Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

CABINET SCARBOROUGH BOROUGH COUNCIL CABINET At a meeting to be held by linzhengnd

VIEWS: 89 PAGES: 316

									              SCARBOROUGH BOROUGH COUNCIL

                                   CABINET
        At a meeting to be held at 10.00 am on Tuesday, 22 January 2008
                          at the Town Hall, Scarborough

                                     AGENDA
Section A - Administration (White)

1.    DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST (Pages 1 - 2)
      Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a personal
      or prejudicial interest to declare in any of the items on this agenda. If so, the
      nature of the interest must be declared at the start of the meeting. In
      addition, the attached form must be completed and passed to the Committee
      Administrator. The Officers will be pleased to advise, if necessary, and any
      request for assistance should be made, in the first instance, to the
      Committee Administrator whose name appears at the end of this agenda.
      Ideally, such advice should be sought before the day of the meeting so that
      time is available to consider any uncertainty that might arise.

2.    MINUTES (Pages 3 - 22)
      To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on
      18 December 2007. (Minutes attached).

3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
      Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant
      to the business of the Cabinet.

4.    FORWARD PLAN (Pages 23 - 40)
      To review the Cabinet’s Forward Plan (Reference CE/08/01 attached).

5.    PROGRESS OF SCRUTINY OF EXECUTIVE DECISIONS
      To receive an oral report by the Chief Executive.

Section B - Policy Items for Recommendation to Council (Blue)

A6.   FINANCIAL STRATEGY 2008/09 (CORPORATE BUSINESS PLAN) (Pages
      41 - 162)
      To consider a report by the Strategic Director of Corporate Services
      (Reference SDCS/08/7 attached).

A7.   MEMBERS' ALLOWANCES (Pages 163 - 176)
      To consider a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services
      (Reference HLDS/08/04 attached).
A8.   PROGRESS REPORT ON FILEY FLOODING ISSUES (Pages 177 - 210)
      To consider a report by the Head of Engineering and Harbour Services
      (Reference HEngH/08/05 attached).

A9.   NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL MINERALS AND WASTE
      LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK (Pages 211 - 222)
      To consider a joint report by the Head of Planning Services and Head of
      Environmental Health Services (Reference HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
      attached).

A10. THE NORTH YORKSHIRE BUILDING CONTROL PARTNERSHIP (Pages
     223 - 230)
      To consider a report by the Strategic Director of Operations (Reference
      SDO/08/01 attached).

A11. PROPOSED REPLACEMENT CHRISTMAS LIGHTING AT
     WESTBOROUGH PRECINCT, SCARBOROUGH, DUE TO THE
     PROPOSED "BATHING BELLE" STATUE BEING INSTALLED AND THE
     REPLACEMENT OF STREET LIGHTING AT AQUARIUM TOP,
     SCARBOROUGH (Pages 231 - 240)
      To consider a report by the Head of Street Scene Services (Reference
      HSS/08/001 attached).

Section C - Executive Decisions (Yellow)

12.   APPROVAL TO THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: A FRAMEWORK
      AGREEMENT FOR SCANNING. A FRAMEWORK CONTRACT FOR
      VIDEO CONFERENCING. A CONTRACT FOR THE PROVISION OF
      WIDER AREA NETWORK FUNCTIONALITY (Pages 241 - 248)
      To consider a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services
      (Reference HLDS/08/02 attached).

13.   CREATIVE INDUSTRIES TRUST LTD (Pages 249 - 256)
      To consider a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services
      (Reference HLDS/08/03 attached).

14.   SCARBOROUGH BOROUGH LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK -
      HOUSING ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT ISSUES
      AND OPTIONS (PROPOSED CONSULTATION ON ADDITIONAL
      HOUSING SITES SUBMITTED) (Pages 257 - 272)
      To consider a report by the Head of Planning Services (Reference
      HPlg/08/01 attached).

15.   EMPLOYER NEEDS SURVEY - ACCEPTANCE OF EXTERNAL FUNDING
      (Pages 273 - 276)
      To consider a report by the Head of Regeneration Services (Reference
      HRgn/08/01 attached).
16.   DOG WARDEN SERVICE
      To consider a report by the Head of Environmental Health Services
      (Reference HEHS/08/008 to follow).

17.   NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL PARKING AGENCY
      To consider a joint report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and
      Head of Engineering and Harbour Services (Reference HLDS/08/05 and
      HEngH/08/06 to follow).

18.   IMPLICATIONS OF THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004 ON
      PARKING ENFORCEMENT (Pages 277 - 286)
      To consider a report by the Head of Engineering and Harbour Services
      (Reference HEngH/08/03 attached).

19.   WHITBY TOURISM INFORMATION CENTRE (Pages 287 - 298)
      To consider a report by the Head of Property Services and Head of
      Marketing and Communications Services (Reference HPrp/08/03 and
      HMCS/08/01 attached).

Section D - Information Items (Green)

20.   RECYCLING PROGRESS REPORT (Pages 299 - 306)
      To consider a joint report by the Head of Environmental Health Services and
      Head of Street Scene Services (Reference HEHS/08/006 and HSS/08/02
      attached).

21.   CABINET (GRANTS AND RELIEF) SUB-COMMITTEE (Pages 307 - 308)
      To receive the minutes of the meeting held on 18 December 2007 (attached).

22.   INDIVIDUAL CABINET MEMBER DECISIONS (Pages 309 - 310)
      To note the decisions of individual Cabinet Members (Reference CE/08/02
      attached).

Section E (Pink)

23.   EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
      To consider the following motion:-
      “that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972,
      the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on
      the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information (as
      defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act) relating to the financial affairs of
      any particular person (including the authority holding that information)”.

24.   ROUTINE PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS (Pages 311 - 320)
      To consider a report by the Head of Property Services (Reference
      HPrp/08/04 attached).

(N.B. If you have any questions, need further information about the meeting or
require special facilities in order to attend, please contact Gill Wilkinson,
Democracy Services Manager, Town Hall, St. Nicholas Street, Scarborough –
Tel: 01723 232303 Fax 08702384159 or email
Gill.Wilkinson@scarborough.gov.uk.)
This page is intentionally left blank
                         Page 1          Agenda Item 1


             MEMBERS’ DECLARATIONS OF
                    INTERESTS

Name:

Meeting:

Date:

Agenda
No & Item

Nature of
Interest:




       If you are uncertain whether you have a
    personal interest or whether the interest is also
     prejudicial, please seek officer advice before
                      the meeting.

Is the interest:
         personal and non-prejudicial?
         personal and prejudicial?

(please √)                                    CEO02760.sfr(may 04)
             Page 2




This page is intentionally left blank
                                      Page 3                 Agenda Item 2
                                     CABINET

                At a meeting held on Tuesday, 18 December 2007
                                    Present:-
                    Councillor T W Fox (Chairman) in the Chair;
Councillors G A Backhouse, D J Bastiman, J S Blackburn, D Chambers, D C Jeffels,
               Miss J M Kenyon, Mrs J E Mortimer and W H Tindall



1.    DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
      Councillor Derek J Bastiman, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in
      agenda item 12, Character Appraisal, Management Proposals and
      Conservation Area Boundary Review - Scalby. he was an associate of one of
      the people who were making comments regarding the proposal and whose
      property was covered by the conservation area boundary review..

      Councillor David C Jeffels, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in
      agenda item 17, Scarborough Museums Trust. he was a trustee on the
      Scarborough Museums Trust.

      Councillor Thomas W Fox, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in
      agenda item 17, Scarborough Museums Trust. he was a trustee on the
      Scarborough Museums Trust.

      Councillor Miss Jane M Kenyon, declared a Personal interest in agenda item
      23, External funding to support delivery of the Safer Communities Partnership
      Strategy. she is chair of the Safer Communities Partnership.

      Councillor Mrs Jane E Mortimer, declared a Personal interest in agenda item
      23, External funding to support delivery of the Safer Communities Partnership
      Strategy. she is Chair of the Supporting People member's group.

      Councillor Andrew G Backhouse, declared a Personal interest in agenda item
      30, Registration of land as a Town or Village Green at Linden Road, Newby,
      Scarborough. he was chair of the Newby Community Action Group.

      Councillor Derek J Bastiman, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in
      agenda item 30, Registration of land as a Town or Village Green at Linden
      Road, Newby, Scarborough. Chair of the Newby and Scalby Parish Council.

      Councillor Derek J Bastiman, declared a Personal and Prejudicial interest in
      agenda item 32, Affordable Housing - Overdale, Eastfield. he was the Director
      of Yorkshire Coast Hiomes.

2.    MINUTES
      The Minutes of the meeting held on 20 November were agreed as a correct
      record of the meeting and signed by the Chairman.
                                      Page 4


3.    PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
      There were no public questions.

4.    FORWARD PLAN
      The Cabinet considered the Forward Plan (Reference CE/07/32.
      RESOLVED that the Forward Plan be approved.

5.    PROGRESS OF SCRUTINY OF EXECUTIVE DECISIONS
      It was reported that there had been no call-ins from the Cabinet meeting held
      on 20 November 2007.

                                    (For Approval)

A6.   AREA COMMITTEES - RESPONDING TO THE WHITE PAPER
      CHALLENGE
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Strategic Director of Operations
      and Head of Legal and Democratic Services (Reference SDO/07/19 and
      HLDS/07/63). Cabinet were informed that the report proposed changes to the
      Area Committees following a member/officer review., which in turn was in
      response to the Government White paper on greater localism. The Council
      had already addressed issues in the White Paper by setting up Area Forums.
      With the establishment of these consultation vehicles the role of Area
      Committees needed to be reviewed. It was felt that the Area Committees
      should have a greater decision making role at a local level on issues that may
      currently be decided by Cabinet. It was noted that members had raised
      concerns that Area Committees had become associated mainly with grant
      giving at the expense of their role as decision-making bodies. It was therefore
      recommended that grant giving be reserved for two meetings only. The new
      Councillor Call for Action that was being implemented in April 2008 could
      provide a link between the Area Forums and the Area Committee and it was
      recommended that each Area Committee use £4000 within its budget to
      resolve local issues that are raised via the Councillor Call for Action. It was
      noted that there would be amendments to the constitution to develop the new
      role for Area Committees. To promote joint working it was suggested that the
      committees could align themselves with the County Area Committees and
      also have the ability to co-opt members to the committee. Members discussed
      this report. The overall review of Area Committees and the alignment of Area
      Committees’ priorities with the Community Strategy was welcomed. Members
      felt that greater involvement of parish councils and the public was important
      including agenda setting. It was felt that this was the first step to ensuring the
      correct working of Area Committees and Area Forums. Concerns were raised
      that the Council may be overloading the public with Area consultations and
      engagement. It was noted that the public would only want to attend a certain
      number of meetings. Thus replication should be avoided. Cabinet were
      reminded that Area Forums were not council committees but part of the Local
      Strategic Partnership.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet:-
      (i)     delegate the following powers to Area Committees:
              (a)    Traffic Regulation Orders where an objection is received;
                                     Page 5


            (b)      Stopping up and diversion of the Highway where an objection is
                     received;
             (c)     Stopping-up, extinguishment or diversion of public footpaths and
                     bridleways where an objection is received;
             (d) The exercise of consent to the applications for the authorisation of
                   dispersal orders pursuant to s30 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act
                   2003;
      (ii)   note the proposal to provide for the governance of the expenditure of
             such funds as may become available to the Council through the bid for
             Leader Area Status to be delegated to the Area Committees;
      and that Cabinet recommend to Council:
      (iii)  amendments to the Constitution identified at appendix 1 to provide that
             Area Committees:
             (a)     align their purpose with that of the County Council Area
                     Committee, namely the promotion of the Community Strategy
                     and social, economic and environmental well being;
             (b)     become the mechanism through which proposals developed at
                     Area Forums are progressed; and
             (c)     be established as a Committee to which Councillor Calls for
                     Action may be referred;
             (d)     to provide for a procedure for urgent decisions to be made by
                     the Cabinet Members following consultation with the Area
                     Committee chair.
      (iv)   Establish a budget of £4,000 per Area committee for responding to
             Councillor Calls for Action, with this to be financed from the existing
             Area Committee budgets;
      (v)    restrict the meetings of Area Committees at which grant is considered
             to two each year per Committee, and require grant applicants to identify
             how their applications support the Council’s Community Strategy;
      (vi)   authorise the Head of Financial Services to develop revised procedures
             for the management of applications for grants subject to him providing
             a report to the Area Committees on any changes; and
      (vii) provide for Area Committees to co-opt Parish Council Members on to
             such Committees in a non-voting capacity.
      Reasons:
      To complement the work of the Area Forums and make more likely the
      achievement of the purposes for which Area Committees were originally
      established.

A7.   CAR PARKING MANAGEMENT - 2008/09
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Strategic Director of Corporate
      Services and Head of Engineering and Harbour Services (Reference
      SDCS/07/91 and HEngH/07/71). Cabinet were informed that this was a
      substantial report that would be going to Council. The report had already been
      to five Overview and Scrutiny meetings and three meetings of the parking
      working group. The parking charges were part of the integrated transport
      policy. The Parking Working group were thanked for their hard work.
      Members discussed this report. The question of ring-fencing parking permits
      for stallholders on Coble Landing in Filey had been considered by the working
                             Page 6


group and was not thought to be appropriate. The Head of Legal and
Democratic Services was also thanked for his work on the report.
RESOLVED that Cabinet is recommended to approve the following changes
to car parking arrangements for 2008/09:
 No            Issue         Report         HEngH Recommendation
                              Para
1     Charging Structures 3.7.4                             Low    High
      for Off-Street Car                                   Season Season
      Parks
1a Town Centre                3.7.5 Up to 1 hour            £1.20  £1.50
      Short Stay                      Up to 2 hours         £2.20  £2.50
                                      Up to 3 hours         £3.20  £3.50
                                      Up to 4 hours         £4.20  £4.50
                                      Up to 6 hours         £5.20  £6.00
                                      Up to 24 hours        £6.00  £9.00

1b   Town Centre (other)     3.7.5   Up to 1 hour       £1.20    £1.50
                                     Up to 2 hours      £2.20    £2.50
                                     Up to 3 hours               £3.50
                                     Up to 4 hours      £3.20    £4.00
                                     Up to 6 hours               £5.00
                                     Up to 24 hours     £4.20    £6.00

1c   Town Centre             3.7.5   Up to 1 hour
     (Periphery)                     Up to 2 hours       £1.50   £1.50
                                     Up to 3 hours
                                     Up to 4 hours       £3.00   £3.00
                                     Up to 6 hours       £4.00   £4.00
                                     Up to 24 hours      £5.00   £5.00

1d   Tourist A               3.7.5   Up to 1 hour                £1.50
                                     Up to 2 hours       £1.20   £2.50
                                     Up to 3 hours               £3.50
                                     Up to 4 hours       £2.20   £4.50
                                     Up to 6 hours               £5.50
                                     Up to 24 hours      £3.00   £6.00

1e   Tourist A - Only on     3.7.5   Up to 1 hour                £1.50
     South             Bay
     Underground                     Up to 2 hours               £2.50
     Quay Street                     Up to 3 hours               £3.50
     Eastborough                     Up to 4 hours       £1.20   £4.50
                                     Up to 6 hours               £5.50
                                     Up to 24 hours      £2.20   £6.00

1f   Tourist B               3.7.5   Up to 1 hour                £1.50
                                     Up to 2 hours       £1.10   £2.00
                                  Page 7


 No            Issue            Report          HEngH Recommendation
                                 Para
                                          Up to 3 hours
                                          Up to 4 hours          £2.10     £3.00
                                          Up to 6 hours                    £4.00
                                          Up to 24 hours         £3.00     £5.00

1g    Tourist C                   3.7.5   Charge is per day      £3.00     £6.50
                                          until 7pm.

1h    HGV Parking         3.7.5     Up to 24 hours         £5.50     £5.50
1i    Off Street Permits 3.7.13 Introduce the following revised
      (Staithes)                conditions:
                                (a) that the waiting list for car park
                                permits for Staithes Staith be made
                                public
                                (b) condition (i) be amended to read
                                “The permit holder must be a full time
                                resident living within the conservation
                                area of Staithes village”
                                (c) condition (vi) be amended to read
                                that “no permit will be granted where
                                the applicant has access to any form
                                of parking suitable for a motor car
                                within the Staithes village, whether
                                through property he or she owns as a
                                resident or through his or her financial
                                interest in a business”

1j    Off Street       Permits 3.7.11 Set off street permit charges as follows:
      Rates
                                                    Charges 2008/2009
      SCARBOROUGH
      Albion Road                                        £275.00
      Annual Permit                                      £400.00
      Annual Permit (Mon-Fri)                            £365.00
      Friarsway                                          £275.00
      Westwood                                           £350.00
      William Street                                     £275.00
      Monthly Permit                                      £45.00
      Short Stay Permit                                 £1,300.00
      FILEY
      Country Park/West Avenue                              £80.00
      Church Ravine                                        £90.00
      Old Council Offices Yard                             £240.00
      WHITBY OTHER
      West Cliff                                           £100.00
      Whitby Winter **                                     £150.00
                            Page 8


No           Issue          Report            HEngH Recommendation
                             Para
     Runswick Householder                             £90.00
     Summer Permit Villages                            £90.00
     Robin Hood’s Bay Residents                        £25.00
     Staithes Residents                                £25.00
     Brickhills                                       £325.00

2    Coach Parking          3.7.15                          Introduce £5.50
                                                            per day

3    Spa Forecourt          3.7.17                          Change to pay
                                                            and display and
                                                            categorise as
                                                            same tariff as
                                                            Spa Drive -
                                                            Tourist A
                                                            charging all year

4    Swimming         Pool 3.7.22 Subsidy for users of      To continue, but
     concession          in       Scarborough Indoor        acknowledged
     Scarborough       and        pool and Whitby           when assessing
     Whitby                          Leisure centre         parking income
                                     through refund of      as a measure of
                                     parking charge (2      performance
                                     Hour Charge)

5    On-Street Pay and       3.8.4                              Proposed
     Display Charges

     1,2 & 4 hour Streets            30 minutes                    £0.80
                                     1 hour                        £1.50
                                     1 hour 30 mins                £2.00
                                     2 hours                       £2.50
                                     2 hour 30 mins                £3.00
                                     3 hours                       £3.60
                                     3 hour 30 mins                £4.20
                                     4 hours                       £4.80

6    On-Street Pay and       3.8.6                              Proposed
     Display Charges
                                     1 hour                        £1.50
     Vernon Road                     2 hour                        £2.50
     Valley Road                     3 hour                        £3.50
     Lower Ramshill Road             4 hour                        £4.50
                                     7 hour                        £6.00

7    Set Resident Permit     3.8.9   1st: £15, 2nd £25, thereafter £40 each per
     Charge                          annum
                                     Page 9


       No           Issue           Report          HEngH Recommendation
                                     Para

      8     Remove Free             3.8.12 1st: £15, 2nd £25, thereafter £40 each per
            Residents Permits                annum
            (Over 60's)

      9     Set number of           3.8.14 Set number of scratch cards at a maximum
            Scratch Cards at 100             of 100 per calendar year (per household)
            per calendar year for            and remove free allowances in all cases
            all groups and
            Remove provision of
            50 free scratch
            cards/annum to
            residents
      10    Trades Persons          3.8.20 Changes to who is entitled to a trades
            Permits                          persons permits to the following list and
                                             associated trades:
                                             Aerial Installation        Kitchen Fitters
                                             Bathroom Fitters           Masonry
                                             Builders                   and associated
                                             Carpenters                 Painting
                                             Carpet/Flooring            Plumbing
                                             Fitters                    Roofing
                                             Decorators                 Tiling
                                             Electrical Installation    Window Fitting
                                             and Maintenance
                                             Insulation Installation
                                             Joinery

      11    Permit Applications     3.8.25 To approve revisions and amendments to
                                             the application forms to better clarify
                                             qualifying criteria for all
      Reason:
      To ensure the Council’s financial position is protected, and ensure a fully
      integrated approach to car parking demand management within the Borough.

A8.   INDEMNITY FOR MEMBERS AND OFFICERS
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic
      Services (Reference HLDS/07/66). Cabinet were informed that in the
      Standards Committee action plan it was resolved to recommend to the
      Council the introduction of an indemnity for members and officers. It was
      noted that the indemnity would apply if a member or officer honestly believed
      that they were acting within the powers of the authority, even if subsequently
      this transpired not to be the case. It was suggested that indemnity cover be
      offered retrospectively for the period of one year.
      Members were reminded that from April 2008 the Standards committee would
      be the first stage for code of conduct complaints.
                                    Page 10


      RESOLVED that Cabinet recommend to Council the grant of an indemnity to
      members and officers of the authority in the terms set out at Appendix 1 of the
      report.
      Reason:
      To ensure that the public interest is retained in ensuring full and open debate
      of matters of current interest to the authority and that Council can have
      confidence to make appointments of members and officers to external bodies.

A9.   THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A GROUNDWORK TRUST IN SCARBOROUGH
      BOROUGH
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Regeneration Services
      (Reference HRgn/07/35). Cabinet were informed that this was a very detailed
      report. Groundwork Trust already existed in Selby. It was proposed to expand
      their activities to include North Yorkshire and in particular the Scarborough
      borough. Groundwork Trust had extensive experience of neighbourhood
      management and increasing skills and employment.
      RESOLVED that:-
      (i)    subject to the preparation of governing documents that meet the
             approval of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, to agree to the
             expansion of the remit of the current Groundwork Trust for Selby (a
             company limited by guarantee) to become a Groundwork Trust for
             North Yorkshire with a priority focus on Scarborough and Selby;
      (ii)   agreement to the Council becoming a member of the company and that
             the portfolio holder for Regeneration, Strategic Planning and
             Community Development be the Council’s representative on the Board
             be approved;
      (iii)  the draft “Business Plan for Groundwork delivery in North Yorkshire” as
             a basis for the development of an appropriate Service Level Agreement
             be noted;
      (iv)   subject to a Service Level Agreement approved by the Leader, to
             agree to the provision of £20k per annum core funding for a period of
             five years, with this to be financed from £60,000 existing approved
             funding (VFM reserve) and an additional further £40,000 from the VFM
             reserve; and
      (v)    the performance of the Trust through the Projects and Partnerships
             Overview and Scrutiny Committee be monitored.
      Reason:
      To enable extra financial resources and professional expertise to be brought
      into the Borough to support the Council’s Neighbourhood Renewal objectives.

