate and what facilities it should have · Will have a mix of specific car park signs and more generic text signs. The latter could be used for car park information, or in case of major incident or a special event. · Will be designed with the flexibility to cope with Christmas shopping arrangements, football matches, etc. · The signs will be controlled by upgrading the UTC centre with the next generation of UTMC compliant software. · Car Park data will be readily available to LCC staff. · The system will be expandable for new car parks, extra signs, or the inclusion of some diversion signing. · It would be possible to expand the system to include diversion or routing signs on the Outer Ring Road.
5. Strategy All major approaches to the city centre will have VMS signs. Normally these would display car park information. In the event of an incident (e.g. blocking of the Inner Ring Road) these signs will inform drivers of the problem and recommend a diversion. An incident could be a vehicular accident causing major congestion, or a planned event such as the annual marathon run. The signs will also be designed and sited so that in the event of a major disaster in Leeds information and traffic re-routing could be implemented on all major radials. This will be in line with the City Centre Evacuation Plan. In general signs will be located where there is a choice to join the Inner Ring Road, or an option to U-turn. The Loop would have car park signs encouraging drivers to go on to …other car parks‘ if the nearest one is full. These would be placed at the decision point to join a queue for that car park. Other car park signs will be placed within the city centre as considered appropriate.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 6. Costs
Cost estimate of a new car parking/traffic management system Item Cost Number Cost Car park signs (supply & inst) –10,000 20 –200,000 VMS for traffic mngmnt (supply & inst) –19,000 12 –228,000 Sign transmission equipment –1,500 32 –48,000 Electricity supply installation –1,000 32 –32,000 Car park data collection equipment –2,000 20 –40,000 Car park transmission costs –1,500 20 –30,000 Decommissioning old signs –15,000 total works cost —593,000 staff –142,000 total cost —735,000
Revenue cost Current costs Line rental 200 52 –10,400 –5,000 Sign maintenance –7,000 –5,000 total increase in revenue —7,400
7. Phasing
The purchase of the signs would be staged. The car park signs will be installed first, starting with the more critical car parks in terms of their contribution to congestion. This would be followed by the traffic management variable signs.
Gordon Robertson, Dec 04
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: Steve Speak
Tel: (0113) 24 78086
REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REPORT TO: EXECUTIVE BOARD
DATE: 11 FEBRUARY 2005
SUBJECT: DEPUTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL MEETING ON 12 JANUARY 2005 REGARDING PROPOSALS FOR A NEW PRISON IN THE GARFORTH AREA
Electoral Wards Affected: Specific Implications for: Ethnic Minorities o Garforth and Swillington Women o Disabled People o Executive Eligible for call in Not Eligible for call in Board (details contained in the report Decision
SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to inform Executive Board of two deputations to Council on 12 January 2005 concerning the possible development of a new prison in Garforth.
Council received deputations from Mark Dobson of the Garforth Residents Association and from a group comprising Alan and Pamela Lamb, Colin Warner and Brian Colley. Copies of their statements to Council are attached to this report.
Council also passed a resolution regarding the decision to short-list the Garforth site and requiring that the Government be advised of the Council‘s concerns.
Councillor Carter has subsequently written to the Home Secretary and the Prisons Minister. A copy of this correspondence is attached.
The Development Department has received confirmation that Garforth is one of a short-list of six sites in West Yorkshire together with additional background information. Officers will be providing a technical response in due course.
Members are invited to note the contents of this report and the 2 delegations to Council.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Council meeting of 12 January 2005 received 2 deputations from Garforth residents concerning proposals for a new prison which may be located at the junction of the M1 and A642 on the northern edge of the town. The deputations were made by Mark Dobson, the chairperson of the Garforth Residents Association, and by a group comprising Alan and Pamela Lamb, Colin Warner and Brian Colley who are also Garforth residents. Copies of their statements to Council are attached as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 respectively.
1.2 The statements raise a number of concerns with the proposals. The statement from Mr Dobson refers to: the employment allocation which covers the proposed site; conflict with the government‘s own guidelines on prison location; and the inappropriateness of the rural/green belt setting. The other statement highlights: the potential impact on a town such as Garforth; low unemployment levels locally; the impact on property prices; and the pressure for the release of yet more green belt land.
1.3 In addition to the deputations the meeting of Council on 12 January 2005 also debated a White Paper Motion tabled by Councillor Murray and an amendment proposed by Councillor Millard. Council resolved as follows:
…The Council regrets the Government‘s decision to short-list Garforth as a site for the building of a new prison, notes that a campaign has been initiated against it and instructs officers to write to both the new Home Secretary and the Prisons Minister in the strongest possible terms making it clear that this Council has strong concerns at the prospect of another prison or Detention Centre anywhere within the city. Council also regrets that the MP for Elmet has suggested other sites in Leeds as suitable‘.
2. COMMENT
2.1 The proposals for a prison at Garforth were explained to officers of the Development Department at a meeting with HM Prison Service on 9 November 2004.
2.2 At this meeting the Prison Service indicated that a review was being undertaken of future prison needs nationwide. There is a shortfall of prison spaces in Yorkshire and Humberside and particular pressure in West Yorkshire. The shortage of spaces is leading to many prisons having to serve their sentences further away from home. The introduction of new, large capacity, multi-function prisons is seen as the way forward. The Garforth site is regarded by the Prison Service as suitable for a 2000 place prison, consistent with this policy.
2.3 The Prison Service subsequently wrote to the Development Department on 17 December 2004, confirming their interest and providing further background information. In this correspondence we were advised that the Prison Service had originally considered a long list of 34 sites in West Yorkshire that apparently met their site criteria. Following a desk top study some 26 sites were inspected. The process has resulted in a short list of 6, including the site at Garforth. The Council has not been made aware of the location of any of the alternative sites, although this information was requested by officers at the meeting.
2.4 On a point of detail the Prison Service has advised that although the new prison would be multi-functional it is not the intention that any new prison would permanently house Category A prisoners. Such prisoners could be held from time to time on remand.
2.5 Following the resolution in Council, the Leader of the Council has written to the Home Secretary and the Prisons Minister to express the Council‘s concern and reflect the strength of feeling evident in the deputations. A copy of the letter from Councillor Carter PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc is attached as appendix 3 to this report. This correspondence concludes by urging the government to seek a more appropriate location for the new prison and to drop the Garforth site from the short list. At the time of writing there had been no response to this correspondence.
2.6 Should the Prison Service nevertheless determine to proceed with proposals for the Garforth site then planning permission would be required.
2.7 It is apparent from the information provided by the Prison Service that they recognise and understand the issues raised by residents and have sought to address them when dealing with prison proposals elsewhere in the Country. The Prison Service is therefore experienced in dealing with local opposition to its proposals. Officers will be responding to the information provided by the Prison Service in due course.
