Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

To improve accessibility individual documents published after 1 May 2020 are available as HTML pages where their original format supports this

Speaking at a Council or Committee meeting

Venue: St Aldate's Room - Oxford Town Hall. View directions

Contact: John Mitchell, Committee Services Officer 

Items
No. Item

44.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Lygo.

45.

Declarations of interest

Minutes:

Councillor Pegg declared an interest as a  trustee of the Rose Hill Advice Centre

46.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 125 KB

 

Recommendation: That the minutes of the meeting held on 09 October 2017be APPROVED as a true and accurate record.

 

Minutes:

The Committee resolved to APPROVE the minutes of the meeting held on 09 October 2017 as a true and accurate record subject to the recasting of minute number 38 in relation to ‘A Clean and Green Oxford’ to reflect the fact that the Committee had heard rather than agreed with the point made by the Board Member about “Green Belt” designation .

47.

Report back on recommendations pdf icon PDF 103 KB

Contact Officer: Andrew Brown, Scrutiny Officer,

Tel 01865 252230, abrown2@oxford.gov.uk

 

Background Information

Scrutiny is empowered to make recommendations to the City Executive Board, which is obliged to respond in writing.

Why is it on the agenda?

For the Committee to note and comment on recent executive responses to Scrutiny recommendations.  Since the last meeting the Board has responded to recommendations on the following items:

·         Financial Inclusion Strategy 2017-2020

·         Recycling

·         Disabled impacts in planning

·         Oxford Design Review Panel

Who has been invited to comment?

·         Andrew Brown, Scrutiny Officer

 

 

Minutes:

The Chair was pleased to note that the vast majority of recommendations from the last meeting had been accepted and, of the remainder, all but one had been accepted in part.

 

 

48.

Work Plan and Forward Plan pdf icon PDF 173 KB

 

Background Information

The Scrutiny Committee operates within a work plan which is agreed at the start of the Council year.  The work plan will be reviewed at every meeting so that it can be adjusted to reflect the wishes of the Committee and take account of any changes to the latest Forward Plan (which outlines decisions to be taken by the City Executive Board or Council).

Why is it on the agenda?

The Committee is asked to review and note its work plan for the 2017/18 council year.  The Committee is also asked to select Forward Plan items for pre-decision scrutiny based on the following criteria (max. 3 per meeting):

     Is the issue controversial / of significant public interest?

     Is it an area of high expenditure?

     Is it an essential service / corporate priority?

     Can Scrutiny influence and add value?

Who has been invited to comment?

·         Andrew Brown, Scrutiny Officer

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Scrutiny Officer spoke to the report and drew attention to a new item on the Forward Plan scheduled for the December meeting of the CEB on a review of Community Protection Notices. It was agreed that this item should  be added to the Committee’s work plan.

 

 

 

49.

East Oxford Community Centre - Improvement Scheme pdf icon PDF 156 KB

 

Background Information

The Scrutiny Committee has asked for this item to be included on the agenda for pre-decision scrutiny.

Why is it on the agenda?

The City Executive Board on 21 November 2017 will be asked to

1.    Make a recommendation to Council to increase the capital budget from £2million to £3.7 million funded by capital receipts of £2.6million arising from the project and £1.1 million of other existing capital funds, an increase of £0.43 million over £0.67 million previously agreed by City Executive Board for this project.

2.    Delegate authority to the Executive Director to approve expenditure and award any contracts needed to deliver the scheme.. 

 

This is an opportunity for the Scrutiny Committee to make recommendations to the City Executive Board.

Who has been invited to comment?

·         Councillor Dee Sinclair, Board Member for Culture & Communities

·         Ian Brooke,  Head of Community Services

·         Vicky Trietline, Development Project Management Surveyor

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The City Executive Board on 21 November 2017 was to have been asked to consider a report about the improvement scheme. It had however been withdrawn from that meeting. It was expected that the report would be rescheduled for January with another opportunity for the Scrutiny Committee to consider it then.

 

 

50.

Review of Community Grants Programme and Commissioned Advice Strategy 2018-2021 pdf icon PDF 150 KB

Background Information

The Scrutiny Committee has asked for this item to be included on the agenda for pre-decision scrutiny.

Why is it on the agenda?

The report will update the City Executive Board on the review of the grants and commissioning programme and propose how it can be further improved.

 

This is an opportunity for the Scrutiny Committee to make recommendations to the City Executive Board.

Who has been invited to comment?

·         Councillor Dee Sinclair, Culture and Communities

·         Councillor Susan Brown, Customer and Corporate Services

·         Ian Brooke,  Head of Community Services

·         Julia Tomkins, Grants and External Funding Officer

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The City Executive Board on 21 November would receive an update on the review of the grants and commissioning programme with proposals as to  how it can be further improved. The item provided an opportunity for the Scrutiny Committee to make recommendations to the Board.

 

 

Councillor Sinclair, Board Member for Culture and Communities, introduced the report, reminding members of the Committee that this review was written in the context of cuts in public spending elsewhere, growing demand, and community and voluntary organisations having to do more with less. The review had brought many issues to the surface. There was a clear need for the grants programme to support the Council’s key values and priorities. The report set out, among other things, how the programme had been reviewed to maximise its effectiveness in tackling inequality and cohesion.

 

She drew particular attention to the introduction of a three year funding programme for both the commissioning programme and the open biding grants programme. This would help with sustainability and long term security for community and voluntary organisations and was a direct response to comments made.

 

Kiera Bentley, Chair of the OCVA addressed the Committee briefly.  The OCVA received funding from both the County and City Councils but was seeing a reduction in that funding. 52% of the work it supported was in the City with some 500 organisations “below the radar”. The OCVA supported many organisations and activities not all of which (or the effectiveness of which) OCC would be aware. The OCVA did focus on priority areas in the City but also supported other activities. She regretted what she saw as a lack of prior dialogue with OCC. She was not aware of any negative feedback in relation to OCVA’s work.

 

Officers said that the review should not be read as criticism of the OCVA, that there had been prior dialogue with the Association at a meeting held with representatives of the OCVA in March 2017 and was raised again at a recent meeting in October. 

 

Several members of the Committee expressed concern at the limited extent to which the open bidding and small grants programmes benefitted BME members of the community and to which representatives of that community were successful in securing grants.  It was reported that there was a history of BME applications being rejected because they had not been filled in correctly whereas other members of the community who were better versed in such matters were more likely to be successful. This was a pattern of behaviour which perpetuated an inbuilt, if unintended, bias. 

 

Some members of the BME community did not see the OCVA as properly representing their interests.  It was suggested that there might be merit in identifying a BME focussed agency/organisation to act on behalf of the BME community in relation to grant applications.

 

Agreed that means need to be found of building capacity with underrepresented BME groups and, where there are outreach activities, it would be desirable for them to be directed towards BME communities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

51.

Dates of future meetings

Meetings are scheduled as followed:

 

·         05 December 2017

·         15 January 2018

·         06 February 2018

·         06 March 2018

 

 

 

 

Minutes:

The next meetings of the Committee are scheduled as follows:

 

           05 December 2017

           15 January 2018

           06 February 2018

           06 March 2018