A10. WHITBY MARINA
     The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Strategic Director of Operations,
     Head of Regeneration Services and Head of Engineering and Harbour
     Services (Reference SDO/07/20, HRgn/07/43 and HEngH/07/76). Cabinet
     were informed that the report gave details of the design of the marina user
     and public toilet facility for Whitby Marina that would now be subject to public
     consultation. It was noted that there was a budget of approximately £2million
     for the project. £1.1million was committed for current work, which left
     £900,007 for the further facilities. The proposed design of the new facilities
     was shown as Appendix 2 of the report and was projected to cost at
                                      Page 11


      £900,001, which included contingency funding. It was envisaged that the new
      facilities would be sited near the current facilities and that the building works
      would begin in Autumn 2008.
      Members discussed this report. It was requested that local members be
      consulted at the first stage.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet:-
      (i)      agree the proposed scheme for development at Whitby Marina for the
               purposes of public consultation and detailed design;
      (ii)     recommend to Council that the capital budget for the scheme be
               amended to £2,021,000 (as Yorkshire Forward and Government Office
               have now confirmed funding of £0.721m. The Council’s contribution of
               £1.3m remains unchanged);
      (iii)    approve taking the scheme out to public consultation in accordance
               with a consultation plan to be agreed with the Portfolio Holder and
               Northern Area Councillors; and
      (iv)     to receive a further report after consultation that considers the final
               content and design of the scheme, and the full financial implications.
      Reason:
      To allow progression of proposals for the detailed design and implementation
      of a marina user and public toilet facility for Whitby Upper harbour.

A11. PROPOSED REMEDIAL WORKS TO LANDSLIP, REAR OF THE SPA,
     SOUTH BAY, SCARBOROUGH
     The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Engineering and Harbour
     Services (Reference HEngH/07/72). Cabinet were informed that the landslip
     that occurred on the 19 November meant that part of the gardens was still
     closed. A budget was required for the remedial work to this area.
     RESOLVED that Cabinet:-
     (i)    note the circumstances surrounding the landslip and actions
            undertaken to date;
     (ii)   authorise up to £85,000 funding from the Council’s Insurance Fund for
            the design, supervision and construction of appropriate and sustainable
            remedial works;
     (iii)  authorise the appointment of a specialist geotechnical engineering
            consultant from the Council’s coastal framework to assist in developing
            an acceptable design of the necessary remedial works, and the
            supervision thereof; and
     (iv)   seek competitive tenders from suitably qualified contractors to
            undertake the works.
     Reasons:
     (i)    Comply with the Council’s Financial and Contract Procedure Rules;
     (ii)   to ensure the appropriate remedial works can be undertaken as
            expeditiously as possible to ensure effected slopes are stabilised and
            hence reduce the risk of further land instability and possible
            subsequent damage to the local assets, including the Spa premises;
            and
     (iii)  to enable the paths, currently closed on public safety grounds, to be re-
            opened.
                                    Page 12


A12. CHARACTER APPRAISAL, MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS AND
     CONSERVATION AREA BOUNDARY REVIEW - SCALBY
     (Councillor Bastiman declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item
     and left the room)
     The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Planning Services
     (Reference HPlg/07/207). Cabinet were informed that Best Value
     Performance indicator 219B required formal appraisals of conservation areas
     for the adoption of those areas. Scalby was designated a conservation area in
     1979. In a re-appraisal it was recognised that a larger area had special
     architectural and historic qualities. Comments and letters from the public were
     included in the report and circulated at the meeting.
     RESOLVED that subject to presentation to Council of such further
     communications as are or have been received within the consultation, Cabinet
     recommend to Council that:
     (a)     Scalby Conservation Area boundary be extended to that shown in the
             map appended as annex 2 to this report; and
     (b)     the Character Appraisal and Management Proposals for the Scalby
             Conservation Area set out in annex 1 to this report be adopted.
     Reason:
     Scalby has previously been recognised as having special architectural and
     historic qualities, which it is desirable to preserve and enhance and which
     resulted in the designation of a Conservation Area in 1979. A re-assessment
     has recognised a larger area as having special architectural and historic
     qualities. The recommendation is for the adoption of the Character Appraisal
     and Management Plan which sets out a framework for establishing policies for
     ensuring the qualities of the area are so preserved including an enlargement
     of the existing Conservation Area.

A13. PROPOSED CHANGES TO DOG CONTROL LEGISLATION
     The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Environmental Health
     Services (Reference HEHS/07/115). Cabinet were informed that over the
     years the timing of the introduction of the dog control bye-laws seemed to
     miss the Easter period. Altering the timings of the bye-laws would include
     Easter. The changes also included changes to the areas where the bye-laws
     would apply. The proposals would go out for consultation. Members
     discussed this report.
     RESOLVED that Cabinet recommend to Council:-
     (i)    approval as the basis of consultation a draft Dog Control Order under
            the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 in respect of the
            seashore and promenades based on the existing controls outlined in
            Appendix 1 to this report with the following amendments:
     (ii)   (a) The extension of the western boundary of the seasonal dog ban
            area in respect of Whitby West Beach from the slipway (former beach
            café) to the steps on the promenade at the western end of the chalets.
             (b) The extension of the period of the seasonal dog bans from 1 May to 30
             September to 1 March to 30 September annually to the following beaches –
             Scarborough South Bay, Scarborough North Bay, Filey and Whitby West
             Beach.
             (c) A requirement to remove dog faeces from the areas to which the
             Dog Control Order applies. This particular provision is necessary as the
                                     Page 13


            current Borough-wide control under the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act
            1996 would cease to have effect in these areas once any DCO is
            made.
      (iii) approve the proposed timetable in Section 7 of this repor; and
      (iv)  request a review of all dog control requirements in force by the
            appropriate Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
      Reason:
      To ensure proper and appropriate control of dogs within areas of the Borough.

                                  (For Decision)

14.   CHAUFFEUR AND ATTENDANT SERVICE
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic
      Services (Reference HLDS/07/64). Cabinet were informed that this proposal
      would bring in savings and additional efficiencies. It was asked that previous
      Mayors be consulted on the contract as they would have awareness of the
      main issues involved. Members discussed this report and expressed concerns
      that the role of the Mayor not be down-graded. It was agreed that the
      proposed form of contract be the subject of consultation with previous Mayors.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet approve the offer for tender of the Council’s
      Chauffeur and Attendant requirements.
      Reason:
      To achieve the efficiencies identified for achievement within the current
      financial year.

15.   FRAMEWORK AGREEMENTS FOR CATERING RELATED SUPPLIES
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic
      Services (Reference HLDS/07/67). Cabinet expressed a hope that local
      businesses may tender for some of the goods.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet approve letting framework contracts for:
      (a)     Frozen Food & Groceries.
      (b)     Alcoholic Beverages and Soft Drinks.
      (c)     Wines.
      (d)     Cask Ales.
      (e)     Ice Cream & Impulse lines.
      (f)     Fresh Fruit & Vegetables.
      (g)     Fresh Meats.
      (h)     Pre-prepared Sandwiches.
      (i)     Dairy Products.
      (j)     Confectionary.
      (k)     Laundry Services.
      (l)     Fresh Fish.
      (m)     Taxi Services.
      (n)     Floral Decorations.
      (o)     Cash Register Maintenance.
      (p)     Bakery Products.
      (q)    Vending Machine/Hot & Cold Products.
      Reason:
      To further the implementation of the Councils Procurement Strategy.
                                    Page 14


16.   FRAMEWORK AGREEMENTS
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic
      Services (Reference HLDS/07/62). Cabinet were informed that the framework
      agreements would increase savings for the Council.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet approve entry into the following framework
      agreements
      (i)    the supply of furnishings
      (ii)   specialist print
      (iii)  electoral print and support
      (iv)   concrete and aggregates
      (v)    building materials
      (vi)   Plant and Equipment Hire
      (vii) Traffic signalling equipment
      (viii) CCTV maintenance
      (ix)   Office of Government Commerce framework contract for mobile
             working
      (x)    Office of Government Commerce auctioned framework for IT
             Equipment
      (xi)   IT and Telecommunications Equipment at the Creative Industries
             Centre
      (xii) Network connection for the Creative Industries Centre
      (xiii) Telephone call charges for Scarborough Borough Council
      (xiv) Postal Services
      Reason:
      To further the implementation of the Council’s Procurement Strategy.

17.   SCARBOROUGH MUSEUMS TRUST
      This decision is identified for urgent implementation in accordance with
      Overview and Scrutiny Rule 10
      Councillors Tom Fox and Jeffels declared a personal and prejudicial interest
      in this report and left the room.
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic
      Services (Reference HLDS/07/65). Cabinet were informed that this was the
      final report to seek confirmation of agreement to enter into the set of
      agreements the Council committed to enter into through the deed of intent
      approved on 23 January 2007. The agreements would transfer to the
      Scarborough Museums trust on the Museums and Gallery Service with effect
      from 1 January 2008. There would be annual reports to the council on how
      the Trust was managing the services, and the Trust would be reviewed by the
      Projects and Partnership Overview and Scrutiny committee of the council.
      The agreements would result in:
      (a)     staff within the Museums and Gallery Service transferring to the
              Scarborough Museums Trust with effect from 1 January 2008;
      (b)     furnishings and equipment that are currently used by staff, transferring
              to the Trust on terms that they be replaced from time to time, and if the
              Agreement is terminated equivalent furnishings and equipment at that
              time being returned to the Council;
      (c)     stock held by the Council (for example in the Museum Shops) being
              transferred to the Trust and credit being provided for in the settlement
              to recognise its value;
                                Page 15


(d)    novation of contracts between the Council and third parties to the
       Trust;
(e)    management of the Council’s entire Collection by the Trust on terms
       that provide for it to be maintained and available monies applied for its
       upkeep;
(f)    in relation to the properties occupied by the Museums and Gallery
       Service:
       (i)      lease of the Rotunda Museum to the Trust for a period of thirty
                years
       (ii)     a sub-lease of sections of the Wood End Museum to the Trust;
       (iii)    a licence to occupy the Art Gallery;
       (iv)     a sub-lease of the Eastfield Store; and
       (v)      in the short term a lease of the Londesborough Lodge to the
                Trust;
       the leases provide that maintenance of the buildings will continue to be
       undertaken by the Council, accordingly the property budgets
       associated with the buildings have been retained by the Council;
(g)          a guarantee to the Pension fund in the event there is a shortfall in
       funds in the event of premature termination of the provision of the
       service under the Transfer Agreement by reason of the insolvency,
       winding up or liquidation of the Trust.
       The service would be provided by the Trust for 30 years.
       Members discussed this report.
RESOLVED that Cabinet agree to enter into the final form of agreements for
transfer of the Museums and Gallery Service to the Scarborough Museums
Trust as follows:
(a)    a Services Agreement relating to the provision of the entire Museums
       and Gallery Service by the Trust;
(b)    a Service Level Agreement setting out services the Council will
       continue to make available to the Trust, and the terms upon which
       those services will be available;
(c)    a Collections Agreement relating to the management of all collections
       held by the Council;
(d)    a lease of the Rotunda museum;
(e)    a sub-lease of Wood End (as tenant of the Creative Industries Centre);
(f)    a licence to occupy the Art Gallery, pending consideration of future
       proposals for enhancement of the building;
(g)    a sub-lease of the Museum Store at Unit 10, Eastfield;
(h)    a short term business lease of Londesborough Lodge to the
       Scarborough Museums Trust for the period that the Trust will be
       leasing the building pending completion on comparable terms to those
       that would have applied had the Trust been able to move into Wood
       End Museum from 1 January 2008; and
(i)    Entry into a loan agreement to the Trust providing the sum of £50,000
       repayable over two years to fund fundraising activity being undertaken
       by the Trust toward continuing operations (agreed by Council on 29
       October 2007 report HFS0720);
(j)      entry into an Admissions Agreement with Scarborough Museums
       Trust and North Yorkshire County Council to enable Scarborough
       Museums Trust to become an admitted body, and
                                   Page 16


      (k)    agreement to the use of £30k of existing reserves within budgets
             developed for costs relating to the Transfer of the Service to the
             Scarborough Museums Trust for the purpose of the opening ceremony.
      Reason:
      To effect the decision of the Council of 30 October 2006 to transfer the
      Museums and Gallery Service to the Scarborough Museums Trust and ensure
      the effective promotion of the re-opening of the service.

18.   APPROVAL FOR PROCUREMENT OF A NEW CUSTOMER
      RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT (CRM) SYSTEM
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Head of Financial Services and
      head of Marketing and Communications Services (Reference HFS/07/39 and
      HMCS/07/07). Cabinet were informed that this was part of the Council’s
      corporate efficiency programme and had been considered by the Service
      Transformation Group. The CRM was the key tool for Customer First to
      monitor and track all customer enquires. The current CRM was now due for
      renewal. A new system could help to link the front and the back offices and
      link to Geographical Information Systems so that issues could be mapped
      across the borough.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet provide: -
      (i)     authority to procure within the project budget of £120,000 (identified
              within the IT Fund) a single integrated CRM to replace the existing
              system, which is now out of contract and on a 12 month extension; and
      (ii)    authority within the project budget to enter into such contracts as may
              be necessary to achieve this objective.
      Reasons:
      • To inform Cabinet of the requirement to replace current CRM system.
      • To follow procedures to comply with Council financial and procurement
              rules.

19.   APPROVAL FOR PROCUREMENT OF AN ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT
      AND RECORD MANAGEMENT (EDRM) SYSTEM
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Financial Services
      (Reference HFS/07/41). Cabinet were informed that this was essential for how
      the authority handled and stored data as information was a key resource for
      any organisation. To keep information electronically a system was needed to
      ensure security, reduction in duplication of documents, and a workflow for
      document destruction. An EDRM would also allow remote access with our
      partners. It was suggested that for such an important resource an identified
      officer would need to have responsibility for ensuring its correct management.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet provide:
      (i)     authority to procure within the project budget of £260,000 (identified
              within the IT and IEG Funds) an integrated EDRM system; and
      (ii)    authority within the project budget to enter into such contracts as may
              be necessary to achieve this objective.
      Reasons:
      • To inform Cabinet of the requirement to procure and EDRM system.
      • To follow procedures to comply with Council financial and procurement
              rules.
                                      Page 17


20.   OUTSTANDING OBJECTIONS TO PROPOSALS ARISING FROM RECENT
      REVIEWS OF TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Engineering and Harbour
      Services (Reference HEngH/07/75). Cabinet were informed that further
      consultation would be carried out on the Cleveland Road proposals. It was
      explained that members of the public who had expressed concerns would be
      included in this consultation.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet approve the following proposals:
      (i)    Cleveland Road:
             Head of Engineering & Harbours to facilitate a meeting of residents,
             businesses, officers, Ward Members and Portfolio Holder for Environment &
             Transport to discuss the problems and seek solutions.
      (ii)   Hackness Road:
             Introduce the draft traffic regulation order as advertised, which will
             prohibit waiting over the following lengths:
                      South west side:
             From its junction with Scalby Road to a point 45m south-west of its
             north eastern junction with Hackness Gardens.
                      North west side:
             From a point 31m south west of its junction with Scalby Road, to a
             point 45m south-west of its junction with Hackness Gardens.
      (iii)  Stepney Road:
             Introduce the relocated bus stop along the frontage of nos. 4/6 Stepney
             Road.
      Reason:
      To facilitate the safe and efficient passage of vehicular traffic along the public
      highway and address the road safety issues that have arisen in these
      locations.

21.   MANAGING COASTAL EROSION RISK - A NEW NATIONAL
      FRAMEWORK FOR SERVICE DELIVERY
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Engineering and Harbour
      Services (Reference HEngH/07/74). Cabinet were informed that DEFRA had
      been consulting with stakeholders on future coastal management. DEFRA
      were now setting policy and devolving coastal management responsibility to
      the Environment Agency and local authorities. There were currently 11
      coastal groups around the country. It was proposed to streamline that to 6,
      which will be funded by central government rather than by the local
      authorities. Scarborough Borough Council was a lead authority and as such
      was responsible for the coast from St Abbs in Scotland to Gibraltar Point near
      the Wash.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet:-
      (i)    note progress with the implementation of the Environment Agency’s
             strategic overview for flood and coastal erosion risk management; and
      (ii)   support the development of a more streamlined service for delivery of
             coastal erosion risk management subject to:
             (a)    final clarification on the future role of the Coastal Groups;
             (b)    the provision of an adequate level of central funding to assist
                    Groups in their new role;
                                    Page 18


             (c)   satisfactory resolution of outstanding issues relating to Coastal
                   Group boundaries; and
            (d)    proper levels of representation for Coast Protection Authorities
                   on the Regional Flood Defence Committees; or
      (iii) subject to the above, support in principle the role of the Borough
            Council officers in taking a lead in the new North Eastern Regional
            Coastal Group regionally and nationally.
      Reason:
      To advise Cabinet of changes in the way that coastal erosion risk
      management will be delivered at the national level in England and
      arrangements for the streamlining of the Regional Coastal Defence Groups to
      improve services for Coast Protection Authorities.

22.   PROPOSED POST OFFICE CLOSURES WITHIN THE BOROUGH OF
      SCARBOROUGH
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Regeneration Services
      (Reference HRgn/07/41). Cabinet were informed that this was a difficult issue
      and was potentially very damaging to some of the communities involved in
      post office closures. However moving the Post Office from their current
      position may be very difficult. A note was circulated to Cabinet, which gave
      further details on the impact of the post office closures, which was expanded
      on by the Head of Regeneration Services.
      It was noted that particularly in rural areas the effects on businesses could be
      very significant. Councillors discussed this report. Councillors expressed
      concern that the details given in the post office consultation document did not
      accurately reflect the impact upon some communities, for example by
      describing a one in four hill as “sloping”. It was felt that the proposed closures
      would rip the heart out of local communities as often the village store, where
      the post office was located, would be forced to close if it did not have the
      additional business from the post office. Public transport in many of the areas
      was poor. The post offices that were not earmarked for closure already had
      long queues. It was further noted that many people did not have a bank
      account and thus were unable to access any benefits they were entitled to via
      this method. Councillors were asked to consider writing separately to the Post
      Office and to send a copy of any letter to Post Watch as the Post Office
      consultation team did not automatically pass on letters.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet formally respond to the Post Office Ltd to highlight
      their concerns about the proposals for Post Office closures within the
      Borough.
      Reason:
      On 27 November 2007, the Post Office Ltd announced its proposals for post
      office closures within North Yorkshire, the public consultation period on these
      proposals runs until 17 January 2008. Post Offices are considered by many
      residents to be a vital local service, with closures disproportionately affecting
      the rural areas within the northern part of the Borough, with the potential to
      cause particular hardship for those without transport, older and disabled
      people.
                                     Page 19


23.   EXTERNAL FUNDING TO SUPPORT DELIVERY OF THE SAFER
      COMMUNITIES PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Regeneration Services
      (Reference HRgn/07/42).
      RESOLVED that the Council agree to accept the grant of £14,167 from North
      Yorkshire Supporting People in respect of the Making Safe Scheme for
      2007/08.
      Reason:
      To enable the Making Safe Scheme to continue to March 31st 2008.

                                 (For Information)

24.   DEVELOPMENT OF A MASTERPLAN FOR THE MERE, OLIVER'S MOUNT
      AND PROPOSED COMMUNITY WOODLAND
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Head of Regeneration Services,
      Head of Property Services and Head of Planning Services (Reference
      HRgn/07/39, HPrp/07/66 and HPlg/07/251). Cabinet were informed that
      master plan options would be brought to Cabinet in February 2008. After this
      the options would go out to public consultation.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet note progress regarding the development of a
      masterplan for the Mere, Oliver’s Mount and proposed community woodland
      in Scarborough.
      Reason:
      To inform members of the progress to date in relation to developing a master
      plan.

25.   DEVELOPING THE NEW SUB-REGIONAL INVESTMENT PLAN
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Regeneration Services
      (Reference HRgn/07/40). Cabinet were informed that Yorkshire Forward was
      producing their corporate plan that would set out their priorities for the next
      ten years. It was likely that there would be four geographical programmes for
      the area including one for Scarborough. This should operate in the same way
      as the old style Single Regeneration Budgets. Funding would be available
      from April 2009. Members discussed this report. It was noted that identifying
      the needs from each authority had produced the sub-regional development
      plan.
      RESOLVED that Members note progress in developing the new Sub Regional
      Investment Plan and turning the 3 draft issue specifications relating to
      Scarborough Borough into specific programmes and projects.
      Reason:
      The Sub Regional Investment Plan will provide a strategic framework for
      partners funding decisions over the next few years and it is important that the
      Borough’s economic needs and opportunities are recognised in this
      document.

26.   CABINET (GRANTS AND RELIEF) SUB-COMMITTEE
      The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet (Grants and Relief) Sub-Committee
      held on 20 November 2007 were submitted.
      RESOLVED that the minutes be noted.
                                    Page 20


27.   INDIVIDUAL CABINET MEMBER DECISIONS
      Individual Cabinet Member Decisions since the last Cabinet meeting were
      submitted.
      RESOLVED that the decisions be noted.

28.   EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
      RESOLVED that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local
      Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the
      following items of business on the grounds that they involved the likely
      disclosure of exempt information (as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the
      Act):-
      • relating to any consultation or negotiations, or contemplated consultations
          or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising
          between the authority and employees of, or office holders, under the
          authority (agenda item 29);
      • in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be
          maintained in legal proceeds (agenda item 30); and
      • relating to the financial affairs of any particular person (including the
          authority holding that information) (agenda items 31-33).