3. RECOMMENDATIONS
(i) Members are invited to note the contents of this report and the two delegations to Council.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc 1.0 APPENDIX 1
Deputation to Council 12th January 2005. 2nd Draft.
Lord Mayor, Council members, my name is Mark Dobson and I am the Chairperson of Garforth Residents Association.
With your indulgence I would like to speak for the Residents Association on the issue of a proposed prison in Garforth, and seek your support for a white paper before you today. I wish to outline the reasons why we do not feel Garforth to be an appropriate area for such a project. I speak to you today with a mandate from the residents of Garforth, following our public meeting in November last year.
Why is the site just off the A642 leaving Garforth inappropriate for such a project? Firstly within the last year the current adopted UDP categorized the land as holding key employment opportunities, this could mean, amongst other things, a business, retail, distribution centre or indeed light manufacturing. It was given this status, and I quote, …To preserve the sites availability for the full range of employment uses‘. A prison, with the very narrow range of employment opportunities it would offer, does not fit within the council‘s categorization which was accepted by the Secretary of State.
The Government claim they want to build prisons in urban areas with a view to both area regeneration and the creation of employment opportunities. Garforth currently has unemployment at just below I %, so a prison may bring jobs into the area but not create jobs from within the area. The land under consideration is actually semi-rural with surrounding agricultural and green belt areas, again this does not fall within the Governments own guidelines. We therefore believe the Garforth site is not suitable on any level. In truth there are many areas in the country, and indeed in West Yorkshire , that would benefit from a large capital spending project such as a prison. We are keen however to avoid looking like NIMBY‘s, attempting to pass our problem onto another area, that is not the case. Our argument is based on fact, the Garftrth site is wrong.
These were among the key points I put to Paul Goggins, the Home Office Minister with responsibility for prisons, when I met him in December last year. Also on that visit I presented the Minister with a 2000 signature petition signed by Garforth residents along with individual letters. Not only was Minister made aware of the technical PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc argument, we were also keen to show him the strength of local feeling against the plans. Today I am seeking political support. Cohn Burgon MP has already pledged his opposition to a prison in Garforth publicly, and today I am seeking the support of Council Members.
We told the Minister we would campaign actively against any future planning application that may be forthcoming on the prison and left him in no doubt as to the numbers we would get to object to any application that may be made. Whilst we realize that council members cannot interfere with the planning process, your support against a prison in Garforth is vital. We thank Clir Murray for setting down a white paper before Council on this issue and trust it will find cross party support. This issue is not, and cannot be allowed to become a political football, that will not best serve the people of my community. The Minister made it clear that whoever was in Government following the next election, the wheels of the Civil Service keep turning and these plans will still be on the table. Both the Government and the opposition are committed to a prison building programme, and whilst many of us would no doubt support that, the area chosen for such a project must be the right one. Garforth is the wrong site, it is that simple. That is why we must act now and speak with a single voice.
To conclude we must say there was much concern in Garforth at the sensational and inaccurate way the news was first broken. Whilst we were obviously glad the information was made public the rather crude political oneupmanship that motivated it‘s release did nothing to serve the community. Hopefully how information of this nature is put in the public domain in future is something the council will address as a matter of urgency.
Lord Mayor, Council Members, thank you for your attention,
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc Appendix 2
LORD MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL WE,ARE HERE TODAY AS RESIDENTS OF GARFORTH OPPOSED TO PLANS TO BUILD A PRISON IN OUR TOWN. ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE, PAMELA LAMB, COLIN WARNER, AND BRIAN COLLEY. MY NAME IS ALAN LAMB. BETWEEN US WE HAVE LIVED IN GARFORTH FOR ALMOST 100 YEARS SO I HOPE YOU‘LL AGREE THAT WE SPEAK WITH SOME AUTHORITY ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF OUR TOWN.
IN NOVEMBER LAST YEAR IT WAS REVEALED BY CLLR ANDREW MILLARD VIA THE YEP AND AN EXTENSIVE LEAFLET DROP THAT GARFORTH WAS EARMARKED AS ONE OF 300 POTENTIAL SITES FOR A NEW PRJSON. THE GRA ORGANISED A PUBLIC MEETING WHICH I ATTENDED. OUR MP ADMITTED THAT HE HAD LEARNED OF THESE PROPOSALS SOME TIME BEFORE THEY WERE MADE PUBLIC BUT FELT IT WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO REVEAL THE PLANS AT THIS STAGE. HE DID HOWEVER ORGANISE A MEETING BETWEEN THE PRISONS MINISTER AND GARFORTH RESIDENTS. UNFORTUNATELY, ON RETURNING FROM THIS MEETING, IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE GRA HAD RECEIVED ASSURANCES THAT WERE NO PLANS TO BUILD A PRISON IN GARFORTH. THE IMPRESSION THIS GAVE IS HIGHLY MISLEADING AND DEEPLY IRRESPONSIBLE AS IT WILL LEAD PEOPLE TO THINK THAT THIS PRISON HAS BEEN STOPPED. IT HAS NOT.
I DECIDED TO CONTACT THE PRISON SERViCE DIRECTLY MYSELF, I FOUND OUT SOME EXTREMELY WORRYING INFORMATiON, GARFORTH IS ON A SHORTLIST OF ONLY 6 POTENTIAL SITES IN THE WEST YORKSHIRE AREA. SURVEYS HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN AND THE SITE DEEMED SUITABLE. THERE ARE ALSO PLANS IN PLACE TO DOWNGRADE AND ULTIMATELY CLOSE DOWN WAKEFIELD PRISON WHICH HOUSES CATEGORY A PRISONERS. SO THE CHANCES OF GARFORTH HAVING SOME OF THLWORST OFFENDERS LAND ON ITS DOORSTEP IS VERY REAL. JUST TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR IN REALITY GARFORTH IS ON A LIST OF 6 SITES. WORK WILL MOST LIKELY BEGIN ON THE CHOSEN SITES IN AROUND 18 MONTHS. TIME IS RUNNING OUT.
WE ARE NOT HERE TO CREATE A POLITICAL FOOTBALL OUT OF THIS ISSUE. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH AND IT WOULD BE HUGELY DISRESPECTFUL TO ME AND THE OTHER GOOD PEOPLE HERE TODAY TO SUGGEST THAT WE ARE HERE FOR ANY OTHER REASON THAN WE ARE COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY OPPOSED TO ANY PLANS TO BUILD A PRISON OF ANY KIND IN GARFORTH.
