Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 20 January 2022 be confirmed.

RESOLVED that:

1.    The attendance be updated to reflect the attendance at the meetings on 9 August 2021 and 1 November 2021.

2.    The minutes of the Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee meetings held on 9 August 2021 and 1 November 2021 be noted.

Councillor Pat Vaughan declared a Personal Interest with regard to the agenda item titled 'Financial Performance - Quarterly Monitoring'. Reason: His granddaughter worked in the Finance Department of the City of Lincoln Council.

Clare Stait, Democratic Services Officer:

a)    presented the Scrutiny Annual Report for 2020/21 for comments, prior to being referred to Full Council for approval.

b)    Advised that within the Constitution it states that the scrutiny committees should produce an annual report to Council. Chairs of the Scrutiny Committees do produce individual reports to Council during the municipal year, however, the attached Scrutiny Annual Report summarises the work of the scrutiny committees for the full year and highlights the key achievements made under scrutiny in 2020/21.

RESOLVED that:

1.    The Vice Chair and Chair of the Bailgate Guild in the Community Leadership Scrutiny Committee section of the report be corrected.

2.    The content of the report be noted.

Robert Marshall, Business Intelligence Analyst:

a)    presented a report to Performance Scrutiny Committee with an outturn summary of the council’s performance in Quarter 3 of 2021/22

b)    explained that the full report was attached as Appendix A of the report, with the strategic Measures Dashboard attached as Appendix B and the Annual Measures as Appendix C

c)    invited members’ comments and questions.

Question: Members asked how the waste and recycling compared to the previous year.

Response: Waste and recycling was down on the same time last year with the whole of the UK seeing a reduction in recycling.

Question: Members asked how local contractors that we used were.

Response: Contractors were classed as local if they were within a 20-mile radius of Lincoln. National contractors were only used if local contractors could not be sought.

Question: Members asked whether the recruitment for a Comms officer had taken place.

Response: It was unknown whether this post had been recruited to. Officers would find out and update the committee.

Question: Members asked if there could be a percentage added to the number of electors registered.

Response: The context of figures was being looked at for future reports.

Question: Members asked that if an email was received by a customer which was replied to and another response was received, whether this would be classed as two emails rather than one.

Response: This would be classed as one contact, but this would not stop the customer phoning or coming into the office which would be counted as multiple contacts even if it was about the same issue. Analysis was taking place to see if the rise in calls was due to customers chasing work/ a response that had not been completed/responded to.

Question: Members asked whether there was a facility for recycling on council estates as people need to be given the opportunity to recycle.

Response: It was a challenge to encourage multi-House units to recycle as there was not the space which would result in major redevelopment. A few sites had been trialled but there was a constant educational need. There would be a lot of consultation being released this year with a revolution on how waste was handled in the future. Food Waste recycling would also be coming into effect in the future with a pay for waste scheme for cans and bottles.

Question: Members asked whether wheely bins had to be used to recycle.

Response: Some tight areas of the city were using a bag service which was collected weekly.

Question: Members asked whether there being only 464 businesses being fully compliant was a health issue.

Response: Lincoln was ahead in their inspections and was overachieving the targets set for the 18 month process. Businesses that had not yet been inspected were ones that had a good history of compliance but if a complaint was received then this was investigated. All businesses that had a red risk in the past had all been inspected.

RESOLVED that:

1.    An update for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Colleen Warren, Financial Services Manager:

a)    presented a report to Performance Scrutiny Committee on the third quarter’s performance 2021/2022 (up to 31^st December 2021)

b)    provided information on the Council’s:

·         General Fund Revenue Account - the General Fund Summary was currently projecting a forecast underspend of £57,063 (Appendix A provided a forecast General Fund Summary), resulting in general balance at the year-end of £2,250,422. There were a significant number of forecast year-end variations in income and expenditure against the approved budget. Full details of the main variances were provided in Appendix B.

·         Housing Revenue Account – the HRA was projecting an in-year variance of a £32,226 underspend, which would increase the general balances to £1,105,879 at the end of 2021/22. There were a number of forecast year-end variations in income and expenditure against the approved budget. Full details of the main variances were provided in Appendix D.

·         Housing Repairs Service – the HRS was forecasting a deficit of £716,516 in 2021/22. Appendix E provided a forecast summary, with full details of the main variances provided in Appendix F.

c)    provided information in the following areas:

·         General Investment Programme – the revised General Investment Programme for 2021/22 amounted to £20.937m following the quarter 2 report. At quarter 3 the programme had decreased by £9.069m to £11.328m as shown at paragraph 7.2.