                                   (For Decision)

29.   SENIOR MANAGEMENT RESTRUCTURE
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Strategic Director of Corporate
      Services (Reference SDCS/07/92). Cabinet discussed this report.
      RESOLVED that:-
      (i)    Cabinet agreed to note the financial implications arising from the
             redundancy situation affecting the Holders of Posts PP1 Head of Policy
             and Performance, PL1 Head of Planning Services, PR1 Head of
             Property Services, R1 Head of Regeneration Services, SS1 Head of
             Street Scene Services,
      who have not applied for a post within the new Senior Management Structure,
      (ii)   approve that arrangements be put in hand for all Posts identified in (i)
             above to be deleted from the Establishment of the Council and for the
             Postholders to be made redundant.
      (iii)  to agree that the effective date for the redundancies be determined by
             the Chief Executive, with this to be subject to operational and efficiency
             considerations and the giving of formal statutory notice as is required
             by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
      (iv)   To agree that a budget of up to £35,000 be provided for the recruitment
             of the three remaining posts, with this to be financed from
             underspending on salaries budgets across the Council in 2007/08.
      Reasons:
      To ensure decisions are made in accordance with the Council’s approved
      procedures, and ensure proper financial accountability and management of
      the restructure process.
                                     Page 21


30.   REGISTRATION OF LAND AS A TOWN OR VILLAGE GREEN AT LINDEN
      ROAD, NEWBY, SCARBOROUGH
      Councillor Bastiman declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item
      as he was Chair of Newby and Scalby Parish Council, and left the meeting for
      this item.
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Property Services (Reference
      HPrp/07/63). Cabinet discussed this report.
      RESOLVED that no objections be submitted to the registration as a town or
      village green of an area of land at Linden Road, Newby, Scarborough.
      Reason:
      In view of the land’s current status as open space and based on the evidence
      provided in support of the application it is considered that a satisfactory
      objection to registration of land as a town or village green cannot be
      maintained.

31.   AFFORDABLE HOUSING - ASH GROVE, CASTLETON
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Head of Environmental Health
      Services and Head of Property Services (Reference HEHS/07/117 and
      HPrp/07/67). Cabinet discussed this report.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet release 0.17 hectares of land off Ash Grove,
      Castleton to Sanctuary Housing Association to enable the development of 4
      three-bedroom and 2 two-bedroom affordable houses and car parking, subject
      to Sanctuary Housing Association meeting the Council’s legal costs.
      Reason:
      To secure additional affordable homes in the Borough.

32.   AFFORDABLE HOUSING - OVERDALE, EASTFIELD
      Councillor Bastiman declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item
      as he was the Director of Yorkshire Coast Homes, and left the meeting for this
      item.
      The Cabinet considered a joint report by the Head of Environmental Health
      Services and Head of Property Services (Reference HEHS/07/119 and
      HPrp/07/68). Cabinet discussed this report.
      RESOLVED that Cabinet release a parcel of land at Overdale, Eastfield for
      the development of three affordable homes subject to any future ‘right to buy’
      payments in relation to houses on the proposed site being recycled to provide
      local affordable housing.
      Reason:
      To secure additional affordable homes within the Borough.

33.   ROUTINE PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS
      The Cabinet considered a report by the Head of Property Services (Reference
      HPrp/07/64).
      RESOLVED that Cabinet note the property transactions detailed in Part I and
      to approve those detailed in Part II of the Appendix.
                             Page 22


Reason:
To update Cabinet on the property transactions approved through the scheme
of delegation by the Head of Property Services and to finalise the transactions
in Part II of the Appendix and secure revenue income and a capital receipt for
the Council.




                                                          Chairman
                                                      CABINET FORWARD PLAN
                                                             CE/08/01
                                                  1 JANUARY 2008 TO 30 APRIL 2008


 No         Decision to be made            Expected timescale    Chief      Background         Local        Consultation
                                            (Previous date in    Officer      Papers       Stakeholders       process
                                            parentheses with
                                             explanation for
                                                deferral)
       The Leader

       Major development projects and
       strategies (items marked * in
       portfolio lists)
1      Members' Allowances           Not before January          HLDS      None.         Audit Committee   Report to Audit
A      Recommend to Council revision 2008                                                                  Committee
and    of member allowances
K                                    February 2008
                                                                                                                                  Page 23




Item

2      Casino                              Not before February   SDO       None.
       Policy guidance and        criteria 2008
       including site selection            Awaiting
                                           announcement from
                                           Government

3      George Pindar Community            Not before February    HLDS      None.         George Pindar     This Plan
A      College                            2008                                           College
Item   External Member Appointment
       to Trust                           February 2008
                                                                                                                             Agenda Item 4
 No         Decision to be made          Expected timescale       Chief      Background         Local         Consultation
                                          (Previous date in       Officer      Papers       Stakeholders        process
                                          parentheses with
                                           explanation for
                                              deferral)
4      Area Forum Development             Not before March 2008   SDO       None.
       Implications for Council resulting
       from impact monitoring

       Finance, Legal and ICT

1      Financial Strategy 2008/09       Not before January        SDCS      None.
A      (Corporate Business Plan)        2008
and
K                                       February 2008
Item
                                                                                                                             Page 24




2      Approval to the following       Not before January         HLDS      None.         Heads of Service   This Plan
       Contracts: A Framework          2008
       Agreement for Scanning. A
       Framework Contract for Video
       Conferencing. A Contract for
       the provision of wider Area
       Network Functionality
       Agreement to enter into a
       framework contract for scanning
 No         Decision to be made           Expected timescale   Chief      Background         Local        Consultation
                                           (Previous date in   Officer      Papers       Stakeholders       process
                                           parentheses with
                                            explanation for
                                               deferral)
3      Policy on Discretionary           Not before February   HFS       None.
A      Business Rate Relief for          2008
and    Charities and Non-Profit Making
K      Organisations for 2008/09         February 2008
Item   onwards

4      Approval of Information           Not before February   HFS       None.
       Management (IM) Strategy          2008

5      Marine Drive                      Not before February   HLDS      None.
K                                        2008
Item
                                                                                                                          Page 25




6      Finance and Performance           February 2008         SDCS      None.
A      Monitoring (3rd quarter report)
Item                                     February 2008

       Public Health, Housing Land
       and Property

1      Dog Warden Service              Not before January      HEHS      None.         The Police, Kennel Correspondenc
K      To consider the future delivery 2008                                            Proprietors, Canine e
Item   of the service in light of                                                      organisations,
       additional duties being placed                                                  RSPCA.
       on the Council in relation to
       stray dogs
 No         Decision to be made      Expected timescale   Chief      Background         Local             Consultation
                                      (Previous date in   Officer      Papers       Stakeholders            process
                                      parentheses with
                                       explanation for
                                          deferral)
2      Property Strategy            Not before February   HPrp      None.
                                    2008

3      The Futurist                 Not before February   HPrp      None.
                                    2008

4      Housing Grants             Not before February     HEHS,     None.         North     Yorkshire    Discussions
K      Changing to the funding of 2008                    HFS                     County      Council,   with     service
Item   housing grants             Awaiting result of                              Support     People,    users       and
                                  Housing Condition                               Home                   stakeholders
                                  Survey                                          Improvement
                                                                                  Agency          and
                                                                                                                            Page 26




                                                                                  Service Users and
                                                                                  the voluntary sector
5      Londesborough Lodge, The     Not before February   HPrp      None.
A      Crescent, Scarborough        2008
Item
                                    February 2008
       Environment and Transport

1      Progress report on Filey     Not before January    HEngH     None.
A      Flooding issues              2008
Item
                                    February 2008
 No         Decision to be made             Expected timescale   Chief      Background         Local       Consultation
                                             (Previous date in   Officer      Papers       Stakeholders      process
                                             parentheses with
                                              explanation for
                                                 deferral)
2      Proposed replacement                Not before January    HSS       None.
A      Christmas lighting at               2008
Item   Westborough Precinct,
       Scarborough, due to the
       proposed "Bathing Belle" statue
       being installed and the
       replacement of street lighting at
       Aquarium Top, Scarborough

3      Implications of the Traffic         Not before January    HEngH     None.
       Management Act 2004 on              2008
       Parking Enforcement
                                                                                                                          Page 27




4      North Yorkshire County Council Not before January         HEngH     None.         N/A              This Plan
       Parking Agency                 2008
       Agreement to terms of Agency
       Agreement with NYCC for
       management of Decrim

5      Scarborough Car Parking             Not before February   HEngH     None.
       Strategy                            2008


6      Scarborough Borough Council         Not before February   HEngH     None.
K      Travel Plan                         2008
Item
 No        Decision to be made         Expected timescale     Chief      Background       Local      Consultation
                                        (Previous date in     Officer      Papers     Stakeholders     process
                                        parentheses with
                                         explanation for
                                            deferral)
7      Trade Waste Collection         Not before February     HSS       None.
                                      2008


8      Review of Decrim               Not before April 2008   HEngH     None.
K
Item

       Regeneration, Strategic
       Planning and Community
       Development
                                                                                                                    Page 28




1      North Yorkshire County Council Not before January      HPlg,     None.
A      Minerals and Waste Local        2008                   HEHS
Item   Development Framework
       To     consider    consultation February 2008
       documents     and   agree     a
       response
 No         Decision to be made           Expected timescale    Chief      Background         Local       Consultation
                                           (Previous date in    Officer      Papers       Stakeholders      process
                                           parentheses with
                                            explanation for
                                               deferral)
2      Scarborough Borough Local           Not before January   HPlg      None.
       Development Framework -             2008
       Housing Allocations
       Development Plan Document
       Issues and Options (Proposed
       consultation on additional
       housing sites submitted)
       To seek approval to publish a
       further set of sites that are being
       promoted by landowners and
       developers as housing sites
       through the LDF
                                                                                                                         Page 29




3      Creative Industries Trust Ltd      Not before January    HLDS      None.         Ward Members     This Plan
       Agreement      to    entry    into 2008
       Agreements with the Creative
       Industries Trust

4      The North Yorkshire Building      Not before January     SDO       None.
A      Control Partnership               2008
and
K                                        February 2008
Item
No        Decision to be made            Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local        Consultation
                                          (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders       process
                                          parentheses with
                                           explanation for
                                              deferral)
5    Employer Needs Survey -            Not before January      HRgn      None.
     Acceptance of External Funding     2008


6    Investment Protocol                Not before February     HRgn      None.         Business          None
     To agree an improved approach      2008                                            community
     to dealing with investment         More background
     enquiries                          information and
                                        research needed

7    Business Improvement Districts     Not before February     HRgn      None.         Town        Centre Ongoing
     (BIDS)                             2008                                            Management
                                                                                                                          Page 30




     To consider and agree an           More preparation work                           Steering Group and
     approach to the development of     needed                                          Chamber of Trade
     a      possible        Business
     Improvement      District    for
     Scarborough

8    Scarborough Business Park      Not before February         HRgn      None.         Scarborough       N/A
     To note progress on this major 2008                                                Business
     scheme and achievement of                                                          Association
     target completion dates and
     outcomes
 No         Decision to be made          Expected timescale      Chief      Background             Local       Consultation
                                          (Previous date in      Officer      Papers           Stakeholders      process
                                          parentheses with
                                           explanation for
                                              deferral)
9      Local Development Framework      Not before February      HPlg      None.         All                  To be agreed
A      Core Strategy - Further          2008
and    preferred options
K      To agree preferred options for   February 2008
Item   consultation                     Changes due to need
                                        to analyse fully
                                        consultation responses
                                        from on-going housing
                                        consultation

10     Conservation Management Plan     Not before February      HPlg      None.
A      for the Art Gallery              2008
Item
                                                                                                                              Page 31




                                        February 2008


11     Eastfield Neighbourhood          Not before February      HRgn      None.
K      Agreement                        2008
Item

       Tourism, Leisure and
       Community Services

1      Whitby Tourist Information       Not before January       HMCS,     None.
K      Centre                           2008                     HPrp
Item
 No         Decision to be made            Expected timescale   Chief      Background         Local           Consultation
                                            (Previous date in   Officer      Papers       Stakeholders          process
                                            parentheses with
                                             explanation for
                                                deferral)
2      A policy for the Acquisition and   Not before February   HTLS      None.         Arts, Heritage,      To be agreed
A      Disposal of Museum Collections     2008                                          History groups and
Item   Updated policy for approval                                                      the Cultural
                                          February 2008                                 Community, Arts
                                                                                        Council
                                                                                        (Yorkshire),
                                                                                        Museum, Archive
                                                                                        and Libraries
                                                                                        (Yorkshire)

3      Art Policy                       Not before February     HTLS      None.         Arts and Culture Ongoing
K      Public to be considered prior to 2008                                            group       and
                                                                                                                             Page 32




Item   consultation                                                                     community

4      Filey Multi Use Games Area       Not before February     HTLS      None.         Filey Town Council, Consultation
A      Support the principle of a multi 2008                                            NYCC Community exercise already
Item   use games area and the use of                                                    Education (Youth conducted.
       106 funding                      February 2008                                   Service),
                                        Finance still to be                             Scarborough Safer
                                        confirmed                                       Communities
                                                                                        Partnership

5      Future Management of Filey         Not before February   HTLS      None.
       Brigg Caravan Park                 2008
                                          Consultation with
                                          stakeholders
 No        Decision to be made         Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local             Consultation
                                        (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders            process
                                        parentheses with
                                         explanation for
                                            deferral)
6      The Cultural Olympiad          Not before February     HTLS      None.         Local       cultural Email        to
       To consider opportunities to 2008                                              organisations        stakeholders
       develop Scarborough's Cultural
       Olympiad up to the 2012
       London Olympics

7      Pannett Park                   Not before March 2008   HSS       None.         Whitby        Town Public
K      To approve the submission of a                                                 Council, Friends of consultation
Item   stage 2 Parks for People bid                                                   Pannett Park        events       and
       and implementation of the                                                                          meetings,
       project if bid is successful                                                                       correspondence

8      Community Revenue Grants     Not before March 2008     HTLS      None.         Grant                  Grant
                                                                                                                             Page 33




A      To review funding of Service                                                   applicants/recipient   monitoring
and    Level Agreements and revise May 2008                                           s                      process
K      Community Grants
Item

9      Royal Albert Park             Not before March 2008    HSS       None.         Friends of    Royal Correspondenc
K      To approve the implementation                                                  Albert Park         e,       public
Item   of Phase 2 of the improvement                                                                      meetings
       scheme
 No         Decision to be made              Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local        Consultation
                                              (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders       process
                                              parentheses with
                                               explanation for
                                                  deferral)
10     Section 106 agreements for off- Not before March 2008        HSS       None.         Various community Correspondenc
K      site open space improvements                                                         groups       and e
Item   To approve the allocation of                                                         Town/Parish
       Section 106 agreements to                                                            Councils
       various open spaces

11     Parks and Green Spaces     Not before March 2008             HSS       None.         Various community Correspondenc
K      Strategy                                                                             groups       and e
Item   To update on Year 1 of the                                                           Town/Parish
       Parks and Green Spaces                                                               Councils
       Strategy
                                                                                                                              Page 34




12     Sports Summit Update                 Not before March 2008   HTLS      None.         Sports Community, To be agreed
K      To consider preferred options                                                        The     Education
Item                                                                                        Community

13     Draft Cultural Strategy              Not before March 2008   HTLS      None.         Community         Ongoing
K      To be considered prior          to                                                   Groups, Clubs and
Item   consultation                                                                         Societies

14     Older Persons Strategy               Not before March 2008   HTLS      None.         North   Yorkshire To be agreed
K      To be considered prior          to                                                   County   Council,
Item   consultation                                                                         Community groups
 No        Decision to be made           Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local              Consultation
                                          (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders             process
                                          parentheses with
                                           explanation for
                                              deferral)
15     Whitby West Cliff O&S review    Not before April 2008    HTLS      None.         Whitby community Email           to
K      To endorse the proposals for                                                     and           trade stakeholders
Item   developing Whitby West Cliff                                                     organisations
       subject to further consultation
       and funding

16     Residents Card                Not before April 2008      HTLS      None.         Local residents         Residents Panel
A      To approve proposals for a
and    residents      card    giving May 2008
K      concessions and benefits for
Item   residents using SBC leisure
       facilities
                                                                                                                                  Page 35




17     Whitby Pavilion Review          Not before April 2008    HTLS      None.         Whitby                  Email
K      To     review   proposals   for                                                  residents/stakehold
Item   improvements      to    Whitby                                                   ers
       Pavilion

18     A new Visitor Economy Strategy   Not before April 2008   HTLS      None.         Renaissance             Meetings/email
       for Scarborough Borough                                                          Groups,
       To approve the development of                                                    Scarborough
       a Visitor Economy Strategy for                                                   Tourism
       the Borough                                                                      Associations      and
                                                                                        Stakeholders
 No         Decision to be made           Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local          Consultation
                                           (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders         process
                                           parentheses with
                                            explanation for
                                               deferral)
19     A destination management plan Not before May 2008         HTLS      None.         Renaissance        Meetings/email
K      for Scarborough                                                                   Groups,    Tourism
Item   To approve proposals to                                                           Associations and
       develop a visitor management                                                      Stakeholders
       and    legibility scheme for
       Scarborough

       Human Resources and
       Performance Management

1      Community Engagement            Not before February       HPP       None.         All Members, staff
       Strategy                        2008                                              and residents
                                                                                                                             Page 36




       Approval of the Strategy (for
       improvement in the numbers of
       individuals and representatives
       of the community engaging
       council)

2      Equalities and Diversity Strategy Not before April 2008   HPP       None.         All Members, staff
       Approval of the Strategy          Awaiting further                                and residents
                                         information
 No         Decision to be made         Expected timescale     Chief      Background         Local          Consultation
                                         (Previous date in     Officer      Papers       Stakeholders         process
                                         parentheses with
                                          explanation for
                                             deferral)
3      Community Cohesion Strategy     Not before April 2008   HPP       None.         All Members, staff
       Approve the Strategy and raise                                                  and residents
       awareness      of      changing
       demographics, future trends and
       the Council's approach to
       community cohesion

       Harbours

1      West Pier, Scarborough          Not before February     HEngH     None.         General     public, Meetings,
       Harbour - Onshore Facilities    2008                                            interest   groups, presentation
                                                                                       harbour users       and website
                                                                                                                             Page 37




2      Municipal Ports Review          Not before March 2008   HEngH     None.         Projects      and Stakeholders,
                                                                                       Partnerships       DfT, other Ports
                                                                                       Overview      and
                                                                                       Scrutiny Committee

3      Ports Strategy                  Not before March 2008   HEngH     None.         Whitby and Filey Letter/meeting
K      To adopt strategy                                                               Town     Councils.
Item                                                                                   Harbour Users
No        Decision to be made            Expected timescale      Chief      Background         Local        Consultation
                                          (Previous date in      Officer      Papers       Stakeholders       process
                                          parentheses with
                                           explanation for
                                              deferral)
     Community Safety

1    SBC response to Home Office        Not before February      HRgn      None.
     CDRP National Standards            2008
                                        Work currently
                                        underway to develop
                                        the necessary
                                        structures and systems
                                        for implementation.
                                        Also awaiting
                                        clarification from the
                                        Home Office on a
                                                                                                                           Page 38




                                        number of questions

2    Crime and Disorder Act Review      Not before February      HRgn      None.         Crime and Disorder None
     - Information Sharing and          2008                                             Reduction
     Strategy Regulations               Work currently                                   Partnership
     Agreement      to    Information   underway to develop
     Sharing Protocol                   the necessary
                                        structures and systems
                                        for implementation.
                                        Also awaiting
                                        clarification from the
                                        Home Office on a
                                        number of questions
Abbreviations

Officers
CE         Chief Executive
SDCS       Strategic Director of Corporate Services
SDO        Strategic Director of Operations
HEHS       Head of Environmental Health Services
HFS        Head of Financial Services
HHR        Head of Human Resources
HEngH      Head of Engineering and Harbours Services
HLDS       Head of Legal and Democratic Services
HMCS       Head of Marketing and Communications Services
HPlg       Head of Planning Services
HPP        Head of Policy and Performance
HPrp       Head of Property Services
HRgn       Head of Regeneration Services
HSS        Head of Street Scene Services
HTLS       Head of Tourism and Leisure Services
Overview and Scrutiny Committees
                                                                                                                                                             Page 39




CSOSC      Corporate Strategy Overview and Scrutiny Committee
PPOSC      Projects and Partnerships Overview and Scrutiny Committee
SPOSC      Service Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee



Decision Makers
All items on the Forward Plan will be referred to Cabinet for their decision. Items marked with a K are a key decision for Cabinet. Items marked with an A
will need to be referred from Cabinet to full Council for their approval.
           Page 40




This page is intentionally left blank
                                         Page 41                Agenda Item 6

                                                                           ‘A’ ITEM

                                                  REPORT TO CABINET

                                                     TO BE HELD ON
                                                    22 JANUARY 2008

                                           Key Decision              YES

                                          Forward Plan Ref No        A1K


Corporate Priority                        Cabinet Portfolio          Cllr. D
                                          Holder                     Chambers
All



REPORT OF: Strategic Director of Corporate Services – SDCS/08/7
WARDS AFFECTED: All

SUBJECT: FINANCIAL STRATEGY 2008/09 (CORPORATE
BUSINESS PLAN)


RECOMMENDATION (S):
That Cabinet recommends to Council approval of the Financial Strategy (Corporate
Business Plan) (Appendix A) with particular note made of the following
recommendations contained within the strategy: -

-     The proposed revenue budget for 2007/08 of £20,511,050
-      The proposed increase in Council Tax for the Borough Council element, of
      4.9% to £202.09 (increase of £9.44 per year per Band D Property) (note the
      total Council Tax, including County Council, Fire and Police is covered within
      the separate Council Tax Setting report to Council).
-     Proposed Service efficiencies/savings totalling £1,147,700
-     Corporate efficiencies/savings of £882,490, including £500,000 form the
      Corporate Efficiency Programme
-     Additional budget provision for expansion of recycling service of £275,000 and
      the extension of the concessionary fares scheme £982,780
-     The review of Reserves, the approval of the balances criteria and the following
      schemes to be funded, in the short term, from the Revenue Development
      Reserve:
             o Neighbourhood Regeneration £70,000
             o Seafest £10,000
             - Anti Social Behaviour Officer £10,000




                                                                            SDCS/08/7
                                      Page 42


-     The proposed new capital schemes as follows
            o Additional new general capital schemes totalling £925,000
            o Specific Improvements to the Council’s Asset Infrastructure £410,000
            o Enhancements to IT technology of £1.6m over the next 3 years,
            o Investment in Vehicles, Plant and Equipment in 2008/09 of £836,100
-     The Invest to Save Strategy
-     Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy
-     Prudential Indicators Policy
-     The Chief Finance Officers Statutory Statement, with Council asked to note and
      endorse the comments contained within this.