JUST SO THERE IS NO DOUBT, YOU‘LL BE INTERESTED TO KNOW, THAT ON DISCOVERING THAT MARK DOBSON, CHAIR OF THE GRA, WAS ALSO LEADING A DEPUTATION ON THE SAME SUBJECT, I PASSED ON ALL MY CONTACT DETAILS IN ORDER THAT WE COULD COMBINE AND SPEAK WITH ONE UNITED VOICE. I FELT THAT HE WOULD BE A MORE APPROPRIATE PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc SPOKESMAN THAN ME AS HE IS SUPPOSEDLY APOLITICAL. MR DOBSON REFUSED TO EVEN DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY, BUT I HAVE SINCE DISCOVERED THAT HE MAY IN FACT INTEND TO STAND FOR COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF A POLITICAL PARTY IN 2006. I HOPE HE WILL CONFIRM THAT THIS IS NOT THE CASE WHEN HE SPEAKS IN A FEW MINUTES.
I THINK I SPEAK FOR MOST PEOPLE IN GARFORTH AND INDEED THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE WHEN I SAY THIS COUNTRY NEEDS MORE PRISONS. CRIME AND IN PARTICULAR VIOLENT CRIME IS OUT OF CONTROL. THOUSANDS OF CRIMES ARE COMMITED EACH YEAR BY CRIMINALS ON EARLY RELEASE SCHEMES, DESIGNED TO EASE THE BURDEN ON OUR AGEING AND OVERCROWDED PRISON SYSTEM.
SEVERAL YEARS AGO THE RESTAURANT I WORKED IN WAS ROBBED. I WAS BUNDLED INTO A TINY OFFICE AT KNIFEPOINT BY FOUR MASKED MAN AND ORDERED TO HAND OVER THE CONTENTS OF THE SAFE BEFORE BEING SPRAYED IN THE FACE WITH CS GAS. YOU‘LL UNDERSTAND THEREFORE, THAT LIKE THE VICTIMS OF MUGGERS AND MURDERERS, RAPISTS AND PAEDOPHILES, THAT I WOULD SLEEP A LOT EASIER KNOWING THAT THE VILE PERPATRATORS OF THESE CRIMES WERE LOCKED UP BEHIND BARS. YOU‘LL ALSO UNDERSTAND MV HORROR AT DISCOVERING THAT THE VERY SAME KIND OF PEOPLE ARE ABOUT TO BE HOUSED ON MY DOORSTEP,
SOME WILL SAY THAT THE PRISONS HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE SO WHY NOT GARFORTH? I‘LL TELL YOU WHY NOT. GARFORTH IS A THRIVING TOWN, WELL SITUATED AND ALREADY HEAVILY DEVELOPED. IT HAS EXCELLENT PRIMARY SCHOOLS, ONE OF WHICH IS A MERE 500 YARDS FROM THE PROPOSED SITE, AND ONE OF THE BEST SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN THE REGION. UNEMPLOYMENT IS LESS THAN ONE PER CENT. WE DON‘T NEED THE JOBS A PRISON WOULD BRING. IT WOULD MEAN MORE HOUSES BEING BUILT AND MORE GREEN BELT BEING DESTROYED. HOUSE PRICES WOULD PLUMMIT AND THE WHOLE COMPLEXION OF OUR TOWN WOULD BE CHANGED FOREVER.
THIS ISSUE WIll. ULTIMATLEY BE DECIDED BY NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. SO WHAT WE ASK IS THAT ALL THOSE OF YOU ELECTED TO REPRESENT OUR VIEWS AND INDEED ANYONE WHO HAS AN INTEREST IN STOPPING THESE PLANS COME TOGETHER WITH THE LOUDEST AND MOST POWERFUL VOICE POSSIBLE. OUR MP AND OTHERS HAVE SOUGHT TO PLAY DOWN THE PROPOSALS WHICH IS THE MOST DANGEROUS POSSIBLE THING TO DO AT THIS TIME. WHETHER YOU‘RE A RESIDENT, BUSINESS PERSON, COUNCILOR. MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT OR ANYONE ELSE, IT IS IN NO ONES INTERESTS TO BUILD A PRISON IN GARFORTH. PLEASE GET BEHIND CLLR CARTER AND THE NEW ADMINISTRATION TO STOP THIS. THE GOVERNMENT MUST GET THE MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR, THIS PRISON MUST BE STOPPED.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc Appendix 3
2.0 COUNCILLOR ANDREW CARTER
3.0 LEADER OF THE COUNCIL
2nd Floor East Civic Hall CONFIDENTIAL Leeds LS1 1UR The Right Hon Charles Clarke MP West Riding of Yorkshire Home Secretary The Home Office Work Telephone: (0113) 2474444 50 Queen Ann`s Gates Fax: (0113) 2343640 London Email: [email protected] SW1H 9AT Our Ref: AC/VKX13/GN/AC21
21 January 2005
Dear Minister
4.0 PROPOSED PRISON AT GARFORTH, LEEDS
You will no doubt be aware that as part of the current review of the options for meeting future demands for prison space HM Prison Service has identified a site at Garforth, near Leeds, as having the potential to accommodate a new 2000 place prison.
Before any further advance in the site selection process I think you should be aware of the very strong reservations that this Council has to these proposals, and the strength of feeling in the local community.
The last Council meeting, on 12 January 2005, received two deputations from local residents raising a number of concerns and forcefully expressing their opposition to any prison scheme on this site. At the same meeting Council passed the following resolution:
This Council regrets the Government's decision to short-list Garforth as a site for the building of a new prison, notes that a campaign has been initiated against it and instructs officers to write to both the new Home Secretary and the Prisons Minister in the strongest possible terms making it clear that this Council has strong concerns at the prospect of another prison or detention centre anywhere within the City. Council also regrets that the MP for Elmet has suggested other sites in Leeds as suitable.
I have to say that the Council's concerns are shared across the political spectrum. Garforth is a small town lying in the rural area that extends across the whole of the eastern part of the Leeds District. In the Councils view the type and scale of facility proposed would be alien and wholly inappropriate in such a location however well designed and screened.
Continued/“ PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc The Rt Hon Charles Clarke MP
2
21 January 2005
The Council recognises that there is, regrettably, a continuing need to provide for facilities to house an ever growing number of offenders. However, the Leeds District already houses a number of penal institutions and in the view of Council we are already contributing more than our fair share of such facilities.
I am aware that HM Prison Service has written to the Council providing further details and justification for the proposals. Officers will be providing a technical response in due course. However, you should be under no illusions about the strength of feeling on this matter.
I am also aware that there are a number of other sites under consideration in the Yorkshire area. Although details of these alternative sites have not been made known to us and while I acknowledge that this sort of proposal is likely to be emotive in many locations I would urge that a more suitable alternative be sought and that Garforth be removed from the list of options currently under consideration.