The overall cumulative spending on the General Investment Programme for the third quarter of 2021/22 was £4.131m, which was 36.47% of the 2021/22 programme and 36.47% of the active programme. This was detailed further at Appendix J.

·         Housing Investment Programme – the Housing Investment Programme for 2021/22 following the quarter 1 report amounted to £29.047m. This had been further adjusted to £30.248m during the second quarter of 2021/22. A summary of the changes was shown in paragraph 7.8.

d)    invited members’ comments and questions.

Question: Members asked how much it cost to clean the Central Car Park, how often it was needed and whether this cost was expected. Members also asked if the colour of the car park needed reviewing so it didn’t take as much cleaning.

Response: The cost per clean of the car park was £15k per clean. The colour of the paint did attract the dirt. There was no budget for the cleaning of the car park, but this was to be included in the MTFS. The deep clean would need to be carried out twice a year.

Question: Members asked that if the car park was painted a different colour whether this would cut costs for the cleaning.

Response: All options were being looked at. The environment of the car park needed to be considered as the car park brought in the most income out of the car park that we had. Ways to reduce the costs of the cleaning were being looked at.

RESOLVED that the report be noted and referred to Executive.

RESOLVED that:

1.    The Conservative group wished it to be known that they voted against the budget and not abstained.

2.    The minutes of the Budget Review Group meeting held on 2 February 2022 be noted.

Clare Stait, Democratic Services Officer:

a)    presented the draft work programme for 2021/22 as detailed at Appendix A of her report

b)    advised that the work programme for the Performance Scrutiny Committee was put forward annually for approval by Council; the work programme was then regularly updated throughout the year in consultation with the Performance Scrutiny Committee and its Chair

c)    reported that items had been scheduled in accordance with the existing work programme and officers’ guidance regarding the meetings at which the most up-to-date information could be reported to the committee; the work programme also included the list of portfolio holders under scrutiny

d)    requested any relevant comments or changes to the proposed work programme for 2021/22.

RESOLVED that the work programme 2021/22 be noted.

Colleen Warren, Financial Services Manager on behalf of Jaclyn Gibson, Chief Finance Officer:

a)    presented Performance Scrutiny Committee with a status report of the revised Strategic Risk Register as at the end of the third quarter 2021/22.

b)    reported that the strategic risk registers currently contained thirteen risks as follows:

1)    Failure to engage & influence effectively the Council’s strategic partners, council staff and all stakeholders to deliver against e.g., Council’s Vision 2025

2)    Failure to deliver a sustainable Medium-Term Financial Strategy (that supports delivery of Vision 2025).

3)    Failure to deliver the Towards Financial Sustainability Programme whilst ensuring the resilience of the Council.

4)    Failure to ensure compliance with statutory duties/functions and appropriate governance arrangements were in place.

5)    Failure to protect the local authority's vision 2025 due to changing structures and relationships in local government and impact on size, scale and scope of the Council.

6)    Unable to meet the emerging changes required in the Council’s culture, behaviour and skills to support the delivery of the council’s Vision 2020/2025 and the transformational journey to one Council approach.

7)    Insufficient levels of resilience and capacity exist in order to deliver key strategic projects & services within the Council.

8)    Decline in the economic prosperity within the City Centre.

9)    Failure to deliver key strategic projects.

10) Failure of the Council’s key contractors and partners to remain sustainable and continue to deliver value for money

11) Failure to put in place safe working practices and social distancing measures to protect officers and service users.

12) Failure to protect the vulnerable in relation to the Council’s PREVENT and safeguarding duties.

13) Failure to mitigate against the risk of a successful cyber-attack against the council.

RESOLVED that the Strategic Risk Register as at the end of the third quarter 2021/22 be noted.

You are asked to resolve that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following item(s) because it is likely that if members of the press or public were present, there would be disclosure of ‘exempt information’

RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item(s) of business because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be a disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ as defined by Section 100I and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Colleen Warren, Financial Services Manager on behalf of Jaclyn Gibson, Chief Finance Officer:

a)    provided members with the revised Strategic Risk Register as attached at Appendix A.

b)    invited members’ questions and comments.

RESOLVED that the Strategic Risk Register as at the end of the third quarter 2021/22 be noted.