(NOTE – THIS RECOMMENDATION WILL NEED TO BE CONSIDERED BY
COUNCIL ALONGSIDE THE SEPARATE COUNCIL TAX SETTING RESOLUTION
WHICH WILL BE PRESENTED DIRECTLY TO COUNCIL)

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
The Council is required to approve a balanced revenue budget, and set its level of
Council Tax for 2007/08. The overall Financial Strategy sets out the Council’s
financial direction for coming years. The Chief Finance Officer (Strategic Director of
Corporate Services) has a statutory responsibility to ensure a balanced budget is
set by Council, and that he reports to Members in accordance with the Local
Government Act 2003 and other relevant Acts. The Financial Strategy supports the
achievement of Corporate Priorities for the Council, and sets out the significant
issues facing the Council and how these will be addressed, together with
associated risk assessments.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
A detailed risk assessment is included within the Financial Strategy. Highlighted
risks include the achievement of the efficiency savings, management of the capital
programme to budget, and achievement of income from seasonal activities.
Attention is also drawn to the Chief Finance Officer’s statutory statement set out in
this report. Attention is also drawn to the fact the Government have said they will
cap “excessive” Council Tax increases. Exactly what is meant by “excessive” is not
clear, however it is known that many authorities will set increases similar to the
percentage increase proposed within this report.


1.       INTRODUCTION
1.1      The Council approved a detailed Financial Strategy in February 2007. This
         report updates the comprehensive Medium Term Financial Strategy, and
         provides a basis from which the Council can move forward positively over
         coming years, tackling the challenges it faces, and ensuring a strong financial
         standing is maintained.

2.       CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1      The Financial Strategy underpins all of the Council’s objectives. In setting out
         resource allocations, the Council’s priorities have been considered, and
         resources allocated towards the Council’s top priorities.


                                                                             SDCS/08/7
                                       Page 43


3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   The issues relating to the Financial Strategy are set out in detail within the
      attached Financial Strategy. Members’ attention is in particular drawn to the
      Executive Summary of the Financial Strategy, which sets out the Key
      Objectives of the Strategy and the Headline Proposals contained within the
      Strategy.

3.2   The Council needs a fully integrated Financial Strategy that seeks to ensure
      long-term financial stability, the achievement of Value for Money, and funding
      for priorities. The attached Appendix sets out the detail of the Strategy, which
      builds upon the previous Strategies approved in recent years.

3.3   The focus of this Financial Strategy continues to be on long term planning,
      and decision making for the future. Whilst the Strategy includes specific
      proposals for the 2008/09 Revenue Budget, there should not be an over
      concentration on just one year’s budget. This Strategy seeks to avoid year on
      year budget setting, and use of short term/one off measures to balance the
      budget. It is a Strategy for the future, to ensure effective resource planning,
      maintain financial prudence, and the delivery of Corporate Objectives.

3.4   Whilst there is a need for significant efficiencies to be achieved, the strategy
      provides for some significant investment in key priorities. These include
      Recycling, investment in parks and gardens, investment in leisure, and further
      investment in public toilet enhancements. In addition there is ongoing
      provision for ICT investment to ensure the Council is able to use new
      technology to deliver service improvement and efficiency.

3.5   To achieve the delivery of this Financial Strategy requires an understanding
      within the senior levels of the organisation of the collective responsibilities for
      the stewardship and use of resources.

3.6   There are however many challenges facing the Council in coming years. To
      ensure that the Council maintains a healthy financial standing will require
      significant efficiency gains to be made in coming years. This is perhaps the
      most significant challenge facing this Council over the next 4-5 years.

3.7   In addition, management of the Capital Programme over coming years will
      present a major challenge. There are a number of major capital schemes that
      have been recently commenced, and delivery of these projects within budget
      is crucial. However, even the best project management cannot prevent
      additional costs, and in this respect ensuring adequate contingency funding
      and not over-committing capital resources will be key to maintaining the
      Council’s financial position.

3.8   The financial interests of the Council will of course always be at the forefront
      of decision making, to ensure the Council does not overstretch itself and result
      in damaging financial/service consequences. It will be inevitable that the
      aspirations/ambitions of the Council will outweigh resources. As such any



                                                                              SDCS/08/7
                                    Page 44


      available resources need to be carefully prioritised, and be considered in
      terms of their impact over the longer term.

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   Consultation has been undertaken with the Areas Committees, through
      Borough News, and also through Corporate Strategy Overview and Scrutiny
      Committee. The views of the O&S committee will be reported verbally at the
      meeting.

5.    ASSESSMENT
5.1   The attached Financial Strategy sets out fully the options and issues that are
      relevant. In addition there is a need to consider the Statutory Requirements
      under the Local Government Act 2003.

5.2   Local Government Act 2003 – Section 25 Report

      Section 25 of the Local Government Act 2003 requires the Chief Financial
      Officer (S.151 Officer) to report to the Authority when it is making the statutory
      calculations required to determine its Council tax or precept. The Authority is
      required to take the report into account when making the calculations. The
      report must deal with the robustness of the estimates included in the budget
      and the adequacy of the reserves for which the budget provides.

      What is required is the professional advice of the Chief Financial Officer on
      these two questions. Both are connected with matters of risk and uncertainty.
      They are interdependent and need to be considered together. In particular,
      decisions on the appropriate level of reserves should be guided by advice
      based on an assessment of all the circumstances considered likely to affect
      the Authority.

      In each Local Authority the Chief Financial Officer alone must prepare the
      Section 25 report.

      Section 25 requires the report to be made to the Authority when the decisions
      on the calculations are formally being made (i.e. Council). However, those
      decisions are the conclusion of a process involving consideration of the draft
      budget by various parts of the organisation, including the executive, member
      committees and officers. During this process appropriate information and
      advice has been given at the earlier stages on what would be required to
      enable a positive opinion to be given in the formal report.

      ODPM guidance states that “it should be possible to identify the sections of a
      composite report that are made under section 25, so that the Authority is able
      to discharge its duty to take account of the statutory report under section 25
      (2).”




                                                                            SDCS/08/7
                                      Page 45


5.3   Section 25 Report (Report of the Chief Finance Officer – Strategic
      Director of Corporate Services)

      In setting the Revenue budget for 2008/09 I consider that the proposed
      budget is robust, and reflects a realistic and prudent view of all
      anticipated expenditure and income.

      The proposed Service efficiency savings/other savings are in excess of £1m,
      together with some £0.8m of Corporate Efficiency Savings. The achievement
      of these savings will be crucial in managing within the budget. The risk of this
      has been mitigated in part by thoroughly reviewing all savings proposals for
      their robustness, and effective budget monitoring procedures are in place.
      However, there inevitably remains a risk in delivering on this level of efficiency
      savings in the year, and there are potential delays in achievement of some
      savings. Where this occurs, compensating savings will need to be identified.

      Concessionary fares and Park and Ride are two significant issues facing the
      Council this year. In respect of Concessionary Fares, I consider that a
      realistic assessment of the costs have been made, but that this assessment is
      inevitably difficult to assess with precise accuracy, as this is the first year of
      the expanded scheme. It will be necessary to monitor this budget and ensure
      any required actions are taken as early as possible. In respect of park and
      ride, I have previously advised Members of the issues relating to this scheme,
      and consider that the car parking charges approved by Council in January
      2008 ensure that the implications of park and ride are mitigated.

      The overall level of reserves is considered in detail within the Financial
      Strategy. In summary I consider that the overall level of reserves is adequate,
      though the Capital Contingency, Insurance Reserve, and Pension Reserve all
      require review in the near future. In this context however, it should be noted
      that once again there is no planned use of Reserves to support the Revenue
      Budget in 2008/09 and this does add to the overall robustness of the budget,
      particularly in the longer term. A high use of reserves to support the revenue
      budget would present problems in the longer term, and the avoidance of
      planned use of reserves is something that I recommended is continued in
      future years wherever possible.

      The overall value of the Capital Programme will diminish significantly in
      2008/09, and with it the overall risk reduce. However there is still a need to
      exercise prudence and ensure that resources are not overcommitted. It
      should be noted that Council (and public) aspirations clearly exceed available
      resources. There is therefore a need for rigorous prioritisation of schemes
      (which has taken place in recent months, and which must continue for the
      future), and also a need to recognise that there will be a number of desirable
      projects for which funding is unlikely to be available.

      The Council has a number of areas of activity that produce significant income.
      Many of these areas are sensitive to fluctuations in usage, and in particular
      fluctuations in the weather. In setting the budget a prudent approach has
      been taken in the estimate of these income levels, however that cannot avoid


                                                                            SDCS/08/7
                                    Page 46


      potential situations where income may not be achieved due for example to
      poor weather conditions. All major sources of income are monitored on an
      ongoing basis, to ensure any potential shortfalls are identified at an early
      stage, and where possible corrective actions are taken

6.    IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Policy
      The Financial Strategy is integral to the Council’s overall policy development,
      and contains within it proposals for the allocation of resources to deliver
      specific Council priorities.

6.2   Financial
      All of the financial issues are set out within the Financial Strategy. It should
      be noted that the Authority is required to follow a formal process as regards
      the setting of Council Tax, which is laid out in the regulations.

6.3   Legal
      There are no particular legal implications from the report.

6.4   Human Resources
      There are changes in relation to the Council’s establishment, and these are
      identified within the efficiency savings proposals.

6.5   Equalities
      There are no specific issues arising.

6.6   Environmental and Sustainability
      There are a number of projects which have environmental and sustainability
      implications, and these are identified within the full Financial Strategy.

6.7   I have considered whether any further implications arise from this report and I
      am satisfied that there are no other identified implications that will arise from
      this decision.



Strategic Director of Corporate Services
Author: Ian Floyd
Telephone No: 01723 232340
Fax No: 01723 341829
E-mail address: ian.floyd@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT DEBBIE CROSSLEY ON
01723 232342 e-mail debbie.crossley@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                                            SDCS/08/7
          Page 47


                    APPENDIX A




Financial Strategy
(Corporate Business Plan)

Supporting the Council’s
         Vision
   and Key Priorities
Page 48
                                      Page 49


CONTENTS
Executive Summary and Recommendations

Main Report

1.    Purpose and Scope

2.    Links with other strategies and plans

3.    Local and National Priorities

4.    The Financial Context

5.    The Council’s Financial Priorities and how they will be Achieved

6.    Making Better Use of our Resources

7.    Development of the Financial Strategy

8.    The Revenue Plan 2008-2013

9.    The Capital Strategy 2007 –2017

10.   Impact Assessment

11.   Balances and Reserves

12.   Conclusion

Appendix A: Revenue Budget and Council Tax 2008/2009

Appendix B: Additions to the Capital Programme

Appendix C: Action Plan for Achievement of the Financial Strategy Objectives

Appendix D: Invest to Save Strategy

Appendix E: Treasury Management Statement and Annual Investment
          Strategy for 2008/2009

Appendix F: Prudential Indicators

Appendix G: Reserves

Appendix H: Summary Capital Programme
Page 50
                                     Page 51


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Financial Management is essential in achieving good corporate governance,
and underpins service quality, improvement, and accountability. It supports
effective performance and the achievement of organisations aims.

Financial Planning is integral to an organisations strategic planning process.

The Council has put in place a fully integrated financial strategy that seeks to
ensure long-term financial stability, the achievement of Value for Money, and
funding for priorities. This Financial Strategy updates the previous Strategy,
which was approved by Council in February 2007.

The focus of this Financial Strategy is on long term planning, and decision
making for the future. Whilst the Strategy includes specific proposals for the
2008/09 Revenue Budget, there should not be an over concentration on just
one years budget. This Strategy seeks to avoid year on year budget setting,
and use of short term/one off measures to balance the budget. It is a Strategy
for the future, to ensure effective resource planning and the delivery of
Corporate Objectives.

To achieve the delivery of this financial strategy will require an understanding
within the senior levels of the organisation of the collective responsibilities for
the stewardship and use of resources.

The Financial Strategy seeks to achieve the following Objectives: -

1.     Budgets are Prudent and Sustainable in the Long Term,

2.     Financial Plans Recognise Corporate Priorities and Objectives,

3.     Significant risks are identified, and mitigation factors identified,

4.     The Capital Programme is planned over a 10 year period, with
       “Unsupported” Borrowing minimised, other than where there is a
       clear financial business case to borrow,

5.     Constraints on capital and revenue resources, including the
       uncertainties around future government funding, are recognised
       and taken into account,

6.     Council Tax increases will be kept below the Government’s
       expected upper level of increase, and the broad anticipated
       increase for future years will be set out within the Financial Plans,
       recognising that these increases may be subject to change.

7.     Prudent levels of general balances, reserves and contingencies
       are maintained in the context of an assessment of the risks facing
       the Council,
                                Page 52


8.    Value for Money and achievement of improved efficiency and
      service delivery underpin the Financial Strategy,

9.    The Financial Strategy supports the achievement of Excellence in
      Financial Management and Use of Resources.

The Headline Proposals, which seek to support these recommendations, are
as follows:-

      The proposed revenue budget for 2008/09 of £20,511,050
      The proposed increase in Council Tax for the Borough Council element,
      of 4.9% (increase of £9.44 per year per Band D Property) (note the total
      Council Tax, including County Council, Fire and Police is covered within
      the separate Council Tax Setting report to Council).
      Proposed efficiencies/savings from Heads of Service totalling
      £1,147,700
      Corporate efficiencies/savings of £882,490, including £500,000 form
      the Corporate Efficiency Programme.
      Additional budget provision for expansion of recycling service of
      £275,000 and the extension of the concessionary fares scheme
      £982,780
      The proposed new capital schemes as follows :-
      o Additional new general capital schemes totalling £925,000
      o Specific Improvements to the Council’s Asset Infrastructure
          £410,000
      o Enhancements to IT technology of £1.6m over the next 3 years,
      o Investment in Vehicles, Plant and Equipment in 2008/09 of
          £836,100
      The review of Reserves, the approval of the balances criteria and the
      following schemes to be funded, in the short term, from the Revenue
      Development Reserve:
      o Neighbourhood Regeneration £70,000
      o Seafest £10,000
      o Anti Social Behaviour Officer £10,000
      The proposed Invest to Save Strategy
      Treasury Management Policy Statement
      Prudential Indicators Policy
      The Chief Finance Officers Statutory Statement, with Council asked to
      note and endorse the comments contained within this.

This Financial Strategy represents how the Council plans its resources over
the long term. The Strategy provides the base to enable the Council to move
forward positively over coming years. However, a significant amount of
ongoing work will be required to put the Strategy into action, and ensure
resources are effectively managed and aligned with priorities.
                                    Page 53


1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY
The Financial Strategy sets out the overall shape of the Council’s budget by
establishing how available resources will be allocated between services,
reflecting Council and community priorities, and therefore providing a
framework for the preparation of annual budgets.

In particular it:

•   sets out the Council’s medium term financial aims and the measures to be
    taken to ensure they will be achieved;

•   sets out the Council’s approach to delivering improved services and value
    for money over the next few years;

•   describes the Council’s arrangements for developing the medium term
    financial plan, including:
    • The identification and prioritisation of spending needs;
    • The key financial influences on our medium term financial planning and
        the assumptions made in developing the plan;
    • The challenges and risks associated with the plan and how we will deal
        with them.

•   sets out the Council’s policy on reserves and balances.

•   identifies the resource issues and principles, which will shape the Council’s
    financial strategy and annual budgets.

The financial strategy covers all revenue and capital spending plans
                                 Page 54


2.      LINKS WITH OTHER STRATEGIES AND PLANS
The Council’s financial strategy and plan is linked with and supports service
priorities and the Council’s other strategies and plans. These include:

•    The Community Strategy
•    The Council’s Corporate Plan
•    Asset Management Plan
•    The IT Strategy and Work Programme
•    The Procurement Strategy
•    The Treasury Management Strategy
•    The HR Strategy and other related HR policies
                                   Page 55


3.     LOCAL AND NATIONAL PRIORITIES
The Council’s new Corporate Plan sets out our vision, mission and key aims
for the next five years and explains how it plans to achieve them.

Our vision is

“to achieve the Renaissance of the North Yorkshire Coast by
2020.”
This will be achieved through our five key aims:

Aim 1           Developing Safer and Stronger Communities
Aim 2           Building Prosperous Communities
Aim 3           Creating Healthy and Vibrant Communities
Aim 4           Creating Quality Environments
Aim 5           Improving the Council
Within each aim are a number of priorities, which have been chosen following
consultation with the local communities. The top priorities are:

                Reducing Crime and Disorder
                Encouraging Economic Growth and Job Creation
                Ensuring Affordable and Decent Homes
                Enhancing Public Spaces and Parks
                Improving the Performance of our Services and
                ensuring they provide Value for Money
The Council’s medium term financial planning is driven by these priorities. By
integrating the development of the budget and financial plan with these
priorities we seek to ensure that resources have been allocated to deliver the
corporate priorities, in a robust and sustainable manner.

The Financial Strategy also seeks to make links with national priorities, for
example electronic service delivery and recycling. In considering any
proposals for investment the links to national priorities are considered.

By planning over a number of years the Financial Strategy aims to ensure that
Local and National priorities are delivered in the long term, and service
improvement and realignment is planned in an effective manner.
                                  Page 56


4.      THE FINANCIAL CONTEXT
The Councils current revenue spending and funding is summarised below

     2007/2008 Estimate       Cost of Borough Services          2008/2009 Estimate

  Gross         Net                                           Gross              Net
Expenditure Expenditure            Service                  Expenditure      Expenditure
   £000        £000                                            £000             £000
    10,374        1,301 Central Services to the Public           10,751            1,324
                        Democratic and Corporate
     4,316        4,238 Core                                         4,594        4,510
     7,615        4,459 Environmental Health                         8,000        4,795
     4,744        2,786 Refuse Collection                            5,312        3,218
    12,151        7,379 Leisure & Culture                           11,592        7,052
    25,217        1,071 Housing Services                            25,715        1,116
     3,888        2,147 Planning                                     3,331        2,119
                        Highways, Roads and
     7,293          207 Transport Services                           9,048           948
    13,138      (3,734) Other Services                              11,872       (4,571)
    88,736       19,854 Budget Requirement                          90,215       20,511

                2007/08              Financing                 2008/09
                 £000                                           £000
                   11,956   Revenue Support Grant                 12,203
                       29   Council Tax Surplus                        17
                    7,869   Scarborough Council Precept            8,291
                   19,854   Budget Requirement                    20,511

The following table summarises the total Capital Expenditure and the
Council’s Investment in the Borough.
                                 2007/08    2008/09      2009/10     2010/17       Total
                                    £000       £000         £000        £000       £000
Capital Expenditure
Renaissance                       18,586      1,117          400           0     20,103
Other Priority Schemes             4,278      3,671        2,064       3,085     13,098
Coast Protection                     649        980          420         340      2,389
Asset Management Budget              230        121           88         775      1,214
Vehicle Plant and Equipment        1,204        837        1,552       8,838     12,431
Information Technology               350        942          350       2,450      4,092
Invest To Save                       299          0            0           0        299
Total Capital Expenditure         25,596      7,668        4,874      15,488     53,626
Financed From:
Grants and Contributions         (18,313)    (3,274)      (2,082)     (2,242)   (25,911)
Net Cost to Council                 7,283      4,394        2,792     13,246      27,715
Revenue       spending    from
Capital Resources:
Asset Management                     386        345          367       1,067      2,165
Other                                586        450            0           0      1,036
Total Council Investment           8,255      5,189        3,159      14,313     30,916
                                    Page 57


Further details, on a scheme-by-scheme basis are provided of the capital
programme within Appendix ‘H’

As Council Tax pays for 39% of the Council’s revenue spending most of the
Council’s resources come from central government and, consequently, our
financial strategy is to some extent shaped by factors outside our immediate
control. However, there are many facets to an effective financial strategy, and
the Council must ensure it proactively manages its resources with a view to
ensuring robust financial planning that delivers Council priorities.

Current Issues

Local Government Funding Arrangements

Localism – Lyons, Spending Review and Beyond

During 2007 the anticipated Lyons report was supposed to address critical
funding issues, including those of fairness, accountability, clarity, efficiency
and effective management, but this was somewhat overshadowed by the
Governments White Paper, 'Strong and Prosperous Communities', with the
Minister stating that he believes in looking at ‘form and function’ before turning
to finance.

The White Paper aims to meet citizens concerns through three factors:

o Greater financial stability and predictability
o Very strong and wide local partnerships that build up the place delivery
  brand, and
o A reconnection of the local tax with the locality and its citizens.

Government have indicated that Local Government success depends on more
than just looking at budgets and balance sheets. The future of Local
Government is focused around target setting, strengthening partnerships, and
looking to refresh Local Area Agreements through engaging with communities.

The vision is for Local Government to take on responsibility and make local
taxes more relevant to the local citizens. It should make accountability more
real to the local citizen and shape places and build communities for the future.

Sustainability

Enshrined within the Climate Change Bill, currently going through Parliament,
are requirements to force organisations to assess and reduce their carbon
footprints.

These requirements put sustainability at the heart of the corporate processes
used by public bodies and companies, with a new reporting framework
designed to capture environmental costs in organisations annual accounts.
                                 Page 58


 The Government have said ‘ Just as our public finances must balance over an
economic cycle for the health of the economy, we must live within our new
carbon budgets’.

Three year settlements for Revenue Support Grant and Capital Financing

In December 2007 Government announced its first 3-year finance settlement
for Local Government, covering the Council’s grant allocation for 2008//09 to
2010/11.

The introduction of 3-year settlements is aimed to improve the ability to
forecast the overall financial position for the Council. However, there will
remain significant uncertainties in long term planning, as the level of grant is
only one part of a complicated set of assumptions in long term financial
planning.

Public Spending Plans and National Priorities

It should be recognised that the growth in public spending in recent years
(primarily towards Health and Education) is unlikely to continue at the same
rate. Public services are however under increased pressure from their
customers for improved service provision. In addition, national targets for
improved service delivery are becoming common, including electronic service
delivery, planning, concessionary fares and recycling. This financial strategy
seeks to ensure national priorities are considered alongside local priorities.

Comprehensive Performance Assessment

The white paper 'Strong and Prosperous communities' published in October
2006 set out wide ranging proposals for supporting and improvement of local
services. A key part of these proposals is a new performance assessment
framework Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) that will take affect from 1
April 2009.

CAA will focus on the delivery of outcomes that are the responsibility of
Councils either alone or working in partnership with others through

1. An annual joint inspectorate risk assessment for each area
2. A scored use of resources judgment
3. A scored Direction of Travel judgment
4. Local performance against a new set of national indicators

Efficiency and Value for Money are key measures in these assessments with
one of the new national indicators measuring the levels of savings achieved by
the Council.