Yours sincerely
Councillor Andrew Carter Leader of the Council
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 21 - prison5.doc AGENDA ITEM NO.:
Originator: Martin Gray/Ian Mackay/ M White Tel: 247 4313/247 8090/ 247 7908 REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBOURHOODS AND HOUSING AND DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT REPORT TO EXECUTIVE BOARD DATE : 11TH FEBRUARY 2005 SUBJECT : BEESTON HILL AND HOLBECK NEIGHBOURHOOD RENEWAL AREA STRATEGIC PLAN
Electoral Wards Affected : Specific Implications For :
Beeston and Holbeck Ethnic Minorities City and Hunslet Women Disabled People
Executive Eligible for Call In x Not eligible for Call In Board (details contained in the report) Decision
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report outlines work undertaken to date on the Strategic Plan for the regeneration of Beeston Hill and Holbeck Neighbourhood Renewal Area. It outlines the work done in producing the Land Use Framework for the area which provides the context for taking decisions about the physical fabric in the area and work on the Service Improvement Plan which outlines a Framework for addressing the key issues and need in the area, by improving services.
The report asks members of Executive Board to:-
a) Approve the Land Use Framework as Supplementary Planning Guidance.
b) Note the reports contents.
c) Endorse the Strategic Plan, Service Improvement Framework and Land Use Framework as the regeneration strategy for Beeston Hill and Holbeck.
d) Endorse proposals for delivering the strategy as outlined in paragraph 7.1.
1.0 PURPOSE
1.1 This report outlines work undertaken to date on the Strategic Plan for Beeston Hill and Holbeck. The Plan consists of the Land Use Framework, which is about the future use
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com of land, buildings and spaces and the Service Improvement Framework, which is about improvements in service delivery.
2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Members are requested to:
1) Note the contents of this report; 2) Approve the Land Use Framework as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG); 3) Endorse the Strategic Plan ÷ the Land Use Framework and the Service Improvement Framework as the regeneration strategy for Beeston Hill and Holbeck; 4) Endorse the proposals for delivering the strategy as outlined in paragraph 7.1.
3.0 BACKGROUND
3.1 The Leeds Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy identified Beeston Hill and Holbeck as one of three areas in need of comprehensive regeneration in 2001. A Neighbourhood Renewal Partnership Board for the area has overseen the development of a 10 year strategy. This commitment to priority neighbourhoods is maintained in Vision for Leeds II.
3.2 Beeston Hill and Holbeck was designated as an area for comprehensive regeneration in recognition both of the challenges faced by the area (City & Hunslet and Beeston & Holbeck wards continue to experience some of the highest levels of deprivation in England), and also the opportunities created by proximity to the city centre, links to Holbeck Urban Village, and good transport networks, especially to the M621 motorway.
3.3 Beeston Hill and Holbeck has also been identified as a priority neighbourhood within the Area Delivery Plan for Inner South Area Committee for 05/06 and in the Community Plan of the former Beeston and City and Holbeck Wards.
4.0 DEVELOPING THE REGENERATION STRATEGY
4.1 There are two elements to the strategy:-
· A Land Use Framework (LUF) ÷ based on sustainable regeneration principles and the needs and aspirations of local people, this provides the context for future decisions about land use and helps create a framework for investment for the public and private sector. The LUF offers, for the first time in Beeston Hill and Holbeck, the opportunity to take a more visionary approach to the regeneration of the area by focusing on making potential investment opportunities benefit local people; · A Service Improvement Framework (SIF) ÷ this outlines a framework for addressing the key issues and need in the area, by improving services. The SIF acknowledges that the delivery of good quality services, responsive to the needs of the area, are a key element in the regeneration process.
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 5.0 LAND USE FRAMEWORK (LUF)
5.1 The Neighbourhood Renewal Partnership Board commissioned the Development Department to produce the LUF. This is the first example where the Development Department has produced, designed and project managed such a Framework on behalf of a client.
5.2 The LUF will not only provide a greater degree of certainty and confidence to existing and potential investors but will provide hope for residents who already live in the area and who play a critical role in making the area more stable and sustainable.
5.3 As Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), the LUF will be used as a material consideration in the determination of planning applications.
What does the Framework Contain?
There are four key aspects to this Framework:
1. Location and context plans that explain the area covered.
2. The Vision for the Area ÷ this is made up of:
…Making Connections‘ (Plan 2)
Opportunities (Plan 3)
3. …Urban Design Opportunities‘ ÷ these aim to raise the stakes, to improve the image and quality of life in Beeston Hill and Holbeck. They also, where appropriate, acknowledge what we have at the moment.
4. Development Opportunities ÷ these are to be used to identify uses for sites and how to take next steps.
What are the key aims and issues?
- Assist in …closing the gap‘ between this area and the rest of the City ÷ to make this area an important part of the social, economic, sporting and cultural life of Leeds.
- Consider ways to improve the image and identity of Beeston Hill and Holbeck.
- Identify and explore opportunities for improving housing and choices for local residents and attract new investment into the area.
- Improve connections to and from Beeston Hill and Holbeck to other parts of the city, as well as connections within the area.
- Protect and enhance the role, quality and location of greenspace.
- Creation of sustainable and attractive centres for Beeston Hill, Holbeck, Parkside and West Hunslet.
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Provide an urban design analysis to support sustainable and attractive neighbourhoods.
- Address community safety concerns.
- Create an area where residents will be proud to live.
- Support community engagement in neighbourhood renewal.
- Re-use of sites and buildings to benefit the local area.
- Use the area‘s listed buildings and heritage to assist regeneration.
5.4 The Framework is split into four areas ÷ Holbeck, West Hunslet, Beeston Hill and Parkside ÷ the same theme and approach has been applied to each area, which includes a section on …Urban Design Opportunities‘ and …Development Opportunities‘.
5.5 The underlying approach has been to engage local people and to make the regeneration of a predominantly residential area more transparent and inclusive.
CONSULTATION
5.6 Draft versions of the LUF and SIF were subject to an intensive period of community consultation in Spring 2004, where over 400 local people were engaged in a variety of events, including a series of workshops, a mobile consultation bus, on-street questionnaires, school events and a number of focus groups with people who have been traditionally under-represented in regeneration.
5.7 Local people were asked to consider a number of options for specific sites and ideas for their neighbourhood in general. This approach allowed local people to feel fully engaged and resulted in positive solutions being put forward to resolve difficult problems.
5.8 The main themes and issues arising from the consultation are summarised below. These findings have been reflected in the final LUF document.