The proposals are being piloted at this time in several Councils across the
Country and final details of the CAA process will be published in the spring of
2008. In order to prepare for CAA it will be necessary for the Council to work
                                   Page 59


more closely with its partner organisations and for action plans to be
developed.

Efficiencies

In October 2007 the Department of Communities and Local Government
(DCLG) published a report ‘Delivering Value for Money in Local Government’

The report highlights that public services have been set a target of achieving
at least 3% net cash releasing value for money gains per annum, between
2008 and 2011. Collectively Councils are expected to achieve £4.9 billion cash
releasing efficiency by 2010-11.

These efficiencies have to be achieved through a greater focus on Value for
Money and through a culture of innovation.

Responsibility for identifying opportunities for efficiency gains are left to
individual councils and it will be up to them to put in place the processes that
they need to plan VFM projects, track delivery, measure achievement, and
assure service quality. The Councils progress on efficiency will be monitored
and challenged through a number of methods including Comprehensive Area
Assessment (CAA) and a new performance framework consisting of 198
performance indicators which includes a new national VFM indicator.

The Council recognises the need to ensure VFM and reflected this in its
Corporate Plan 2006-2011 ‘Delivering Success’ where one of the top priorities
is ‘to improve the performance of our services and ensure they provide Value
for Money’. To help deliver this the Council, has for a number of years
operated a programme of Service and Value for Money reviews and in
2006/07 further developed the process through the introduction of a Corporate
Efficiency Programme which is designed to achieve savings while improving
performance and Service delivery


Local Public Service Agreements and Local Area Agreements

The government is committed to working with local authorities to set stretching
targets for service improvements and providing ‘rewards’ in the form of one-off
grants for success.

LAA's are about improving local services through a 3-year agreement between
the main public sector agencies working in an area and the government. By
June 2008 all local areas will have agreed a new LAA with their government
office. LAA's are based on a set of 35 targets, 17 statutory education and early
years targets and any number of locally agreed targets, which partners will
commit to delivering. Area based grant funding will be made available to assist
in delivering the LAA.

LAA’s involve government departments, local authorities, the voluntary sector
and other representatives of the community and partners,
                                 Page 60


Area Based Grants

Strong and Prosperous Communities the Local Government White Paper made
the commitment that the new local government performance framework would
radically reduce the amount of information that central government demands, by
replacing many different reporting regimes and hundreds of different indicators
with reporting against the single set of national outcome indicators (198)
indicators, which include (2) cohesion indicators.

As Area Based Grant is a non-ring fenced, general grant, the grant
determinations cannot include any conditions, and authorities will not be
required to provide any additional reporting information other than that provided
through the new performance framework, in their statutory accounts, statistical
returns and Whole of Government Account returns.

Central Government will monitor progress towards national priorities using the
data reported against all 198 national indicators regardless of which indicators
are agreed as designated priority improvement targets for the authorities Local
Area Agreement

Within the 3 year Finance settlement the Council received an Area Based
Grant for cohesion. The amount receivable in 2008/09 is £26,470.

Additional Cost Pressures

There has been a trend in local government in recent years for additional cost
pressures (for example pay increases, impact of meeting national targets, new
legislation) to significantly outweigh increases in Government funding. This
has resulted in a national position of significant Council Tax increases. The
extension to the Concessionary Fares form April 2008 is a fine example of
where the Council has not received enough funding to implement a new
Government initiative. At an estimated cost of £1.8m per year the
Governments grant of £800,000 is £1m short, thus putting pressure on Council
Tax increases.

Looking ahead, it is likely that further pressures will be placed upon local
authorities resulting in the requirement for authorities to achieve
efficiencies/savings. These anticipated pressures are reflected within this
financial strategy.

Inevitably, the further the Strategy projects into the future, the harder it
becomes to predict with accuracy the pressures that may face the Council.
However, the Strategy does include contingency sums for unknown future
pressures.

Prudential Borrowing

For many years, borrowing to fund capital investment was restricted by the
Government. In April 2004 credit controls were lifted and replaced by the
Prudential Code. We can now borrow “prudently”. At the heart of this is the
                                    Page 61


ability to demonstrate that borrowing is affordable. To meet this criteria and in
order to lessen the revenue pressures facing the Council, this strategy
restricts borrowing to expand the capital programme, except where this is on a
basis of Invest to Save proposals (where the additional borrowing costs are
more than covered by the savings generated from the proposal), where the
scheme specifically attracts Government Revenue Support or where the
borrowing can be backed by equivalent internal funds. This issue is developed
further in this financial strategy.

External Funding

The Audit Commission sees the achievement of external funding as a key part
in the demonstration of Value for Money. External funding opportunities
include European funding, lottery funding, and Yorkshire Forward funding.

The Council must carefully appraise the role that external grant resources can
play in meeting its objectives. Decisions about bidding for external grants must
be taken in the context of the priorities in the Corporate Plan.

Local Authority Business Growth Incentives (LABGIs) –

This scheme allows Councils to retain some of the business rates revenues
that are associated with growing the business tax base at a local level. It
provides positive financial incentives for Councils to work in partnership with
business, Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) and other key local and
regional players. The level of grant awarded to the Council in 2006/07 was
£379,000 and in 2007/08 was £810,000. Any further funding will be used to
support the capital programme.

Significant Partnerships

Working alongside key partners is essential to the delivery of the Council’s
Community Strategy. Whilst the Council has many partners and relationships
with other bodies, significant partnerships are defined where there is a
financial risk between the parties.

Where significant partnerships exist, the Council must ensure that good
governance procedures are in place to limit any potential risk on the Council,
and report financial transactions within the annual statement of accounts.

Major partnerships that the Council currently work along side are the
Scarborough Museums Trust and the Creative Industries Trust, both providing
significant investment to the Renaissance of Scarborough.

The following table shows the agreed medium term financial plans with the
Council and its significant partners.
                                  Page 62


Scarborough Museums Trust
                                  Pre 07      2007/08     2008/09       Total
                                   £000        £000        £000         £000
 Capital Expenditure                1,184        2,666          50       3,900

 Financed By:
 Scarborough Council                                                        231
 Lottery                                                                  1,983
 ERDF Grant                                                                 506
 Fundraising                                                              1,180
 Total                                                                    3,900

The Council has formalised a 30-year agreement with the Scarborough
Museums Trust for providing a Museums service for the 1 January 2008. The
annual financial support from the Council to the Trust is agreed for the final
quarter of 2007/08 at £123,840.

Creative Industries Trust
                                  Pre 07      2007/08     2008/09       Total
                                   £000        £000        £000         £000
 Capital Expenditure                2,192        3,758           0       5,950

 Financed By:
 Scarborough Council                                                      1,200
 Yorkshire forward                                                        3,050
 ERDF Grant                                                               1,700
 Total                                                                    5,950

The development of the Woodend Creative Workspace on the Site of the
Wood End Museum aims to provide employment and business opportunities
within the creative industries sector. A mix of offices, artists studios, business
incubator space, plus specialist facilities for the Scarborough Museums Trust
are being created.

Once the building is complete the specifically created Creative Industries Trust
will lease the centre from the Council and operate it with a subsidy from the
Council in the early years. In the longer term it is expected that the Trust will
not require a subsidy from the Council. Due to some delays to the project,
unspent revenue funding agreed for 2007/2008 will be rolled forward together
with a proposed subsidy of £52,000 in 2008/2009 which was approved by
Cabinet in February 2006 (HFS/06/12). Further information is available at
www.woodendcreative.co.uk
                                    Page 63


5.  THE COUNCIL’S FINANCIAL PRIORITIES AND HOW
THEY WILL BE ACHIEVED
Our objectives

The financial strategy is designed to maintain financial stability and, as far as
possible, avoid the need for large unplanned increases in Council Tax and
unaffordable borrowing, whilst ensuring we have sufficient resources to
achieve the corporate aims and priorities. To this end, it is proposed that the
Medium Term Financial Strategy should ensure the following specific
objectives. Each of these objectives is underpinned by an Action Plan set out
within Appendix ‘C’ of this report.

Financial strategy objectives

Objective 1 - Budgets are Prudent and Sustainable in the Long Term

This seeks to ensure that budgets recognise real cost pressures, and that no
over reliance is placed upon any one off savings, and/or use of one off
reserves.

This will be achieved by ensuring:-
- Adequate provision is made for inflation pressures, pay awards, and new
   legislation
- The revenue budget is not supported by one off savings, or any significant
   use of reserves
- Effective budget monitoring to ensure early identification of issues and
   action planning

Objective 2 – Financial Plans Recognise Corporate Priorities and
Objectives

This seeks to ensure that financial plans link in with corporate planning and
priorities, and that there is provision within the Financial Strategy for
growth/development funding on an ongoing basis.

This will be achieved by ensuring:-
- additional investment, and savings proposals make explicit reference to
   corporate priorities
- Local and national targets are considered
- Long term vision and objectives are considered within the report
- Provision within financial planning figures for growth and contingency
   amounts based upon perceived risk,
- Review capital prioritisation process/option appraisal
                                 Page 64


Objective 3 - Significant risks are identified, and mitigation factors
identified

Risk Management is crucial in long term planning, and it is essential that the
Financial Strategy clearly identifies the associated risks, and that this is
supported by an embedded risk management culture within the organisation.

This will be achieved by:-
- Risk management being embedded in corporate and service planning
- Financial risks being specifically considered on an ongoing basis, and
   specifically reflected within the Financial Strategy

Objective 4 - The Capital Programme is planned over a 10 year period,
with “Unsupported” Borrowing minimised, other than where there is a
clear financial business case to borrow

This seeks to ensure that unsupported borrowing is minimised, thereby
ensuring the capital programme is prudent and sustainable, and does not lead
to unaffordable revenue implications.

This will be achieved by ensuring: -
• the development of a 10 Year capital programme
• the establishment of a Capital Development Fund
• the use of Unsupported Borrowing only on an Invest to Save Basis
• an adoption of an Invest to Save Strategy
• contingency funding is included within the capital programme
• a Corporate approach to external funding opportunities

Objective 5 - Constraints on capital and revenue resources, including the
uncertainties around future government funding, are recognised and
taken into account;

It is important that the Financial Strategy is realistic and that there is a
corporate awareness of the constraints on Council funding.

This will be achieved by ensuring:-
- specific reference within each financial strategy of constraints, and current
   issues
- regular reporting to cabinet on local government finance issues
- awareness of the financial position within the organisation through an
   effective Communication strategy

Objective 6 - Council Tax increases will be kept below the Government’s
expected upper level of increase, and the broad anticipated increase for
future years will be set out within the Financial Plans, recognising that
these increases may be subject to change.

The Government may in the future require authorities to set out planned
council tax increases for the next three years. It is important in developing the
financial plan that an assumed Council tax increase in included, ensuring that
                                      Page 65


financial plans do not place over-reliance upon excessive Council Tax
increases.


This will be achieved by ensuring:-
• that financial plans take account of this level of Council Tax increase,
   Government expectations on Council Tax increases, and in particular that
   target efficiency gains reflect the likely levels of council tax

However, it has to be recognised that additional burdens and demands can be
placed upon local authorities, and that it may not always be feasible to achieve
an increase in Council tax in line with the inflation rate. This is the case for
2008/09, where the impact of extending the recycling scheme and the
concessionary fares scheme has increased the financial pressures facing the
Council. The additional cost associated with this equate to a Council tax
increase of approximately 16%, and in that sense actually account for all of
the increase in Council Tax increase that is being recommended (4.9%).

Objective 7 - Prudent levels of general balances, reserves and
contingencies are maintained in the context of an assessment of the
risks facing the Council.

It is important to strike a balance between maintaining adequate reserves and
contingencies and delivering priorities and achievement of Value For Money.

This will be achieved by ensuring:-

•   an annual review of reserves, linked to corporate priorities and treasury
    management implications
•   that ensure capital reserves are maintained. In view of the significant risks
    facing the Council in terms of the delivery of a major efficiency
    improvement programme and capital programme it is essential that
    minimum levels of reserves are maintained.

Objective 8 - Value for Money and achievement of improved efficiency
and service delivery underpin the Financial Strategy

Value For Money should be at the heart of everything the Council does, and
the pursuit of improved efficiency and performance needs to be established as
an ongoing underlying principle

This is being achieved through:-
A Value For Money Group
A Value For Money Strategy for the Council
A Corporate approach to external funding
A VFM Review Programme and a Corporate Efficiency Programme
Embedded Finance and Performance reporting to Members
Benchmarking the costs of our services
                                   Page 66


Objective 9 - The Financial Strategy supports the achievement of
Excellence in Financial Management and Use of Resources

A Financial Plan in isolation will achieve little. It needs to be supported by :-
• Effective financial governance arrangements
• Financial Management that supports performance
• Effective Monitoring arrangements
• Effective Financial Reporting

This will be achieved by
- Implementation of the action plan in relation to the Use of Resources
   Assessment
- Developing the financial culture within the Council
- Financial reporting and documentation based upon stakeholder needs
- Improved Financial Systems (General Ledger Upgrade)
- Training and Development – finance/non finance
- Integration of financial and non financial performance measures

These objectives are further explored throughout this report, and the
recommended actions to support these objectives are set out within the Action
Plan
                                      Page 67


6.       MAKING BETTER USE OF OUR RESOURCES
We can only maintain and increase investment in priorities by managing our
services in an efficient way and being committed to a programme of
continuous improvement and cost effectiveness. It is also important that there
is effective corporate working along with long term planning and coordination
of work within the Council.

At Member Level: -

The member Corporate Strategy Working Group will continue to be integral
to driving the Financial Strategy forward, and reviewing financial performance.
Supporting this role, the Audit Committee will have a key role in ensuring that
effective Stewardship, internal control, and risk management are adopted
within the Council.

Cabinet will of course continue to play a key role in the delivery of Value for
Money, and monitoring performance. Full Council will remain responsible for
setting the overall budgetary framework, and the Overview and Scrutiny
Committees will play a significant part in the development and monitoring of
policies and performance.

At Officer Level: -

The existing Capital Strategy Group will continue to monitor the achievement
of the capital programme, reporting to Cabinet on a quarterly basis. The group
will also review the option appraisal process/prioritisation of capital schemes
to ensure a robust process is in place that ensures that resources are
allocated in line with priorities. This Group will also support the Investment
Strategy Group in developing a process that will ensure that the bidding for
external funding is clearly focused on the Council’s corporate priorities.

An Investment Strategy Group is in place to lead on the overall coordination
of a number of major Investment issues (e.g. Town Centre, Private
Development, Partnerships, Renaissance, etc).

A VFM Group has been established to:

     •   Manage the whole VFM process in line with the KLOE,
     •   Ensure that Efficiency targets set within the Council’s financial strategy
         are achieved
     •   Receive information on costs and how these compare to others
     •   Establish clear policies and effective processes for reviewing and
         improving value for money.
     •   Develop of a corporate work programme targeted at specific areas
     •   Recommend areas for one off investment to deliver long term VFM

A Corporate Efficiency Programme has been put in place, to review across
the Council areas where efficiency/service improvements can be identified.
The process is monitored by a Member Programme Board.
                                  Page 68



Through the Capital Strategy group we are developing a process that will
ensure that bidding for external funding is clearly focused on the Council’s
corporate priorities. This group will also review the option appraisal
process/prioritisation of capital scheme, to ensure a robust process is in place,
ensuring resource allocation is in line with priorities. The Capital Strategy
group also monitors the achievement of the capital programme, and this is
then reported as part of quarterly budget monitoring reports to Cabinet.

A Use of Resources Group is established to ensure that the Key Lines of
Enquiry within the Use of Resources Assessment are addressed. Linked to
this, a number of Corporate/Service related CPA groups have been
established to address the KLOE within specific service areas that will feature
as part of the revised CPA process.

In Partnership: -

To ensure resources are used to maximum effect will require the Council to
continue to work in partnership with other organisations, and with the
Community. Examples of such partnerships include: - working with Yorkshire
Forward, the development of the Community Strategy with a wide range of
groups and organisations, and development of Urban Renaissance with the
Town Team.

The financial position of significant partnerships will be regularly reviewed, and
reported to Cabinet and overview and Scrutiny.
                                   Page 69



7.      DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY
As noted above, the development of the budget and medium term financial
plan is driven by the Council’s priorities.

We already have in place a comprehensive Financial Strategy, and this
document represents an update to the existing Strategy. Our objectives are
to:

     help Members to determine priorities;
     forecast the changes in demand for services;
     identify the likely financial implications of changes in legislation;
     demonstrate the future cost of policies or proposals;
     match the demand for spending with the resources likely to be available;
     and
     provide a financial framework within which departments and individual
     managers can plan their services.

The budget process

The financial strategy comprises a 5-year revenue plan and a 10-year
capital plan.

The plans will be reviewed annually and rolled forward by a year. The process,
from the start of the review of the financial plans through to the approval and
allocation of budgets, spans the whole year. An outline timetable is set out
below. A more detailed timetable is presented in March to Corporate Strategy
Working Group setting out the plan for the year. This plan is rolled forward,
and reviewed at each future Corporate Strategy Working Group meeting.

One of the key features of the budget processes is the linkage between the
corporate financial requirements and the operational needs and demands of
the Council. This is done through the Service Plans that identify funding
requirements for the revenue and capital budget, performance outcome
expectations and risk assessments. A key feature of the Service Plans are the
critical success factors and the proposed efficiency savings, which are shown
at Appendix ‘A3’
                                                Page 70



                                      The Budget Process

                                     March - April                                May - June
                                      •       Forward plan for year          •    Confirm targets for
                                      •       Integrate timetable with            next three years
                                              corporate planning             •    Guidance to managers
                                      •       Update projections             •    Review Final Accounts
                                      •       Review of process              •    Ask HoS for
         Ongoing                      •       Key financial reporting             priorities/bids/commit
                                              documents published                 ments – linking to local
•   Regular monitoring                                                            and national priorities
    information
•   Efficiency identification
•   Reports to
    CSWG/Cabinet
•   (ONGOING)                                    Jan- Feb                           July-Aug
•   Presentations to Senior
    Management, and to                    •    Update MTFP               •       Cabinet report (July)
    Departmental                          •    Sign off by heads of      •       Priorities/Commitments
    Management Teams                           service                           worked on
•   Communication strategy                •    Council tax set           •       Efficiency proposals for
    to staff                              •    New capital schemes               08/09 developed
•   Performance Monitoring                •    Cabinet report (Dec)
    reports                               •    Cabinet report (Jan)
•   Audit Committee – risk                •    Council report (Feb)
    management
•   Quarterly meetings
    between SDCS/HoS

                                                 Nov – Dec                          Sept - Oct



                                •   Finance settlement                   •       Efficiency proposals
                                •   Consultation                                 reviewed
                                •   Review service risks                 •       Review of reserves
                                •   Review priorities – local and        •       Financial Plan updated
                                    national                             •       Priorities/Commitments
                                •   Detailed budget preparation                  reviewed
                                •   Cashflow forecast
                                •


         Consultation and Communication

         There is a need for this Strategy to be effectively communicated to staff and
         key stakeholders. In addition, it is important that in the development of the
         Strategy, allocations of resources, and the setting of Council Tax that there
         are effective consultation mechanism in place.

         Looking ahead the following broad actions are planned to ensure effective
         communication and consultation:-
                                    Page 71


    •   Borough News – Regular information about the Council’s performance,
        resource issues, and plans for future years, with requests for feedback
        on the Council’s budget priorities.

    •   Budget Consultation Paper – Specific report potentially for circulation
        within the Borough news, libraries and website. The circulation list will
        also include Members, Community and Stakeholder Organisations,
        Health Partners, the Audit Commission, and Members of Parliament.
        This paper will be discussed at the Area Committees, the Corporate
        Strategy Group, and the Council’s Scrutiny Committees;

    •   Regular communication with staff at all levels, and with unions

Budget Monitoring arrangements

It is essential that the financial plan is regularly monitored, with the progress
being reported to Lead Members. This will be done through the issuing of
monthly revenue and capital monitoring reports to Senior Management, and
quarterly financial and performance monitoring reports, linking financial
performance to service performance, to Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny.

The monitoring process focuses on high risk budgets and involves:

    Regular reviews/dialogue between finance staff and service managers with
    timely and accurate budget monitoring information
    Regular meetings between each Head of Service and the Strategic
    Director of Corporate Services to discuss financial issues and concerns.
•   Challenging Heads of Service’ efficiency proposals
•   Using the VFM group, and CSWG to monitor delivery of
    efficiencies/savings

The process requires budget holders to explain the reasons for any significant
variances and Heads of Service to identify ways in which such variances can
be managed within their total resources available. This is one of the key
principles underlying this strategy – that growth items are wherever possible
accommodated from existing resources. To achieve this requires a culture of
financial awareness within the authority and this is seen as a key priority.
                                Page 72


8. THE REVENUE PLAN 2008-2013
The medium term revenue plan is based on an analysis of the key influences
on the Council’s financial position and an assessment of the main financial
risks facing the Council. The financial forecast is based on the following
factors and assumptions:

Local Government Finance Settlement

The Council receives external support from Central Government through the
distribution of resources within the Local Government Finance Settlement. The
distribution is made in accordance to authorities’ relative needs with a
mechanism for protection against detrimental changes in grant allocations.
Approximately 61% of the Councils net expenditure is financed from the Local
Government Finance Settlement.

To strengthen financial stability and promote medium term financial planning
this external funding has been announced for 3 years starting in 2008/09.

The 3-year finance settlement for the Council was very disappointing with
increases of 1.6% for 2008/09 and 1.2% for 2009/10 and 2010/11. These
being far less than inflation and certainly not enough to cover the cost of new
burdens placed on the Council.

Council Tax

In accordance with Objective 6 of this financial strategy, the plan makes a
clear assumption that future Council Tax increases will be restricted to below
Government upper limits. With the added financial pressures of introducing the
concessionary fares scheme whilst restricting Council Tax rises is a difficult
balancing act. The Government have said that they expect the overall
increase in Council Tax to be substantially below 5%.

The proposed Council Tax increase for 2008/09 is 4.9% with the majority of
the increased costs facing the Council, particularly from the extending of the
concessionary fares scheme and recycling, being met from planned efficiency
savings. Future years Council Tax rises are provisionally predicted at 3%.