· Security and safety ÷ there is both a need and a desire to improve the image of Beeston Hill and Holbeck and to increase pride in belonging; most people mentioned the need to tackle safety and security within housing neighbourhoods. · Housing ÷ a strong desire was expressed to retain and enhance stable communities; but also, there was a clear understanding and acceptance of the need to consider in more detail the housing clearance options which are available. · Transport ÷ improved links for pedestrians and cyclists were popular amongst all age groups ÷ and these improvements were seen as important not just within Beeston Hill and Holbeck but to the city centre and beyond; strong interest was expressed for improved public transport in general, but particularly to South Leeds Stadium which is seen as less accessible to local people; safe routes to schools were a particular concern throughout the area. · Management ÷ many local people recognise and value the assets of the area and better management of them. · Greenspace ÷ the quality of existing greenspaces was not rated highly, particularly from a security point of view; the value of new areas of
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com greenspace/public space/focal points was a consistent theme throughout the consultation. · Community ÷ There was a general desire to improve the provision of community facilities including shops, welfare facilities, meeting spaces, cultural activities and places for cross-cultural integration. · Young people ÷ local people are clear that there is a strong need to provide facilities to keep young people safely and healthily entertained and engaged, especially in the evenings; there is a tradition in the area of playing in the street or close to home and this has been eroded due to personal safety fears. · Redevelopment opportunities ÷ local people consistently said that they want reassurance that redevelopment will be sustainable and will benefit local people and the local economy and community. · Public art ÷ the value of public art as well as …greening‘ the area was seen as important by many. · Potential student community in Holbeck ÷ consultation considered the pros and cons of a student community in Holbeck ÷ it was concluded that although this may assist regeneration of the area, further detailed consultation is needed.
5.9 Key agencies were consulted in the summer and the autumn. These include the Leeds Initiative, English Partnerships, Yorkshire Forward, Housing Corporation, Sport England and the Government Office. 5.10 As well as providing a framework for physical regeneration the LUF addresses issues of connectivity to the city centre, Holbeck Urban Village, the South Leeds Stadium, the new Pool and the new South Leeds High School. It also provides a context for a range of other key developments which are underway or are proposed, and which together indicate the considerable investment being drawn into the area from both public and private sectors. Such major developments include:
· The proposed Holbeck PPFI scheme; · Two new health centres, funded through the NHS LIFT scheme; · New West Hunslet Primary School currently being developed by Education Leeds; · New Sure Start Family Centre at South Leeds Sports Centre; · –450,000 of new investment in multi use games facilities in Cross Flatts Park ÷ a combination of Lawn Tennis Association, Football Foundation, SRB4 and others funding; · The rebuilding of the Joseph Priestley College Alec Beevers site; · The planned refurbishment of Shaftesbury House for residential use; · Housing and environmental works including the Tempest Road facelift and group repair schemes; · The redevelopment of the Hunslet Hall Road Shopping Centre.
5.11 The LUF has been well received. It was adopted by the Regeneration Partnership Board at its meeting on 1st October 2004.
6.0 SERVICE IMPROVEMENT FRAMEWORK (SIF)
6.1 Alongside the need for investment in the physical environment, the strategy in Beeston Hill and Holbeck has also focused on the need to ensure improvements in G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com service delivery to help meet the needs of communities in the area. The SIF is the mechanism for achieving this. It is made up of a series of themed action plans, corresponding to the themes identified as being critical for the future of the area, as well as themes identified in the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. Each themes action plan includes a set of proposals for action, together with timescales, partners and potential funding sources. In total there are over 300 actions in the Framework. These do not represent detailed and costed actions, but seek to provide a framework within which more detailed proposals can be developed. 6.2 Proposals were largely formulated at a series of service workshops held in November 2003, attended by over 150 service providers in total. The outcomes from these workshops were used to develop draft action plans which have then been subject to further consultation across Council Departments and with partner agencies. 6.3 An action plan for 2004/05 has been produced, made up of those actions that are considered the key initial focus for this financial year. Copies of LUF and a summary of the SIF have been sent to each Executive Board Member and will be available in the Members Library.
7.0 NEXT STEPS - DELIVERING REGENERATION 7.1 The successful delivery of the strategy will rely on the following key issues being addressed:
Additional feasibility and research “ narrowing down options and developing a clear investment strategy
· Funding from Yorkshire Forward has been attracted for 2004/05 and 2005/06 to explore some of the key issues impacting on physical regeneration and investment in more detail ÷ this funding will be used to produce an overall investment strategy for the area, both to inform future capital bids to Yorkshire Forward, but also to enable detailed, costed proposals to be submitted to other potential funders, including English Partnerships, Housing Corporation, and where appropriate the Council‘s capital programme · Four studies will be commissioned funded by the above to progress the Land Use Framework to an implementation strategy and inform future submissions to the Yorkshire Forward Investment Plan. These studies will provide detailed design and costings for future capital spend and investment. - Regenerator 1. Strengthen the Parkside area as an economic driver - Regenerator 2. Develop the Matthew Murray site as a key economic driver of regeneration for the Holbeck area - Regenerator 3. Strengthen links and access between this area and the city centre to facilitate a new student village - Regenerator 4. Strengthen retail as an economic driver of regeneration at Dewsbury Road District Centre - Development appraisal ÷ to identify potential development opportunities which will provide the key investment opportunities as drivers for the regeneration of the neighbourhood renewal area. - Also, the additional feasibility and research will be used to support and develop the next stage of the Housing PPFI bid and other similar initiatives.
Funding “ attracting external funding, and ”bending⣶ mainstream spend to have a bigger impact in Beeston Hill and Holbeck
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com · Funding has already been secured from Regional Housing Board and from the Housing Corporation to progress elements of the housing strategy, including addressing the problems of the worst back to back houses. · Additional external funding will be required both to continue the focus on addressing housing issues, and also in unlocking development potential and investment in the public realm and other environmental measures. At present, work is being undertaken to prepare a Housing PPFI bid for the area ÷ a report elsewhere on the agenda provides further detail on this proposal. · It is also anticipated that private sector funding will be required to address a number of the key issues in the area. The focus of the work of the council and other agencies is therefore to ensure that the right conditions for this investment are created. · It will also be necessary to align the key service priorities outlined in the SIF with the service planning cycles both within and out with the council to ensure that the maximum benefit can be derived from mainstream (revenue) expenditure. · In the short term Neighbourhood Renewal Fund will also play an important role in enabling the momentum of regeneration to be maintained.
Integration with South Area Committee and District Partnership agendas
· Improving services in this area can better be achieved by working with agencies through the mechanisms of the Area Committees and District Partnerships. · The work undertaken to date in the Beeston Hill and Holbeck area provides a model for future work in South Leeds, and should provide the basis for the development of more effective area management. At the same time, some of the key needs and challenges in Beeston Hill and Holbeck can only be addressed by partnership structures covering a wider geographical area.
The identification of the most appropriate model(s) for delivery
A number of options for delivering regeneration in Beeston Hill and Holbeck are likely to be required. The complex nature of land ownership, as well as the potential nature of redevelopment is likely to require consideration of a number of delivery mechanisms within a city wide context, including:
· Further detailed work on an evaluation of the potential options is being carried out.
Effective action planning and performance management
The Neighbourhood Renewal Team are currently overseeing the implementation of key themes in the SIF. This includes direct delivery but also bids for additional funding and on influencing better provision of mainstream services.
8.0 LINKS TO CORPORATE PRIORITIES
8.1 Corporate Plan
- Community Safety
The LUF links directly to the requirement to …design in‘ community safety within the future structural arrangements for the area.
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com - Going up a League
The LUF provides a framework to set the standards for and to encourage inward investment for and to Beeston Hill and Holbeck.
8.2 Leeds Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy
Beeston Hill and Holbeck forms part of the key objectives of the LNRS and the LUF has been designed in accordance with these.
9.0 SUMMARY
9.1 The work undertaken in Beeston Hill and Holbeck demonstrates the value of concerted action, partnership working and comprehensive community engagement to address a number of complex and inter-related issues.
9.2 Crime statistics, unemployment data and school performance tables all suggest that the area is improving, but that problems still remain. There are other positive changes:- improvements to Tempest Road, two new community centres, new private sector housing, refurbished playgrounds, a CCTV scheme for industrial areas. There are also numerous planned investments (two new LIFT centres for the PCT, some housing demolition, a skatepark, a new primary school and a new secondary school) and the potential for significant improvement through Housing PPFI. These are all having a positive effect on the perceptions of the area. 9.3 The Strategic Plan for the area is designed to maintain this momentum and to secure the sustainable regeneration of the area within the next 10-15 years. 10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Members are requested to:
1) Note the contents of this report; 2) Approve the Land Use Framework as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG); 3) Endorse the Strategic Plan ÷ the Land Use Framework and the Service Improvement Framework as the regeneration strategy for Beeston Hill and Holbeck; 4) Endorse the proposals for delivering the strategy as outlined in paragraph 7.1.
G:\AG_REPOR\File Structure\TEST AREA\Committees\Executive Board\110205\Reports\Item 22 - Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA PDF createdStrategi cw Plan.dith FinePrintoc pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com AGENDA ITEM NO.
Originator: Linda Raine
Tel: 247 6220
REPORT OF: Director of Neighbourhoods and Housing REPORT TO: Executive Board DATE: 11th February 2005
SUBJECT: Beeston Hill and Holbeck ‘ Expression of Interest for Housing PFI credits Specific Implications For: Electoral Wards Affected: Ethnic Minorities City and Hunslet Women Beeston and Holbeck Disabled people
Executive Decision Eligible for Call In Not eligible for Call in (details contained in the report)
Executive Summary
The report seeks approval · to submission of an Expression of Interest for housing PFI Credits under the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister‘s Round 4 bidding opportunity, and · to authorise the extension of the responsibilities of the Housing PFI Project Board to include the Beeston Hill and Holbeck scheme. · to agree …in principle‘ that capital receipts linked to disposals as part of the scheme be utilised to contribute to project affordability
The scheme will make a major contribution to improving Council homes within Beeston Hill and Holbeck to meet the Decent Homes Standard and carry out additional works described as Decency Plus which will achieve long term sustainability. As such it will assist in delivering Council Plan objectives and in implementing the Land Use Framework for the Neighbourhood Renewal Area which is the subject of a separate report.
If selected, an Outline Business Case will be prepared for Government approval, to secure PFI credits estimated at –114.8m. 1.0 PURPOSE
1.1 To seek Members‘ approval to an Expression of Interest to the Office of the Deputy Prime for Private Finance Initiative (PFI) credits for Beeston Hill and Holbeck under the housing PFI Round 4 bidding opportunity.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 1.2 To seek approval to extend the responsibilities of the Housing PFI Project Board to cover the Beeston Hill and Holbeck scheme.
1.3 To seek Members‘ approval …in principle‘ to utilising Capital receipts generated by specific disposals which are part of the scheme to contribute to the affordability of the project.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 On 21st January 2004 Executive Board gave its support to submission of an Expression of Interest (EoI) to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) under Round 3 of the housing PFI programme, for PFI credits for Council homes in the Beeston Hill and Holbeck Area. A plan showing the area is attached. Under that bidding Round the Council also submitted an Expression of Interest for Hostels for Adults with Learning Difficulties.
2.2 The Learning Difficulties scheme has, following further developmental work, been selected for inclusion in ODPM‘s programme. The Beeston Hill and Holbeck submission was not selected. The main reason was that, at that time, ODPM felt that the Council did not have the capacity to progress the scheme to the tight timetable required by ODPM. As the scheme met selection criteria on all other counts, ODPM suggested that the Council consider re-submission at the next bidding opportunity.
2.3 An invitation to submit Expressions of Interest under housing PFI Round 4 was issued by ODPM in autumn 2004, with a submission deadline of January 28 th 2005. ODPM‘s priorities are similar to those under Round 3. The scheme therefore appears to still meet key criteria for selection onto the programme.
2.4 The proposal covers the northern part of the Beeston Hill and Holbeck Neighbourhood Renewal Area (NRA), one of the Local Strategic Partnership‘s highest priority areas, and one of the most deprived areas nationally. The scheme fits with Council Plan and Neighbourhood Renewal regeneration priorities, and will help deliver the Government‘s objectives of sustainable communities.
2.5 The strategic objectives of the scheme are to:- · Deliver sustainable, long-term regeneration complementing NRA and other initiatives; · Encourage tenure diversification; · Assist investor confidence for the wider area; · Underpin long-term partnership activity
This scheme will complement activity already taking place or planned in and adjacent to the NRA, and will enable the Council to make a commitment to improve its stock, to reconfigure where necessary to meet future demand and then maintain the standard required for long-term sustainability. Given that the Council owns approximately 30% of the homes in the NRA area, most of which are concentrated in purpose built estates towards the north of the NRA, these improvements will have a significant impact.
2.6 The scope of the scheme is for: · refurbishment of over 1,800 Council homes and their repair and maintenance by the PFI contractor for 30 years · demolition of four blocks of unpopular multi-storey flats facing Holbeck Moor and 40 cottage flats at Fairfax Road · phased demolition of up to 260 older back to backs in the Recreations PDF created with FinePrint· conv pdersionfFactor of y unpopular trial version bedsits http://www.fineprint.com to larger flats or family homes · construction of 60 new Council homes for families · environmental improvements · disposal of cleared sites to the PFI contractor to provide new privately owned homes
Complementary investment in housing is taking place in other parts of Beeston Hill (where homes are predominantly privately owned) utilising a mix of Housing Corporation resources and additional borrowing approvals secured from the Regional Housing Board for this initiative under the West Yorkshire Market Renewal Partnership. On 19th January 2005 Executive Board in principle approval was granted for acquisition, demolition and redevelopment of 133 properties in the Beverleys, which are adjacent to the area covered by the PFI proposal. A facelift scheme on Tempest Road and a Landlords‘ Accreditation scheme are already in place.