Inflation rates and pay increases

The medium term plan makes provision for inflation and pay awards as
follows:

Inflation: a composite rate of approximately 2% has been used for non-salary
expenditure budgets

Pay awards: an estimated increase of 2.5% has been included for 2008/09
and each year beyond.
                                   Page 73


Interest Rates

The Council has borrowed to fund capital investment in priority services in
previous years and provision has been made in the plan to fund the ongoing
borrowing costs.

The Council earns significant amounts of interest by lending surplus cash
balances for short periods. These cash balances represent unspent reserves
held such as the Insurance Fund and unspent capital receipts.

The Medium Term Plan assumes that the Council will hold cash balances
averaging £20m and will earn interest at 5.25%. The amount earned will
clearly be affected by changes in interest rates and fluctuating cash balances.

The ongoing effect of existing policies and priorities

The ongoing effect of current policies is included in the plan. These additional
costs include planned increases in the contribution rate to the Pension Fund,
Salary Increments, Contributions to the Capital Development Fund and the
write down of the Vat Mitigation Scheme along with funding allocated for the
development of the Museums Trust and Creative Industries Centre.

Growth and Contingency

The plan assumes provision for growth/contingency as follows:-

2008/09 - incorporated within the 2008/09 detailed report
2009/10 - £300,000
2010/11 - £350,000
2011/12 - £350,000
2012/13 - £350,000

The budget contingency for 2008/09 has been fully utilised to support the cost
of introducing the enhanced recycling scheme and concessionary fares.

Provision is included for years 2009 onwards, to recognise- the likelihood of
additional burdens/pressures upon the Council.

Efficiency savings and the Gershon Review

The Council has achieved its targeted efficiency savings in 2005/2006 and
2006/2007 of £874,750. This has been subject to audit. 2007/2008 is the final
year of the Gershon efficiency review and the Council is confident that the
required savings have been achieved.

In October 2007, The Department for Communities and Local government
published Delivering Value for Money in Local Government: Meeting the
challenge of Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 (CSR07), also called the
VFM Delivery Plan. There are no mandatory targets for individual councils in
CSR07. It is expected that the Local Government Sector will achieve annual
                                  Page 74


£4.9bn VFM gains by 2010-2011. Local government is however expected to
achieve at least 3% per annum net cash-releasing VFM gains, that is 9.3%
over the three-year period.

The Council’s baseline figure is £763,560.

The Medium Term financial plan includes efficiency savings targets of £0.6 in
2009/2010 and £0.7m in 2010/2011. This is the minimum level that is
acceptable if the Council’s financial objectives for the medium term are to be
met.

The Council has also approved the commencement of a Corporate Efficiency
Programme, reviewing in the first phase 10 broad themes identified from the
scooping study conducted by external consultants, plus the additional theme
of Carbon Reduction (Energy Efficiency). As well as meeting the Council’s
Priority of ‘Improving the Council’ through providing Value for Money it has
identified £500,000 efficient savings to support the 2008/09 budget. Further
phases of the Corporate Efficiency Review will be rolled out in 2008/09.

Risks, contingencies and balances

There are significant risks inherent in the Medium Term Plan for the reasons
summarised above and exemplified in the section below. A number of key
items in the plan cannot be estimated with accuracy and the figures in the plan
assume that significant savings will be made. In this situation it is essential to
maintain sufficient balances, not only to deal with unforeseen events but also
to cover the potential risk of not achieving the savings required.

In line with objective 7, the plan assumes nil use of reserves to support the
revenue budget.

Revenue Plan 2008-2013

The graph below shows the forecast “standstill” budget, and estimated
resource availability for the next five years.
                                      Page 75



                          Revenue Plan 2009-2013

                                                                Available Resources
        24.00
                                                                Resources Required
        23.00

        22.00
   £m




        21.00

        20.00

        19.00
                2009/10   2010/11      2011/12     2012/13



The reason for the “gap” in funding is summarised in the table below

Budget Variations              2009/10        2010/11        2011/12     2012/13
Anticipated                     £000           £000           £000        £000
Pay and Price Inflation             787            822            841         854
Corporate Commitments               484            260            350         350
Capital Implications                 70             70             70          70
Contingency Sum                     300            350            350         350
Increase in Financing             (399)          (405)          (514)       (527)
The Funding Gap                   1,242          1,097          1,097       1,097

Bridging the Gap
Efficiency Savings                    (619)        (700)        (700)        (700)
Corporate Savings                      (99)            0            0            0
Other Savings                         (524)        (397)        (397)        (397)
Total                               (1,242)      (1,097)      (1,097)      (1,097)

The efficiency targets and incentives are in line with those reported to Cabinet

The graph highlights the need for significant efficiency gains, in order to
ensure that priority services continue to be delivered.

Achievement of these targets will be difficult, and therefore the process needs
to be seen as an ongoing one, not an annual stop start process. Heads of
Service will be supported in the achievement of efficiencies via the VFM group
and Service Transformation group and there will also be close working with
finance staff.

However, in recognising the need to achieve such a scale of transformation
the Council needs to look closely at all areas of potential efficiency including
Partnership working, procurement, Trusts and streamlining back office duties.
                                  Page 76


9. CAPITAL STRATEGY
The Council’s corporate strategy has an overarching vision to:

‘enhance the quality of life for those living in, working in, or visiting the
Borough’.

The Capital Strategy is the key vehicle for developing long term change to
deliver the key priorities and corporate objectives.

The Council currently has a significant capital programme with major
investments in relation to the Spa, Rotunda, Sandside, Business Park,
Creative Industries Centre and Whitby Marina.

The capital strategy meets this challenge by setting out the mechanism for
delivering structural change in line with the principles for Excellence as set out
in the “Use of Resources” Assessment. It does this by addressing the key
issues of:

   a) prioritisation in line with the key priorities and corporate aims

   b) engagement with partners of the community

   c) affordability of funding

   d) integration of capital and revenue decision-making

   e) framework for managing and monitoring

a) Prioritisation methodology

The Council has developed a prioritisation process that allows members and
officers to focus on corporate priorities when formulating spending proposals
and ensures that any resources available can be allocated in the context of
the Council’s priority needs.

This prioritisation methodology will be applied to all proposals, regardless of
the source of funding, prior to any decision being made to apply for external
capital support such as grant funding, so that the Council can ensure that they
form part of an overall capital investment strategy.

The Capital Strategy Group, Investment Strategy Group, and Corporate
Strategy Working Group are all involved in capital decisions

b) Engagement with partners of the community

The Council is committed to seeking out innovative partnership and funding
opportunities in order to deliver the capital strategy and achieve best value.
                                   Page 77


The Council has worked closely with funding partners (particularly Yorkshire
Forward and Government Office) to deliver the Renaissance projects now
coming to fruition. Future projects will continue to be developed through
partnership working. The Council also recognises the importance of increased
community engagement and participation as fundamental to the quality of
public services and the health of community life. The Council will therefore
seek to develop projects with the full involvement of local communities and
ensure appropriate consultation prior to scheme approval.

c) Affordability of funding

Financing the Capital Programme for the Future

Resources to fund capital spending are provided from central government in
the form of specific grants. In addition other external grants and contributions
are sought. Council funding in the form of capital receipts, unsupported
borrowing, use of reserves and from revenue sources make up the balance of
resources. However, grants provided by central government and resources
from other external agencies are often specific to an individual scheme and
cannot be used for any other purpose by the Council.

In moving towards a 10-year capital programme it is important to review
options for the funding of a programme that will meet Corporate Priorities over
a 10-year period and beyond.

Controlling the level of resource availability and ensuring the Council does not
over commit resources or incur expensive borrowing are also crucial factors
therefore the Capital Development Fund was established in order to achieve
these priorities and serve as the principle source of new capital funding.

The Capital Development Fund identifies the available capital funding for the
Council. It provides a mechanism by which capital spending is controlled, and
the implications of capital spending in terms of the revenue impact are
planned and minimised. By using the Capital Development Fund as the
primary source for highlighting capital funding availability unsupported
borrowing is avoided and financial stability maintained. The Fund seeks to
contribute, in a planned and prudent manner to the long-term vision of the
Council, supporting the renaissance of the Borough.

Financing the Capital Development Fund

The following table shows the Medium Term Capital Plan and resource
availability for the next 10 years. The additional resources available to invest
in priority areas over the next 10 years is £0.461m and the associated
spending plans are detailed in Appendix B. The Council can only generate
more capital resources from increasing its amount of capital receipts.
                                 Page 78


Capital Development Fund 2007 to 2017

                                                              £          £
                                                             000        000
Balance Brought Forward                                                   597
Transfers In
Revenue Contributions to Corporate Reserves                 15,882
Revenue Contributions for Asset Management                   3,450
Disabled Facility Grant                                      2,530
LSVT Receipt                                                 4,140
                                                                       26,002
Transfers Out
Capital Contingency Reserve                                  -1,500
Revenue Development Reserve                                    -500
Value for Money Reserve                                        -500
                                                                        -2,500
Anticipated Expenditure
Asset Management Capital Budgets                             -3,450
Mandatory Disabled Facility Grants                           -4,220
Vehicles Plant and Equipment                                -12,431
IT Replacement / Development                                 -3,500
                                                                      -23,601
Surplus                                                                   498
2007 Approved Schemes                                                  -2,522
Potential General Capital Receipts                                      2,485
Allocated Resources if Capital Receipts are achieved                      461


Capital Contingency Reserve

The Capital Contingency reserve is essential in the management of Capital
Resources.

There are two likely uses for the Capital Contingency Reserve.

   (i)    it will provide a flexible and responsive resource to fund small-
          scale ad hoc capital schemes.

   (ii)   It will provide contingency funding for potential additional costs
          incurred on the existing capital programme.

The uncommitted balance on the Reserve is currently £0.799m, within the
pre-determined criteria (between £0.5m to £1.5m in the medium Term).

Even though the balance is currently within the range set, significant financial
risk exits whilst the ambitious Renaissance programme is being implemented.

To ensure the reserve remains flexible to meet future funding challenges it is
proposed that anticipated monies from LABGI are applied to this reserve.
The position in terms of this grant will be clarified by the end of the 2007/08
                                   Page 79


financial year and it is intended that a report will be taken to Members as part
of the closure of the 2007/08 accounts, with the associated proposals for
reviewing the Capital Contingency sum.

(d) Integration of Capital and Revenue Decision-Making

The Prudential Code

Under the Prudential Regime, which has operated since April 2004, the
Council has the responsibility to demonstrate that its capital investment
programme is affordable, prudent and sustainable. The Prudential Code
requires that this is done by calculating specific indicators for capital
expenditure and financing and by setting borrowing limits. The indicators and
borrowing limits for the current and next two years are set out at Appendix F.

The Council has largely mitigated the risk of unaffordable borrowing by the
establishment of the Capital Development Fund to avoid the extension of
borrowing over the medium term.

Revenue Implications

The revenue implications of funding the capital programme are the loss of
interest from the use of internal balances or the repayment of principal and
interest for any external borrowing.

The introduction of the Capital Development Fund restricts borrowing to
finance capital schemes and hence limits the impact on the revenue budget.
In order to achieve revenue savings in the short term the Council has utilised
uncommitted capital receipts within the capital programme, limiting external
borrowing and therefore the impact on the revenue budget. This has delivered
significant short-term revenue savings, but these benefits do not extend to the
medium term.

The expansion of the capital programme as outlined in the Capital
Development Fund, will require the use of uncommitted capital receipts to be
equalised by borrowing, with the consequent revenue cost impacting upon the
Medium Term Financial Strategy.

It is recommended that the Council can use borrowing to fund capital
investment as follows:

• to the level of ‘supported borrowing’ allocations

 to fund Invest to Save schemes, based upon sound business
 cases/risk assessment, utilising Prudential Borrowing. To assist in this
 process a proposed Invest to Save Strategy is set out in Appendix D.
 This sets out basic principles that underpin the use of Prudential
 Borrowing, and the process to be followed for potential schemes

 to a level to reimburse uncommitted capital receipts
                                 Page 80



    in accordance with the Prudential Code and Treasury Management
    Policy

(e) Framework for Managing and Monitoring the Capital Programme

The Strategic Director of Corporate Services has overall responsibility for the
preparation and monitoring of the Council’s capital programme and for
reporting the outcome to Cabinet. The process, which is managed by the
Capital Strategy Group, involves:

-    Reviewing the capital programme annually.
-    Reviewing the current and estimated future availability of external
     earmarked funding and other opportunities for obtaining or bidding for
     additional capital resources.
-    Prioritising and appraising any new proposals against agreed corporate
     criteria.
-    Preparing the Council’s capital programme, strategy and consultation
     process.
-    Monitoring progress in achieving the capital programme objectives.
-    Ensuring that the outcomes of investment are reported to Cabinet.
-    Ensuring there are effective arrangements for project planning and project
     evaluation.
-    Issuing corporate guidance to ensure that there is a consistent approach
     across all service areas.
-    Reviewing and monitoring the Council’s capital resources and asset
     disposal programme.

Quarterly monitoring reports on the capital programme and prudential
indicators are submitted to Cabinet, the last of which comprises the end of
year outturn. The Council’s financial regulations set out a requirement for
regular reporting to members for all schemes above £250,000.

VAT – Partial Exemption

VAT partial exemption allows Councils to reclaim Vat on exempt activities as
long as the amount is within a 5% of the total reclaimable Vat (Input Tax)

It was identified at the time of selling the Council Houses to Yorkshire Coast
Homes that the loss of Input Tax from the expenditure on the Housing
Revenue Account would have potential implications in relation to the exempt
5% vat threshold.

As a result, since then the Vat threshold is monitored very closely. To date,
the limit has not been breached. All future capital schemes have been
assessed to identify how they will impact on the Partial exemption VAT
position
                                   Page 81


10.    IMPACT ASSESMENT

This section recognises the challenges and risks that have implications for the
Council’s financial position in the medium term. This assessment of risk is an
essential element of the budget process; it is used to inform decisions about
the appropriate levels of contingencies and reserves that may be required and
to indicate priorities for financial monitoring.

Managing Risk is an important part of the Financial Strategy. Each service
maintains its own risk register and these are reported annually to the Audit
Committee. During 2007 comprehensive training on risk has been given to
Officers and Members.

The key risks identified for 2008/09 and in the medium term are listed below,
together with comments on how they will be managed:

Risk              Likelihood      Seriousness    How We Manage The Risk
Loss of Yorkshire Certain         Medium         • Allocation of £1m into
Coast Homes Gas                                    reserves for all contracts.
Contract                                         • Action plan to mitigate
                                                   the risks
Fluctuations      in Medium       High           • Keep      under      review
inflation,  interest                               through the financial
rates, Government                                  strategy
grants,         and                              • Consider      fully     any
changes           in                               changes in legislation
Government                                       • Ensure            minimum
legislation                                        reserves are maintained
                                                   to mitigate the risk
                                                 • Ensure          authorities
                                                   interests are represented
                                                   through the LGA/other
                                                   groups
Budgets         are Medium        High           • Robust budget setting,
overspent                                          challenging          budget
                                                   provision
                                                 • Regular monitoring with
                                                   corrective actions
                                                 • Develop a culture of
                                                   financial awareness
                                                 • Effective project planning
                                                   and management
                                                 • Ensure            sufficient
                                                   contingency sums
Savings are     not High          High           • Regular              budget
achieved                                           monitoring to identify
                                                   issues at an early stage
                                                 • Incorporation       of    a
                                                   contingency sum within
                          Page 82


                                        the budget
Changes in usage Medium   High      •   Ensure            regular
levels    affecting                     monitoring
income from fees                    •   Review trends
and charge                          •   Take appropriate action
                                    •   Ensure income budgets
                                        are not too demanding,
                                        and        allow       for
                                        contingency
Structural Change, High   High      •   Put in place action plans
Service change –                        to manage change
e.g.      Loss    of
Agency Agreement
Budget does not Low       High      •   Ensure           corporate
reflect    corporate                    involvement       in     the
priorities                              process
                                    •   Early consideration of
                                        budget pressures and
                                        legislation changes
                                    •   Regular reporting to
                                        CSWG
                                    •   Approved scoring criteria
                                        for prioritising capital
                                        schemes
The        capital High   High      •   All      schemes        are
programme is not                        monitored through the 10
affordable                              year                 Capital
                                        Development Fund
                                    •   Schemes are monitored
                                        and reported on a
                                        regular basis
Poor planning with Low    High      •   Develop a long term
decisions     being                     financial strategy
made        without                 •   Set out a clear budget
proper                                  timetable
consideration/cons                  •   Regular      updates      to
ultation                                Members
                                    •   Effective      consultation
                                        processes
Budget does not Medium    Medium    •   The Councils position on
consider the full                       sustainability is provided
impact         of                       in a separate note
sustainability                          (below)      within     this
                                        section of the Financial
                                        Strategy


The budget does Medium    Medium    •   The impact of the budget
not      assess                         on social and community
                                  Page 83


equalities impact                                    needs is provided in a
on its population                                    separate note (below)
and       community
groups
There          are High          High            •   A specific budget has
insufficient                                         been allocated to Asset
resources to meet                                    Management      for    10
the needs of Asset                                   years
Management                                       •   All      schemes      are
                                                     prioritised
                                                 •   The       ‘gap’   funding
                                                     between resources and
                                                     requirements is being
                                                     addressed through a
                                                     programme               of
                                                     rationalising         the
                                                     Council’s Assets.

Risk Sensitivity Analysis

The risk assessment needs to be analysed for its sensitivity towards size of
budget, volatility of demand and impact of new schemes.

Size of Budget

The Council’s largest expenditure item is its employee costs which total £24m.
A 1% variation equates to £240,000. The budget includes a provision for a
pay award of 2.5%. The budget is monitored on a monthly basis and history
shows the Council has adopted a prudent approach to setting the salary
budgets.

Volatility of Demand

Being a seasonal tourist resort the Council’s income levels are dependant
upon the weather. The main areas relate to car parking and seasonal
entertainment activities.

Car Parking Income totals £4m. A 1% variation equates to £40,000. Car
Parking Income is monitored on a weekly basis and is reported to Members
on a quarterly basis. The Council holds a specific income equalisation reserve
for Car Parks that currently has a balance of £250,000.

The total income from Seasonal Entertainment Activities and Catering in
2007/08 is £2.7m. The budgets are monitored on a monthly basis. To mitigate
financial risk the budgets for 2008 have been set on a prudent basis with
options to mitigate risk from outsourcing various activities.

New Areas
                                 Page 84


Two new areas that need to be monitored closely are the financial impact of
introducing the Kerbside Recycling Scheme and the extended Concessionary
Fares scheme.

Recycling – To achieve budget expectations the Council must recycle 20,237
tonnes of material. The Council receives recycling credits to the value of
£38.22 per tonne. A 1% reduction in recycling tonnage equates to £8,000. To
reduce financial risk the Council holds a provision to offset variations up to
10%.

Concessionary Bus Fares – this new requirement is very dependant upon
the level of usage. The budget for 2008 has been prepared based upon
consultants advice on the likely usage levels. The budget will be monitored on
a monthly basis with periodic progress reports to Members. A 1% increase in
usage levels equates to £34,000.

Social and Community Needs

The Financial Strategy needs to be reviewed in terms of its equalities impact
to access the bearing it has on the Borough’s population and differing
community groups.

Whilst this process needs to be developed and embedded within the scoring
criteria for evaluating priority growth bids, it is important to note that the
Council is being proactive with its finances in supporting equalities and the
needs of the community with such schemes as:

•   Council Building Disabled Accessibility
•   Outreach support for Council Tax and Housing Benefits
•   Concessionary Bus Travel for the over 60’s
•   Housing disabled facility grants
•   Area Committees and Area Forums
•   Parish Councils and the Model Agreement

The Financial Strategy is consulted with the public through presentations to all
four Area Committees and the Corporate Strategy Overview and Scrutiny
Committee. The Service Business Plans identify the Key Stakeholders for
each service area.

Sustainability Impact

Based on the findings of the Stern Report and enshrined within the Climate
Change Bill, currently going through Parliament, are recommendations and
proposals that will require organisations to assess and reduce their carbon
footprint.

These requirements put sustainability at the heart of the corporate process
used by public bodies and companies with a new reporting framework
designed to capture environmental costs in organisations annual accounts.
                                    Page 85


The Government have said, “Just as our public finances must balance over an
economic cycle for the health of the economy, we must live within our new
carbon budgets”.

In order to progress towards integrating sustainability into the performance
management cycle and ultimately into the accounting process the Council
must first adopt an encompassing sustainability policy.

In partnership with the Councils Energy Policy (adopted April 2007) the
Sustainability Policy will form the heart of the Authorities drive to significantly
reducing both its own and the Borough carbon footprint.

Energy and sustainability targets will cascade through all services, with
managers tasked in delivering the objectives within energy and sustainability
action plans.

Action plan objectives provide measurable targets on which to base a robust
sustainable accounting and reporting processes. The accounting process
must include the costs and risk levels of both achieving and not achieving the
objectives of the action plan.

The Current Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) model includes
a number of elements directly related to climate change. It is expected that
Comprehensive Area Assessments (CAA) for 2009 will build on these
elements bringing in wider and more diverse range of partners. The Councils
Sustainability Policy will need to be a flexible document to take into account
the recommendations of the CAA.

Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) include a number of specific areas covering the
wider areas of sustainability. These range from the natural environment to
enhancing bio diversity and cover Council services such as planning, waste
management, transport and asset management. In order to deliver these
targets, linked with the many other KLOE target categories financial
management, value for money and internal control will require a closely
monitored and cross sectional sustainability accounting policy.

Improvement areas for 2008 include the development of an Action Plan,
Sustainability Policy and monitoring procedure
                                  Page 86




11. BALANCES AND RESERVES
The Local Government Act 2003 places a specific duty on the Chief Finance
Officer, i.e. the Strategic Director of Corporate Services, to make a report to
the authority when it is considering its budget and the level of the Council Tax.
This report must deal with the robustness of the estimates and the adequacy
of reserves allowed for in the budget proposals. The Council must have
regard to this report in making their decisions.

The Council also has a fiduciary duty to local taxpayers and the Strategic
Director of Corporate Services must be satisfied that the decisions taken on
the level of balances and reserves represent the proper stewardship of funds.

In assessing the adequacy of the contingencies, balances and reserves, the
Director takes account of the key financial assumptions underpinning the
budget, together with an assessment of the Council’s financial management
arrangements. This assessment will include a review of past performance and
external influences on the financial plan, and full consideration of the risks and
uncertainties associated with the plan, their likelihood and potential impact.