The PFI scheme area is immediately south of Holbeck Urban Village where there is already considerable investor activity and interest. A vision has been prepared which will be delivered in partnership with the private sector, and will create a vibrant mixed use area which will help link Beeston Hill and Holbeck NRA to the city centre.
2.7 Land Use Framework
A Land Use Framework (LUF) for the NRA area was in development when the EoI was prepared under Round 3. The LUF sets out a strategic approach to land use in the area and to guide planning decisions. The scope of the PFI scheme was developed with the intention that it would assist in delivering some of the emerging aspirations under the LUF. At the time of submission under Round 3 this was work in progress, so it was not possible to make clear decisions as to the use of Council assets linked to the PFI scheme. The LUF work has progressed during 2004, and there is now a clearer position on land use, options for the area and an opportunity to utilise Council assets via the PFI procurement to deliver the wider regeneration agenda for this part of the City. A separate report to Executive Board will seek approval to the LUF.
3.0 ROUND 4 ‘ SCHEME REVIEW AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
3.1 In partnership with Leeds South Homes the objectives and scope of the scheme have been reviewed. The scheme is still considered to be of major benefit in meeting the overall NRA regeneration objectives. Only minor changes have been made to the scope of the scheme (a small number of additional demolitions and conversions) to ensure that unpopular Council stock for which there is low demand is tackled.
3.2 With assistance from officers of Leeds South Homes (LSH), who currently manage the properties in the scheme on behalf of the Council, stock condition information and costs estimates have been reviewed and updated, as has the impact on LSH ‘s Business Plan. The scheme includes the bulk of the work required to achieve the Decent Homes Standard in this area, a key Council and Government objective.
3.3 Option appraisal
3.3.1 A new requirement this bidding round is to complete an option appraisal to ODPM guidelines comparing investment via LSH with PFI. The purpose of the appraisal is to assess the investment needs of the Council homes in the area and the resources available via LSH or through a PFI scheme, and to determine which option is best able to meet the needs. The options and outcomes must also be the subject of consultation PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com with tenants. The appraisal must be submitted to Government Office for Yorkshire and Humberside and be …signed off‘ by them prior to submission of the EoI.
3.3.2 For the EoI, ODPM require completion of a financial model which compares all three investment options for Council homes; ALMO, stock transfer and PFI. This is to establish that the scheme offers value for money and that PFI is the best option for delivering the improvements. The financial modelling has all been reviewed and updated. The outcome is summarised in section 4 below.
3.4 Consultation
3.4.1 Some consultation was carried out prior to the Round 3 submission. Feedback from tenants‘ representatives and other partners and stakeholders was all positive at that time.
3.4.2 Further consultation has been carried out this time as part of the option appraisal process. GOYH have indicated their satisfaction with the arrangements.
The services of an independent tenant advisor (ITA), The Agency for Community Empowerment Limited, have been used, to ensure that the information provided is fair and balanced, to help and advise tenants and to feedback their views to officers.
3.4.3 Presentations have been made to the following groups;- · Hunslet Moor 2000 · Hunslet Hall Tenants Forum · Gaitskells Community Association · Cross Ingrams Residents Association
Meetings have been well publicised and a freephone number provided to contact the ITA. The proposals have been well received at meetings and via written and verbal feedback to the ITA and officers.
3.4.4 Reports outlining the proposal and the opportunity for re-submission under Round 4 have been taken to the Inner South Area Committee and the Beeston and Holbeck Regeneration Board, which are attended by Ward Members and partners respectively. Support for resubmission was forthcoming at both meetings.
3.4.5 On 24th November 2004 Leeds South Homes Board reaffirmed their …in principle‘ support for the scheme. A further report detailing the updated financial implications for LSH was presented to their Board on 26th January 2004. The Board confirmed their support for resubmission of the scheme, subject to ongoing financial analysis on the impact of the scheme on the future viability of LSH, an agreement between the Council and LSH on the sharing of any risks arising from the scheme, further work on the options for LSH to undertake decency works in advance of the current decency programme. The Board requested the Council confirm its intention to continue to seek funding from the Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Housing Board to assist with wider regeneration activity in the area, including the acquisition and demolition of back- to-back properties (current activity under this programme which was the subject of Executive Board approval on 19th January 2005 is summarised in 2.6 of this report).
4.0 FINANCIAL APPRAISAL
4.1 Three investment options are available to local authorities who require additional capital resources to ensure their stock meets the Decent Homes Standard and is PDF created withsustainable. FinePrint pd TfheFactor optionsy trial are:- version http://www.fineprint.com · Arms Length Management Organisations (ALMO) · PFI · Stock transfer
4.1.1 The Council has selected the ALMO route as the principal investment option for the City. However, the additional funding available to ALMOs is constrained when compared to the other two options. For specific neighbourhoods with very high stock investment requirements, such as Beeston Hill and Holbeck, either PFI or stock transfer may be more appropriate. The financial appraisal carried out for this scheme was in two parts.
4.1.2 A comparison of PFI and investment via LSH has been carried out as part of the option appraisal for GOYH and to present to LSH Board.
For ODPM a comparison is made of four options, using their financial model. The first of the options is not viable for Leeds as it does not deliver any additional resources. The options are:- · Retention at current resources (do minimum) · Retention to deliver renovation (using Authority resources) · Stock transfer · PFI This assessment compares Value for Money under each of the options, the affordability of the scheme for the Council and calculates the indicative PFI credit.
A summary of the outcomes of each exercise is set out below.
4.2 Comparison of investment options
4.2.1 LSH will have approximately –39.4m to invest in the stock over 30 years through a combination of additional borrowing approvals and Major Repairs Allowance. This is around –3.7m short of meeting their current estimate of the investment required to meet the basic Decent Homes Standard (–43.1m).
4.2.2 However, to achieve sustainability the area needs considerably greater investment in both the homes and the surrounding environment. These works can be described as Decency Plus, and will comprise, for example:- · Environmental and community safety improvements, including car parking and homezones · Conversion of unpopular maisonettes and bedsits · Works to communal areas such as lifts and main entrances · Construction of 60 new Council homes for families
4.2.3 LSH will use all of their funding meeting the Decent Homes Standard leaving no provision for any of the Decency Plus works. LSH will only be able to carry out such works at the expense of Decency works.
4.2.4 Unless the additional works are carried out , investment to achieve the Decent Homes Standard is at risk, as the chances of the area being popular are reduced if only a basic standard is achieved.
4.2.5 The PFI scheme includes all of the Decency and Decency Plus works, with an estimated capital investment of –95m. A PFI credit estimated at –114.8m would be requested from ODPM to support the scheme. 4.2.6 PDF created withT FinePrinthe third in pdvestmentfFactor yoption trial v ersionwhich whttp://www.fineprint.comould deliver the level of capital investment required to achieve sustainability is stock transfer. This would also require financial support from Government, as the stock is estimated to have a negative value. Approval for a –70m …dowry‘ would be required for stock transfer to be a viable option. The ownership of the stock would pass to a Registered Social Landlord and support of tenants through a ballot is also required.
4.2.7 In conclusion either PFI or stock transfer are required to achieve the level of capital investment needed in the area. Both of these options require ODPM approval. PFI is considered better Value for Money (see 4.3 below).
4.2.8 Impact on LSH
As part of the option appraisal an assessment was carried out of the impact on LSH as a business. LSH‘s Management Fee would be adjusted as they would no longer be providing the services which are included in the PFI contract. As a minimum the repair and maintenance services will be contracted out. There will also be the option to submit bids for the full housing management service. A Value for Money comparison will be made with LSH to determine whether to retain core housing management services or to contract them out. The impact of each option on LSH has been assessed, and the conclusions are summarised below:- · In both instances it has been assumed that only the funding which LSH currently receive to carry out the services would be utilised to pay the PFI contractor, with none of their central overhead being lost to them. As LSH will retain all of the resources they currently receive to deliver the services they will remain responsible for, the effect of either service package being contracted out is therefore neutral in terms of core service delivery costs. · However, if LSH retain all of the funding to meet their central overhead costs and those costs do not change once services are contracted out, their overall costs per unit rise. If only repair and maintenance services are included in the contract the effect is marginal and still in line with other ALMO‘s unit costs. If all housing management services are contracted out the impact on unit costs is greater. LSH will then need to consider how to manage the effect , taking into account both the PFI contract and other factors and decisions which impact on their unit costs. · An assessment of the procurement period costs has been undertaken and a methodology agreed for sharing those costs between the Council and LSH. Procurement costs are expected to be around –1.35m over three years.
4.3 Value for Money and affordability
4.3.1 The options referred to at 4.1.2 have been appraised, with independent advice from PWC, using the ODPM Round 4 financial model.
This demonstrates that PFI offers the best value solution when compared to the alternative options.
4.3.2 The indicative PFI credit required is estimated at –114.8m. Based on that level of credit, the current assumptions as to revenue contributions by adjustments to LSH ‘s Management Fee, and Capital Receipts from disposals of housing land outlined below, the scheme is affordable to the Council.
4.3.3 The scheme includes proposals to dispose of selected sites for redevelopment, to assist in providing a better mix of housing to meet future needs. Where such sites are in Neighbourhoods and Housing‘s ownership, it has been assumed that any net Capital Receipt from the disposal will be utilised to contribute to the affordability of the PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com scheme, and to reduce the PFI credit. It is an ODPM requirement that authorities apply any resources they have available to minimise the credit requested. Accordingly, it has been assumed that –1.65m in Capital Receipts from disposal of land adjacent to Holbeck Moor and at Fairfax Rd will contribute to the affordability position outlined above. Members‘ in principle support is sought to utilising specific Capital Receipts as proposed.
5.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CAPACITY TO DELIVER
5.1 The principal reason that the scheme did not gain approval under Round 3 was ODPM‘s concerns that the Council did not have the capacity at that time to deliver this scheme, along with the remainder of its housing PFI programme (Swarcliffe and Little London)
5.2 Prior to submission under Round 4, an initial assessment has been undertaken of the resource requirements to deliver the housing schemes. This is being reviewed in detail with the Facilities Development Unit, to ensure that the relevant section of the EoI is robust, and that the resource requirements are acknowledged.
5.3 It is currently estimated that, if this proposal is selected, two additional posts (1x Project manager and 1x Project Officer) would be needed within the core project team to deliver all of the schemes on the housing programme. The costs have been included in proposed budget estimates for 2005/6.
6.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE OUTLINE BUSINESS CASE
6.1 If the scheme is selected ODPM will expect work to prepare an Outline Business Case to commence immediately and to proceed in a timely manner to completion. It is estimated that this stage will take approximately a year to complete, as during that period a stock condition survey for use by the bidders must be procured. This has been included in the estimate of procurement period costs.
6.2 As the scheme will also be used to drive forward delivery of some Land Use Framework objectives, it will also be important, during that period to progress work on the LUF, and to reach conclusions so that the Council is in a position to make clear decisions on which assets are to be offered with the PFI bidding opportunity, to maximise private sector interest and confidence. A number of options, as set out in the LUF, have been discussed when market testing the scheme. Further reports will be made to Asset Management Group and, where necessary to Executive Board, to ensure appropriate approvals are in place prior to submission of the OBC.
7.0 PROGRAMME
7.1 ODPM expect to make decisions about which schemes to select for their Round 4 programme in May 2005. It will then take approximately a year to complete the Outline Business Case and receive approval.
7.2 Procurement is expected to take two years, with work starting on site in early 2008.
8.0 REMIT OF HOUSING PFI PROJECT BOARD
8.1 A Housing PFI Project Board was set up, following Executive Board approval, originally to oversee the procurement of the Swarcliffe PFI scheme. Its remit was then extended to include the Little London scheme. PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com 8.2 The Project Board has delegated authority to make all key decisions throughout the procurement process, assuming the scheme does not significantly change, with the exception of approval of the Expression of Interest, Outline Business Case and Final Business case where reports are made to Executive Board. Reports would also be presented to Executive Board where significant changes occur or are proposed.
8.3 It is proposed that the reporting arrangements and delegation to the Project Board would be extended, were the scheme selected, to include the Beeston Hill and Holbeck scheme.
8.4 Arms Length Management Organisations (ALMOs) have been established since the Project Board was set up. ALMOs, as the organisations with responsibility for managing the stock on the Council‘s behalf, are key partners in the development of these schemes. It is therefore proposed that Chief Officers of relevant Arms Length Management Organisations also be invited to attend Project Board to contribute to the decision making process.
9.0 COMMUNITY SAFETY
9.1 The scheme will have implications under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, in that it will improve the security of Council homes and of the surrounding environment. It specifically includes works which are designed to improve community safety. Unpopular homes will be converted or demolished, which will reduce the number of empty homes. It is expected to assist in reducing crime and vandalism in the area.
10.0 RISK ASSESSMENT
10.1 If the scheme is not selected, there is a risk that sufficient investment will not be made in Council homes within the Neighbourhood Renewal Area to achieve sustainability. Efforts to regenerate the area and make it a desirable place to live in the long term will be thwarted if the Council cannot invest in its own stock to the level required. This could impact on the ability to lever in other external public and private sector funding.
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1 That Members agree submission of the Expression of Interest for Beeston Hill and Holbeck for housing PFI credits under the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister‘s Round 4 bidding opportunity.
11.2 That Members, subject to approval of the Expression of Interest, agree proposals to extend the responsibilities of Housing PFI Project Board to include Beeston Hill and Holbeck as outlined in the report.
11.3 That Members agree in principle to utilise specified Capital Receipts to contribute to the affordability of the scheme.
PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com