The Council’s policy is to maintain its contingencies, balances and reserves at
levels that are prudent but not excessive.

Appendix “G” details the position on the Councils Reserves
                                   Page 87




12. CONCLUSION
This financial strategy sets out a range of proposals regarding the future
management of resources and delivery of priorities.

The Strategy is underpinned by nine key Objectives, which are set out within
section 2 and these are supported by the detailed action plan (Appendix C).
The Executive summary highlights the main proposals, and
recommendations.

In addition, specific proposals are highlighted for the 2008/09 revenue budget,
and the inclusion of new capital schemes.

The process of developing the Medium Term Financial Plan is ongoing.
Although there is a considerable amount of work to be done, and further
improvements to be made, we have put in place the framework for ensuring a
strong financial base that delivers priorities. This strong financial base has
been previously commented upon within External Audit reports, with the
Council receiving high scores for its financial management and reporting.

As far as possible, the plan anticipates future needs and recognises the
financial uncertainties, risks and challenges faced by the Council. We have in
place rigorous financial monitoring, and plans for project management
processes are being dealt with. We aim to ensure we hold balances and
reserves that we consider adequate without being excessive.

Consequently, Scarborough now has in place a sound Medium Term
Financial Strategy and a robust financial plan that is designed to support the
delivery of the targets in the Corporate Plan and meet the Council’s
Objectives.
Page 88
                                   Page 89


                                                                Appendix A

                    Revenue Budget and Council Tax
                               2007/08
INTRODUCTION

This appendix sets out the detailed movements in the revenue budget
between 2007/08 and 2008/09, and recommends the proposed budget for
2008/09 along with the associated levels of Council Tax.

It provides details of:

   •   Efficiency and Other Savings targets set for each Head of Service and
       the proposed savings put forward.

   •   Areas of Budget Pressure and Unavoidable Cost Pressures

   •   Areas of Additional Investment

BUILD UP OF THE 2008/09 REVENUE BUDGET

A base revenue budget of £19,854,270 was approved for the 2007/08
financial year, which forms the starting point for the 2008/09 budget
requirement.

Although the Council has made a concerted effort to minimise budgetary
growth a number of unavoidable cost increases and budgetary pressures
have arisen during the year, as summarised in the following table:

Table 1 – Unavoidable Costs
                                                          £            £
Pay and Price Inflation                                             778,350
Other Budget Pressures                                              425,000
Concessionary Fares
– Anticipated Cost                                    1,821,780
– Specific Grant                                      (839,000)
– Shortfall to be funded by the Borough Council                     982,780
New Government Funded Initiatives                                    11,000
Total Unavoidable Costs                                           2,197,130

Pay and Price Inflation

This increase reflects the inflationary allowances on all budget heads along
with salary increments and variations. It should be noted that negotiations for
the 2008/09 pay award have not yet commenced and a 2.5% inflationary
allowance is included in the above figures for all wages and salary budget
heads. This is deemed to be a reasonable provision based on the low
increase in the revenue Support Grant awarded by Government.
                                 Page 90



The 2008/09 budget includes a corporate provision for salary savings of
£300,000 which are expected to arise from posts that become vacant during
the year. This level of saving is approximately 1% of the salary base and has
been achieved in previous years therefore is deemed to be prudent.

Other Budget Pressures

A breakdown and further details of these costs are included within Appendix
A1 to this report.

Concessionary Fares

The enhanced concessionary fares scheme will come into effect on 1 April
2008. The estimated cost of this scheme for the Borough Council is £1.82
million.

The costs incurred during the year will be dependent on the numbers of
eligible commuters who begin a journey within the Borough Council boundary,
regardless of whether those commuters are residents of the Local Authority. It
is expected that Scarborough will have a high level of visitors therefore will
have to fund a high level of return journeys. Although Government has
financed £839,000 of the anticipated cost through a specific grant, it leaves an
anticipated shortfall of £982,780 that needs to be funded by the Council.

As the anticipated costs are based on an estimated amount of journeys, which
could fluctuate dramatically throughout the year, stringent monthly monitoring
will be adopted for the concessionary fares budget, which will be in excess of
£3.3 million in 2008/09.

New Government funded Initiatives

These increases reflect certain responsibilities and additional burdens that will
pass to the Borough Council in the next financial year. These are funded by
specific grants awarded through the Local Government Finance Settlement.

RESOURCES

On 6 December the Government announced its first 3-year Finance
Settlement, covering the 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 years. The Borough
Council’s settlement for 2007/08 totalled £11,955,680. The Council also
received separate allocation of £91,840 for Waste Performance Efficiency
Grant. The revenue element of this grant has now been incorporated into the
finance settlement.

The settlement awarded for 2008/09 totalled £12,203,350, which includes
financing for the new Government funded initiatives detailed in Table 1 and
the Waste Performance Efficiency Grant. This equates to an actual increase
of £247,670 on the previous years settlement. (A real term increase of 1.6%
on the adjusted grant awarded for 2007/08).
                                   Page 91



Taking this into account, and at this stage assuming a Council Tax increase of
4.9%, the following table summarises the resource position for 2008/09:

Table 2 – Summary of Resource Position for 2008/09

                                                          £            £
Base Revenue Budget for 2007/08                                    19,854,270
Unavoidable Costs (Per Table 1)                                     2,197,130
Waste Performance Efficiency Grant                                     91,840

Last Years Financing                                 19,854,270
Increase in Settlement Grant                            247,670
Assumed 4.9% increase in Council Tax                    409,110
Resources Available assuming a Council Tax
Increase of 4.9%                                                  (20,511,050)
Shortfall                                                            1,632,190

This leaves a shortfall of £1,632,190 that needs to be addressed through
efficiency and other savings. In addition there are a number of areas of
additional investment in priority service areas that are outlined later in this
report which require funding.

MEETING PRIORITIES

Strategic Directors and Heads of Service, in conjunction with Finance Staff,
have been asked to identify any areas where additional investment is
required, with particular reference to Local and National Priority Areas. The
areas proposed for additional investment are summarised in Table 3 below,
with further details provided in Appendix A2

Table 3 – Meeting Priorities

 Head of Service           Bid                  £            Local / National
                                                              Priority Growth
                                                                     Bid
 Corporate          Revenue                          70,000 Appendix B
                    Implications                            demonstrates the
                    associated with                         impact of the
                    the Capital                             Capital
                    Programme                               Programme on
                                                            Council Priorities
 Street Scene       Expansion of the                275,000 To Improve,
                    Recycling                               protect and
                    Scheme                                  sustain the
                                                            Environment
                                                            (National)
 Tourism and        Museums Trust                    30,000 Encourage
 Leisure                                                    Economic Growth
                                                            and Job Creation
                                Page 92


 Planning           Building Control               13,000 Improving the
                    Partnership                           Council
 Regeneration       Local Strategic                10,000 Develop Safer
                    Partnership                           and Stronger
                    Funding                               Communities
 TOTAL                                            398,000

REJECTED BIDS FOR REVENUE GROWTH

Heads of Service came up with several areas of growth that were reported to
the Corporate Strategy Working Group but which are not recommended for
approval within this report. The Council has made an effort to restrict the
allowable growth bids to ones that meet strict Corporate and National Priority
criteria, therefore minimising budget pressures and the need for further
efficiency savings.

A number of rejected growth bids are listed in Table 4 below:

Table 4 – Growth Bids not included within Budget Strategy

                                                                    £
Additional resources to aid with the Implementation of                  30,000
Local Housing Allowance Scheme
The revenue costs associated with purchasing a                          10,000
Corporate Performance Management System
Additional resources towards managing Equality and                      10,000
Diversity
Enhanced Dog Warden Service                                             30,000

EFFICIENCY AND OTHER SAVINGS

SAVINGS TARGETS

The need to develop a process aimed at the achievement of efficiencies and
other savings was highlighted in the Medium Term Financial Strategy Report
(SDCS/05/42), approved by Cabinet in September 2005. This report set out
the long term financial pressures facing the Council and the savings required
to mitigate the anticipated budget deficits, which are in excess of £1 m per
annum for the foreseeable future.

The annual savings target is split between efficiency and other savings, and is
calculated as a percentage of each Head of Service’s net base budget. The
2008/09 savings target totalled £1,147,700. Table 5 sets out the split of
savings targets by type and Head of Service.

PROPOSED SAVINGS OPTIONS

The identification and achievement of the efficiency and other savings has
now been adopted by Senior Management as an integral part of the Councils
budget setting process. Work to identify savings starts early in the preceding
                                   Page 93


financial year, ensuring that there is sufficient time to implement full years
savings and consult with relevant stakeholders.

Throughout the year Heads of Service have met quarterly with the Strategic
director of Corporate Services and finance staff to discuss and scrutinise their
savings proposals and also monitor the achievement of the previous years
proposals put forward. Heads of Service have been made aware that any
unachieved savings from previous years need addressing and mitigating with
the identification of corresponding saving proposals.

The savings proposals put forward by Heads of Service have been scrutinised
by the Corporate and Financial Strategy Group and are summarised in Table
5 and detailed in Appendix A3

Table 5 – Target and Proposed Savings

                                 Target       Target      Total     Total
                               Efficiencies    Other    Savings Proposals
                                              Savings    Target     (net)
                                   £             £          £         £
Policy and Performance              4,520        4,530      9,050     9,050
Human Resources                     9,810        9,600     19,410    19,410
Financial Services                 99,700       97,410   197,110   197,110
Legal Services                     33,510       32,750     66,260    66,260
Property Services                  23,550       23,030     46,580    46,580
Marketing                          25,800       25,220     51,020    51,020
Environmental Health               45,570       44,560     90,130    90,130
Regeneration                        9,020        8,810     17,830    17,830
Tourism & Leisure*                128,750      126,250   255,000   255,000
Planning*                          23,890       23,350     47,240    47,240
Engineering & Harbours             70,850       69,280   140,130   140,130
Street Scene                      105,340      102,600   207,940   207,940
TOTAL                             580,310      567,390 1,147,700 1,147,700

CORPORATE SAVINGS

The Council has had to identify a number of Corporate Savings to balance this
years budget.

The majority of these savings have been identified as part of the Corporate
Efficiency Programme. It was originally intended that these savings would be
ring fenced to offset any associated costs and for any surpluses to be used for
investment in services or capital projects, however due to the unexpected
growth in relation to the Concessionary Fares Scheme they are needed to
balance the revenue budget.

Table 6 sets out the corporate savings identified. Further details are given in
Appendix A4
                                  Page 94


Table 6 – Corporate Savings

                                                              £
Corporate Salary Savings                                      170,000
Creative Industry Centre                                        52,490
Corporate Efficiency Programme                                500,000
Interest                                                      150,000
Minimum Revenue Provision                                       10,000
                                                              882,490

STAFFING IMPLICATIONS

The Council has recognised that to achieve efficiency savings that do not
impact on the delivery of front line services there will need to be a reduction in
staffing numbers.

The savings put forward by Heads of Service show a reduction of 32.5 full
time equivalent posts. In addition to this there will be a reduction of 11.5 full
time equivalent posts associated with the transfer of the Building Control
service to the Building Control Partnership and further reductions relating to
the Corporate Efficiency Programme savings.

SUMMARY OF THE 2008/09 BUDGET POSITION

Table 7 summarises the net budgetary position as detailed in this report

Table 7 – Summary of Budget Position

                                                         Report
                                                          Table
                                                        Reference         £
Shortfall                                                Table 2       1,632,190
Meeting Priorities                                       Table 3         398,000
Efficiency and Other Savings                             Table 5     (1,147,700)
Corporate Savings                                        Table 6       (882,490)
Shortfall                                                                      -

A net budget of £20,511,050 is proposed for the 2008/09 financial year, with
corresponding financing of £20,511,050.

Table 8 below summarises the net budget by Head of Service and Corporate
Budget Heads and the financing for the year, comparing them with the revised
budgets for the 2007/08 financial year.
                                   Page 95


Table 8 – Net Budget under Head of Service and Corporate Control and
Associated Financing

                                                      2007/08         2008/09
                                                          £               £
Policy and Performance                                   312,880         312,860
Human Resources                                          577,550         613,370
Financial Services                                     3,837,670       4,873,690
Legal Services                                         1,780,590       1,791,440
Property Services                                      (953,640)       (393,590)
Marketing                                                994,810         944,540
Environmental Health                                     997,310         912,370
Regeneration                                             470,340         475,630
Tourism and Leisure                                    1,603,780       1,467,380
Planning                                                 711,690         669,120
Engineering and Harbours                             (3,131,900)     (3,413,740)
Street Scene                                           6,418,610       6,851,730
Total Budgets under specific Heads of Service
Control                                              13,619,690      15,104,800
Corporate Budget Heads                                6,234,580       5,406,250
Total Net Budget                                     19,854,270      20,511,050

Financed By:
Local Government Finance Settlement                 (11,955,680) (12,203,350)
Borough Council Precept                              (7,898,590) (8,307,700)
Total Financing                                     (19,854,270) (20,511,050)

IMPACT OF THE LOSS OF THE YORKSHIRE COAST HOMES CONTRACT

Appendix A1 to this report provides details of the growth allowed within the
current years budget for the loss of the Yorkshire Coast Homes Contract
(YCH).

Following notification of the loss of this tender an action plan was put together
to mitigate the financial implications that were anticipated, and this was taken
to Cabinet in March 2006 (Report reference SDCS/06/18). Cabinet approved
the earmarking of £1m of the General Fund Balance to support the Council’s
budget in this period of transition.

In addition, the Financial Strategy initially earmarked £400,000 spread over a
3-year period to mitigate the loss of profit and the residual impact on stores
and transport. A further £124,000 was added to this figure to cover the costs
associated with the loss of the gas contract.

Appendix A5 shows the updated financial position associated with the loss of
these contracts.
                                 Page 96


RESERVES AND BALANCES

The Council’s Reserves and Balances are considered in Appendix G. The
2008/09 budget does not rely on a contribution from General Reserve
Balances.

COUNCIL TAX

The budget position assumes an increase in the level of Council Tax of 4.9%.
Table 9 shows the Scarborough Borough Council element of the Council Tax
levy per Band.

Table 9 – Council Tax Levy per Band

Band             2007/08          2008/09       Increase
                       £                £              £
A                 128.43           134.73           6.30
B                 149.84           157.18           7.34
C                 171.24           179.64           8.40
D                 192.65           202.09           9.44
E                 235.46           247.00          11.54
F                 278.27           291.91          13.64
G                 321.08           336.82          15.74
H                 385.30           404.18          18.88

ASSESSMENT

The Revenue Budget for 2008/09 builds upon the success of the Financial
Strategy, which is now clearly embedded throughout the Council.

The budget efficiency and other savings requirements were identified in the
Medium Term Plan well in advance, allowing Heads of Services to transform
their services areas to achieve these challenging targets and limit the financial
impacts on local taxpayers.

Notwithstanding this, the efficiencies and other savings could not be achieved
without pain, however the developments of the Corporate Strategy Working
Group, the Financial Strategy and quarterly budget monitoring to Members
have supported the process.

The key features of the proposed budget include:

    No requirement to draw from General Fund Reserves
    Achievement of the efficiency targets and other savings
    Significant investment in priority services
    Restricted Council Tax Increases

The budget process for 2008/09 does not stop now the Financial Strategy has
been written. As demonstrated in 2007/08 the budget proposals now have to
be delivered. Heads of Service receive monthly financial managements
                                 Page 97


reports on both their revenue and capital budget and quarterly updates are
reported to Members.

During the year there will be inevitably changes to the budget. Embedded
procedures will allow the Council to be responsive to these changes but will
still ensure that the budget proposals are delivered
Page 98
                                                                                                                                                APPENDIX A1
                                                                 BUDGET PRESSURES

                                                                                                                                                      £
Vat Mitigation and Right to   When the housing stock transferred to Yorkshire Coast Homes the Borough Council budgeted to receive
Buy Scheme                    income from the Vat Mitigation Scheme (on capital works undertaken on Council Houses), along with income
                              from the sale of each Council House under the Right to Buy Scheme.
                              An amount of £100,000 is included within strategy, reducing the income included within the base budget, to
                              reflect the fact that right to buy sales will fall and income from the vat mitigation scheme will reduce as the
                              capital works are undertaken by Yorkshire Coast Homes.
                              This is the fourth year that this write down has been included in budget strategy and the income from these
                              sources total approximately £700,000 in the 2008/09 budget

                                                                                                                                                      100,000
Property Services Tender      The Council was notified in earlier financial years that it had not been successful in retaining the responsive
                              repairs and voids or gas contract with Yorkshire Coast Homes. This growth represents the continuing part




                                                                                                                                                                Page 99
                              funding for the amount required to mitigate the loss of this contract.
                                                                                                                                                       80,000
One Off Funding               Last years approved budget included a receipt of £50,000 relating to the Local Public Service Agreement
                              Reward Grant. This is a one off receipt and therefore cannot be utilised in this financial year.
                                                                                                                                                       50,000
STEAM                         The Council currently receives £35,000 per annum in respect of the STEAM contract, which is a model
                              developed by the former Director of Tourism & Amenities David James. This contract will expire on 31 March
                              2008.                                                                                                                    35,000
Reduction in Trading          The Council was notified during the financial year that the County Council are terminating the Highways
Account Profits               Agency Agreement. The contract includes a 3-year termination clause. This growth reduces the profit targets
                              for the Highways trading account and spreads the impact of this loss over the 3 year period.
                                                                                                                                                      100,000
Benefits Administration       The Council receives an annual subsidy for Benefits Administration. Central Government have cut this
Subsidy                       allocation nationally by 5% to account for Gershon efficiency targets, however the Council’s allocation has only
                              been reduced by 2.9% due to its continuing increase in case loads / new claims. This reduction equates to
                              £60,000.                                                                                                                 60,000
Total                                                                                                                                                 425,000
Page 100
                                                                                                                                            APPENDIX A2
                                                             MEETING PRIORITIES

HEAD OF             BID                      DETAILS                                                                                          AMOUNT
SERVICE                                                                                                                                      REQUESTED
                                                                                                                                                 £
Corporate           Revenue Implications     The capital expenditure funded from the capital development reserve will result in fewer              70,000
                    associated with the      reserves being available for investment and will lead to an estimated £20,000 reduction in
                    Capital Programme        interest receipts per annum. A further growth of £50,000 has been added into the revenue
                                             budget to gradually build up contributions to the Capital Development Reserve, allowing
                                             for future capital expenditure.
Street Scene        Expansion of Recycling   Last years budget incorporated £320,000 in relation to the part years cost associated with
                    Scheme                   the expansion of the recycling scheme. This further growth is required to incorporate the
                                             cost of a full years operation of the scheme.                                                        275,000
Tourism & Leisure   Scarborough Museums      The operational activities of the Museums Service will transfer to Scarborough Museum
                    Trust                    Trust on 1 January 2008. Cabinet approved budget growth of £30,000 at its meeting on 17
                                             October 2006 (report reference SDO/06/28 HFS/06/61) to allow for the financial




                                                                                                                                                            Page 101
                                             implications arising from this transfer.                                                              30,000
Planning            IT Costs                 The Council’s Building Control service will transfer to the North Yorkshire Building Control
                                             Partnership on 1 April 2008. Cabinet Report SDO/07/14 outlined the need for budget
                                             growth of £13,000 to cover the cost of additional IT maintenance following this transfer.
                                                                                                                                                   13,000
Regeneration        Local Strategic          North Yorkshire County Council have reduced their contribution to the Local Strategic                 10,000
                    Partnership              partnership by £5,000 per annum and there is uncertainty over the Primary Care Trusts
                                             annual contribution of £5,000. This funding shortfall will need to be met by the Borough
                                             Council.
TOTAL                                                                                                                                             398,000
Page 102
                                                                                                                           APPENDIX A3
                                                      EFFICIENCY AND OTHER SAVINGS

                             Proposal                                   Efficiency   Other      High Risk    Medium     Low Risk    Reduction in
                                                                                                              Risk                   no of Full
                                                                                                                                       Time
                                                                                                                                    Employees
HEAD OF POLICY AND PERFORMANCE
Reduction in Best Value Budget                                                          9,050                               9,050              0
TOTAL                                                                                   9,050                               9,050              0
HEAD OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Centralisation of Human Resource Functions                                  19,410                             19,410                        0.5
TOTAL                                                                       19,410                             19,410                        0.5
HEAD OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
Deletion of Visiting Officer Posts within Benefits                          41,500                                         41,500              2
Merge 2 jobs on Cash Collection and Council Tax resulting in a role
being retired                                                               21,400                                         21,400              1




                                                                                                                                                   Page 103
Debt Restructuring                                                          20,000                             20,000                          0
Savings from staffing restructures in Accounts, Exchequer and Control       27,580                                         27,580            1.5
Further savings arising on the outsourcing of the payroll contract          10,000                                         10,000              0
Provision of a counter fraud service to Ryedale District Council on a
permanent basis                                                              5,000                              5,000                          0
Restructures in the IT service                                              30,000                             30,000
Renegotiation and expansion of the North Yorkshire Audit Partnership        10,000                             10,000                          0
Savings in various IT Budgets                                               17,280                             17,280                          0
Savings from the re-tender of the Treasury Consultancy contract              7,500                                          7,500              0
Savings on consultancy resulting from taking Treasury Management
back inhouse                                                                 6,850                                          6,850              0
TOTAL                                                                      197,110                             82,280     114,830            4.5
HEAD OF LEGAL SERVICES
Savings arising from Equipment Replacement Programme                        66,260                                         66,260              0
TOTAL                                                                       66,260                                         66,260              0
HEAD OF PROPERTY SERVICES
Staffing Efficiencies in Property Trading Unit                              12,000                                         12,000              1
Staffing Efficiencies in Architects Unit                                    15,000                                         15,000              1
Increases in Rental Income                                                  19,580                  19,580                                     0
TOTAL                                                                       46,580                  19,580                 27,000              2
                             Proposal                                  Efficiency   Other      High Risk    Medium     Low Risk    Reduction in
                                                                                                             Risk                   no of Full
                                                                                                                                      Time
                                                                                                                                   Employees
HEAD OF MARKETING
Restructure at Whitby Customer First and TIC following retirement           2,940                                          2,940              0
Restructure at Filey TIC and Customer First                                 3,000                              3,000                          0
Reduction in Aspire Licenses                                                5,000                                          5,000              0
Increased advertising income from the attractions guide                     3,000                                          3,000              0
Savings on the events guide due to joint publication through the
Tourism partnership                                                         5,000                              5,000                          0
Reduction in Uniforms Budget                                                           2,000                               2,000              0
Discontinue contribution to Captain Cook Tourism Association                             990                                 990              0
Cut in Hospitality and advertising budgets                                             3,000                               3,000              0
Reductions in essential car allowance budget                                           1,000                               1,000              0




                                                                                                                                                  Page 104
Reduction in hours of vacant ‘In Bloom’ post                                          14,400                              14,400            0.5
Ongoing efficiencies                                                                  10,690       10,690                                     0
TOTAL                                                                      18,940     32,080       10,690      8,000      32,330            0.5
HEAD OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Increased rents at Newburn House                                           10,000                                         10,000              0
Increased income from premises licensing                                              10,000                              10,000              0
General Budget Reductions                                                     730                                            730              0
Staffing Efficiencies arising from retirement of postholder                19,210                             19,210                          1
Deletion of vacant post                                                    25,280                                         25,280              1
Deletion of vacant post                                                    18,690                                         18,690              1
Additional income from the Gaming Act                                                  6,220                   6,220
TOTAL                                                                      73,910     16,220                  25,430      64,700              3
HEAD OF REGENERATION
Reductions in Yorkshire Coast Partnership and grants budgets                          17,830                              17,830              0
TOTAL                                                                                 17,830                              17,830              0
HEAD OF TOURISM AND LEISURE
Reorganise the Conference Bureau                                                      19,770                  19,770                        2.5
Increased income above inflation and introduction of Residents Cards                  55,000                  55,000                          0
Transfer the operation of Pindar Leisure Centre to Pindar School                      50,000       50,000                                     2
Reductions in Spa budgets                                                  20,000                             20,000                          0
Increase in Entertainments income at Scarborough Spa                                  30,000       30,000                                     0
Introduction of Car Parking Meter and Winter charges at Scarborough
Spa                                                                                   20,000                  20,000                          0
                               Proposal                                     Efficiency   Other       High Risk    Medium      Low Risk    Reduction in
                                                                                                                   Risk                    no of Full
                                                                                                                                             Time
                                                                                                                                          Employees
Reduced opening of learner pool and weekend swimming at Whitby
Leisure Centre – in line with Scarborough Pool                                             20,000                   20,000                           0
Additional income from the non-closure of Peasholm Park for Naval
Warfare shows                                                                               8,500                    8,500                           0
Purchase of 8 new chalets at Whitby                                                         2,300                                 2,300              0
Deletion of vacant Festivals Post                                               12,040                                           12,040            0.5
Reduction in grant budget and allowing Beached organisers to charge                        17,000                                17,000              0
Reduction in wage costs following savings in sickness and
superannuation costs, particularly in casual staff                              25,000                                           25,000              0
General budget reductions at Falsgrave Community Resource Centre                           12,250                                12,250              0
Rent increases and budget savings at the Evron Centre                                       7,000                                 7,000              0
Reduced opening of the learner pool at Scarborough Indoor Pool                              7,000                                 7,000              0
Saving in the staffing at the Scarborough Sports Centre                                    10,000        10,000                                    0.5




                                                                                                                                                         Page 105
Transfer the running of Gladstone and Falsgrave Recreation Centre to
current users                                                                               12,820       12,820                                      1
Reduce the catering wages ratio by 2%                                                       34,000                   34,000                          2
Outsourcing Outdoor Leisure activities                                                      70,000                   70,000                          6
Current Years budget shortfall                                                           (177,680)                (177,680)
TOTAL                                                                           57,040     197,960      102,820      69,590      82,590           14.5
HEAD OF PLANNING
Deletion of grant budgets                                                                  16,630                                16,630              0
Deletion of payments to Other Authorities for biodiversity Action Plan,
Coastal Management Project and Coastal Project Unit                                        12,300                                12,300              0
Residual salary savings following transfer to Customer First                     7,290                                            7,290            0.5
Administration staffing efficiencies following centralisation of planning
functions                                                                       35,400                               35,400                          2
Budget shortfalls to be offset                                                            (24,380)                 (24,380)
TOTAL                                                                           42,690       4,550           0       11,020      36,220            2.5
HEAD OF ENGINEERS AND HARBOURS
Deletion of vacant post                                                         25,000                                           25,000              1
Deletion of vacant post                                                         10,000                                           10,000            0.5
Restructuring following staffing vacancy (E0009)                                10,000                                           10,000            0.5
Savings in Highways Agency Traffic Survey costs                                             8,270                                 8,270              0
Cuts in Land Drainage Budgets                                                               4,460                                 4,460              0
                             Proposal                                   Efficiency   Other      High Risk    Medium       Low Risk    Reduction in
                                                                                                              Risk                     no of Full
                                                                                                                                         Time
                                                                                                                                      Employees
Reduction in Coast Protection Consultancy budgets                           10,000                                           10,000              0
Increase in Scarborough Harbour Berth income                                           15,000                                15,000              0
Reduction in the number of vehicles used in the service                      4,980                                            4,980              0
CCTV Operational Efficiencies                                                          30,410       30,410                                       1
Ongoing efficiencies                                                                   22,010       22,010                                       0
TOTAL                                                                       59,980     80,150       52,420            0      87,710            3.0
HEAD OF STREET SCENE
Reduction in Abandoned Vehicles Budget                                                  2,000                                 2,000              0
Further savings in Public Convenience Budgets following earlier years
closures                                                                               15,000                                15,000              0
Reductions in Stakesby depot budgets                                        19,170                                           19,170              0




                                                                                                                                                     Page 106
General Budget reductions at Dean Road Depot                                            7,000                                 7,000              0
Efficiency Savings within Parks budgets                                     25,000                                           25,000              0
Increase in Bulky Item income                                                          10,000                  10,000                            0
Reductions in Agency staffing in the Refuse Service                          7,050                                            7,050              0
Increase in Trade Waste Income                                                         50,000                  50,000                            0
Cessation of Skip Collection Service, Trade Clinical Waste Service
and Subcontracting of Household Clinical Waste Service                                 15,000                  15,000                            0
Staffing Efficiencies in Highways Unit                                      27,100                             27,100                            1
Restructure of Parks Section following a retirement in the unit and
reductions in Parks Seasonal budgets                                        30,620                             30,620                            1
TOTAL                                                                      108,940     99,000                 132,720        75,220              2

TOTAL PROPOSALS                                                            690,860    456,840      185,510    348,450       613,740           32.5
                                                                                                                                    APPENDIX A4
                                                        CORPORATE SAVINGS

   SAVING PROPOSAL                                                          DETAILS                                                          £
Corporate Salary Savings    This saving will take the total corporate salary saving in the 2008/09 budget to £275,000. This represents
                            1.1% of the 2008/09 base salary budget. Based on the current years budget monitoring this is deemed to be
                            achievable but it is dependant on staff turnover during the year therefore its inclusion is not without risk.
                                                                                                                                            170,000
Creative Industry Centre    The original business plan for the Creative Industry Centre showed that a subsidy of £102,500 was needed to
Subsidy                     fund its operation in the first year (cabinet report reference HFS/06/12 HRgn/06/54). This subsidy was built
                            into the base budget for 2007/08. This subsidy will reduce in the second years operation, which is reflected
                            with this saving.                                                                                                52,490
Corporate Efficiency        This is the estimated level of saving from Phase 1 of the Corporate Efficiency Reviews, including the savings
Programme                   arising from Corporate Restructuring. Other areas of likely saving are in Overtime, cash collection, rent       500,000
                            reviews, and energy efficiency.
Interest                    Due to increases in interest rates and delays in the outlay of capital expenditure, investment income is
                            expected to achieve a budget surplus in the current year. This is expected to continue into the 2008/09




                                                                                                                                                      Page 107
                            financial year. However, the capital programme is delivered the Councils capital resources, and therefore
                            amounts available for investment, will reduce. Although savings are anticipated in the current year and
                            2008/09, budget growth will be required in future years to accommodate this reduction.
                                                                                                                                            150,000
Minimum Revenue Provision   This saving reflects the reduction of the Minimum Revenue Provision needed in the revenue budget
                                                                                                                                             10,000
                                                                                                                                            882,490
Page 108
                                   Page 109


                                                            APPENDIX A5

FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY SERVICES CONTRACTS WITH
                 YORKSHIRE COAST HOMES

                         2005/06   2006/07   2007/08    2008/09    2009/10
                          £000      £000      £000       £000       £000
Residual Costs
Redundancies                 100
Revenue Base                           341       341        304        224
Full Year Impact                                  35
Pension Contributions
Gas Contract                                       78         70
Financial Strategy                              (150)      (150)     (224)
Sub Total                    100       341        304        224         0

                        2005/06    2006/07   2007/08    2008/09    2009/10
                         £000       £000      £000       £000       £000
General Fund               1,000       900       559        255         31
Provision b/f
Used in Year                100       341       304         224          0
General Fund                900       559       255          31         31
Provision c/f
Page 110
                                    Page 111


                                                                   APPENDIX B
              Additions to the Capital Programme 2008
New Capital Schemes

Recommended additions are set out in the following categories:

1.   Priority Schemes
2.   Asset Management Schemes
3.   IT System Enhancements
4.   Vehicle, Plant and Equipment
5.   Invest to Save

Priority schemes

Priority schemes are designed to complement the Revenue Plan in meeting
the aims and priorities set out in the Corporate Plan. The proposed
investments are outlined below.

Developing Safer and Stronger Communities

Within this aim the top priority is reducing Crime and Disorder. This is primarily
met through the Council’s revenue budget although £174,000 of
improvements to the CCTV Centre where approved in 2007. There are no
additional capital investments recommended within this aim for 2008/09.

Building Prosperous Communities

Major capital investment has been committed through the Council’s
Investment Management Plan, to address the top priority of Encouraging
Economic Growth. Further investment is very dependant upon the Council
receiving additional resources, but its importance is shown with £2m being
identified on the ‘Reserve List’. Members of the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee have recommended that approval be given to undertake a
feasibility study at the Scarborough Station Square to Improve Transportation.

Creating Health and Vibrant Communities

The top priority within this aim is Ensuring Affordable and Decent Housing.
The Housing Strategy addresses this through the Revenue Budget and the 10
year Capital Plan. The 2007 Financial Strategy approved a commitment of
£2.09m over the following 10 years towards disabled facilities grants and
Housing Grants.

Three new schemes are recommended to meet the priorities of improving the
quality of life through participation in leisure and cultural activities and
improving play facilities for young people. These are, improvements to the
Evron Centre Concert Hall, the construction of a Multi Use Games Area in
Filey and creation of a play area in Bankside.
                               Page 112


During 2007 the Council has been successful in bidding for external funding
for Play Equipment from the Big Lottery Fund (£249,000). Of this sum £63,000
has been approved towards Sainsbury Park and Royal Albert Drive. It is
proposed to use a further £71,000 towards the Bankside (£41,000) and Glen
and Crescent Garden project (£30,000) as outlined above. The balance of the
grant (£115,000) has not yet been committed to any specific project but
officers are drafting proposals for future consideration of Members.

Creating Quality Environments

The top priority of enhancing public spaces and parks is addressed primarily
through capital investment. Following on from investment approved previously
for Royal Albert Park and Pannett Park, further investment is now
recommended to Glen and Crescent Gardens, to address the landslip at
Ravenscar and parking at Northstead shops. Building on investment of
£0.195m approved in 2007, a further £0.050m allocation is also proposed for
public conveniences.

Improving the Council

Capital Investment is considered where it Improves the Performance of our
Services and Ensuring they Provide Value For Money. The scheme to be
recommended within this category is the purchase of a Harbour Dredger
Pump.

Summary

The following table sets out the capital investment of £925,000 using up all
available capital funding for new starts. The Medium Capital Plan resource
forecast is shown in section 9.

                                               Total       External     Net
                                               Cost        Funding     Cost
                                                £000        £000       £000
Building Prosperous Communities
Station Square, Feasibility                           25          0        25
Creating Healthy & Vibrant Communities
Evron Centre                                         94        (67)        27
Filey MUGA                                          240       (162)        78
Bankside Play Area                                   60        (60)         0
Play Equipment (Big Lottery Fund)                   115       (115)         0
Creating Quality Environments
Glen and Crescent Gardens                           160        (60)       100
Landslip, Ravenscar                                 100           0       100
Toilet Improvements                                  50           0        50
Northstead Shops Parking Bays                        25           0        25
Improving the Council
Harbour Dredging Pump                                56           0        56
Capital Development Fund                            925       (464)       461
                                     Page 113


Building Prosperous Communities

Priority: Improving transport - Station Square Feasibility Study

To undertake the feasibility study as approved by Members, on the basis that
any forthcoming capital scheme is fully externally funded with no financial
contribution from the Council. Members should be aware that the Council is
not the landowner of this area; it belongs to NYCC (highway) and Rail track.

Creating Healthy and Vibrant Communities

Priority: Improving active participation in leisure and cultural activities – Evron
Centre Concert Hall Refurbishment

The refurbishment and technical enhancement of the concert hall and the
provision of raked seating in order to significantly improve the facility and to
enable an externally funded 2-year artistic programme.

Priority: Improving services for young people – Filey Multi Use Games Area
(MUGA) and Bankside Play Area.

The proposed MUGA follows the work of a multi agency working group and
consultation exercise on youth facilities in Filey. It will be sited off West
Avenue. The tarmac playing area of the facility will measure 37 x 18.5 metres
and accommodate basketball, netball, tennis, five-a-side soccer, cricket,
hockey and uni hoc. The facility will be enclosed by anti vandal proof fencing
and floodlights will ensure evening access and maximum usage. The contract
will also cover the removal of the derelict basketball court nearby.

The Bankside scheme is also proposed, following consultation with Ward
Councilors and young people. The scheme will create a play area for
teenagers with challenging equipment and spaces to ‘hang out’. At present an
amount of £60,000 is proposed, this being the cost of equipment that can be
purchased with grant (£41,000 already secured through the Big Lottery Fund).
The scheme is also included on the Reserve List with additional expenditure
of £30,000 should Council resources become available.

The award of £249,000 from the big Lottery Fund for Children’s Play
Equipment also provides a further £115,000 of funding for 2008/09, which has
not yet been allocated to particular schemes

Creating Quality Environments

Priority: Enhancing of Public Spaces and Parks

Glen and Crescent Gardens

The Glen and Crescent Gardens scheme will involve improvements to play
area, signage, landscape and furniture. This is the first phase of the plan to
bring the park up to Green flag standard.
                                Page 114



Landslip at Crag Hall, Ravenscar

The landslip was first reported on the 30 November 2006. It is situated to the
rear boundary of privately owned Crag Hall Farm, but on Council land and has
partly blocked the bridleway. The slip is gradually moving – it originally
measured 15m in width and 30m in length, but is now 20m in width and 35m
in length. The scheme is to stabilise the slope in order to eliminate the risk to
the public using the bridleway and the risk to Crag Hall Farm

Northstead Shops Parking Bays

The establishment of parking bays in front of Northstead Shops (North Leas
Avenue) will alleviate parking problems in the area. A further advantage is that
it should aid the viability of the local shops. A sum of £17,075 remains in the
Environmental Improvements Reserve for the Northstead Ward following the
transfer of housing stock to Yorkshire coast homes. This can provide the main
funding through the Capital Development Fund with the balance met from the
Capital Contingency Reserve.

Priority: Making our Streets Cleaner.

Public Conveniences

Planned improvements include new urinals, wc’s and wash hand driers to
some unattended toilets in the Northern Area and Peasholm Park.

Improving the Council

Priority: Improving Services performance and ensuring Value For Money

Dredging Pump

The new pontoons in Whitby and Scarborough Harbours, maximise berths and
revenue. The design to achieve this, however, means that it is not possible to
maintain dredged depths with current equipment without dismantling pontoons
and moving berthed boats. A dredging pump will allow this and significantly
improve the capability of the plant to undertake work in marinas, slipways and
confined wharves. The marketability of external dredging works will therefore
be improved. This scheme is to be financed by a contribution from Harbour
Reserves to the Capital Development Fund.
                                    Page 115


Schemes that require external funding can only proceed when funding
has been offered and accepted by Cabinet

Reserve Schemes

With requests for capital investment far outweighing available capital
resources. However, there are potential opportunities to bring in additional
capital receipts over the coming years that may provide funding for some other
projects. With that in mind, a Priority Reserve List of scheme has been
prepared

It is recommended that this Priority Reserve list be maintained as an indicator
of the high priority projects which are currently not affordable but which, if
funding did become available, the Council would consider as priorities. It will
serve also as a benchmark against which any future capital bids should be
judged.

Schemes that have not been approved or do not feature on the Priority
Reserve list will continue to be recognised as bids for forthcoming years.
However, in light of the obvious current financial pressures, there is little hope
of these being afforded in the near future.

The Priority Reserve list assists in terms of future planning and ensuring
corporate consideration of priorities and resources. It also seeks to ensure that
Members are fully aware of the demands on the capital programme and that
any other capital projects would need to be considered against this Priority
Reserve list.

In preparing this list, focus has been placed upon top priorities and the scores
allocated to the schemes. Given the scope for additional resources being
generated, the list has been kept to a maximum of £5m.

New schemes and existing Reserve List schemes
in score order                                               £000       Score
Existing Reserve List
Trafalgar Square                                                72.5         55
Kerbside Glass Recycling                                       1,396         50
Renaissance                                                    2,000         n/a
Asset Management                                               1,000         n/a
New Schemes
Bankside Play Area                                                 30        70
The Dell – Changing Spaces                                       500         70
South Cliff Gardens Rose Garden                                    82        65
Old Railway Line                                                   35        65
White Leys Playing Field                                           50        65
Composting Demonstration Site                                      20        50
Falsgrave Park Entrances                                         25.5        50

Appendix B1 provides details of the schemes on the Reserve List.
                               Page 116


Asset Management

A separate budget exists for Asset Management schemes with consideration
given to the need for enhancement or refurbishment of the existing asset
stock.

The Capital Strategy set a budget of £3.45m of investment in the Council’s
Assets over the 10-year period 2007 to 2017. In 2007 Members approved
schemes totalling £0.85m.

The following table shows the recommended schemes to be undertaken in
2008/09 and 2009/10.

                                              2008/09 2009/10             Total
                                                 £000    £000             £000
 Whitby Pavilion - Roof and             Stone     110     107              217
 Restoration
 Scarborough Market – Roof and Stone                 93                     93
 Restoration
 Scarborough Spa – Energy Management                100                    100
 Total                                              303        107         410

The remaining balance in the Asset Management Budget is £2.190m

Information Technology Scheme

The Capital Strategy provides for £3.5m investment in IT over the 10-year
period 2007-17. Approval has previously been given for expenditure of £1.3m
in the first three years. This was based on an unspent balance of £0.250m
being brought forward into the Capital Development Fund at 1 April 2006.
However, due to unforeseen slippage, the unspent balance was £0.592m and
so this allows for a higher level of expenditure in 2007/08 – 2009/10 than
previously identified. The replacement of the ledger system and introduction of
EDRM, have not reached implementation stage in 2007/08, but the intention is
to select suppliers by April 2008. Major expenditure is therefore now forecast
for 2008/09. The following table shows the proposed IT expenditure for the 3-
year period. All schemes have been considered by the Service Transformation
Group.

Information Technology                2007/08     2008/09     2009/10             Total
                                         £000        £000        £000             £000
Operational
Pc Replacement                             90          90            90            270
Corporate Licences                         40          40            40            120
Network Infrastructure
ISA Server                                 30                                       30
Backup Hardware                            30                                       30
                                   Page 117


Communications                              30          20          20             70
6509 Central Switch                                                 50             50
General Infrastructure                                              20             50
Thin client technology                      30                                     30
Virtualisation                              30          10                         40
SAN Replacement                                                     30             30
Telephony system                                                   100         100
Wide Area Network Upgrade                               20                         20
Systems
Financial Ledger                                       420                     420
ERDM                                                   200                     200
CRM                                                    120                     120
Axxia                                       10                                     10
Choice Based Letting                        20                                     20
Upgrades/replacement                        10          22                         32
Total                                     320          942         350        1,612
Resources
Balance Brought forward                   592                                  592
Medium Term Capital Plan
Allocation                                350          350         350        1,050
Total                                     942          350         350        1,642

Vehicle Plant and Equipment

Separate capital provision exists within the Capital Development Fund for the
replacement of essential, operational vehicle, plant and equipment items. All
proposals have been through the transport Manager and considered in terms
of overall contribution towards operating Council front line services. The value
of vehicles to be replaced £738,240 and equipment is £97,860.

Invest to Save

There are no proposed Invest to Save schemes.
Page 118
                                    Page 119


                                                                  Appendix B1

                      Capital Bids – Reserve List
Trafalgar Square

Restoration and improvement of the two open spaces in the square involving
replacement of railings, landscaping, seating and access improvements.
Trafalgar Square has seen a dramatic improvement in its condition and a
reduction in anti-social behaviour over the last two years due to the efforts of
the Residents and Friends of Trafalgar Square and support from the Council
and Urban Renaissance. The improvement of the open spaces is a high
priority in the Parks Strategy and greatly desired by the community. Due to the
recycling of Marine Drive railings, the scheme is now at much reduced cost.
Funding from English Heritage has been secured subject to the Council
securing equal match funding.

Kerbside Glass Recycling

To provide a kerbside glass recycling scheme to 49,000 properties using a
140 litre bin and the remaining 6,000 properties to be issued with a 40 litre box
to take materials to site. Scheme will require purchase of 3 vehicles as well as
bins and boxes.

Renaissance

Potential projects such as The Futurist, West Pier and The Art Gallery will
need further consideration in the future. At present however, there is no
funding available for such schemes. An indicative sum of £2m is included in
the reserve list but at this stage, the funding remains unavailable.

Asset Management

It is clear that the need for investment in building maintenance exceeds the
resources available. In the future there will be a need to consider either
increasing the Asset Management budget or rationalising the Council’s assets
with a view to reducing the need for further expenditure

Bankside Play Area

Improvement of hugely important play area in one of the most deprived
districts for play equipment in the Borough. Project builds on the existing
funding from Play Lottery and Parish Council to create a worthwhile facility
adequate for the great need in this area.

The Dell/Changing Spaces

The development of The Dell as an improved open space/park for Eastfield,
linking the estate with the Middle Deepdale development and involving the
community with their environment.
                                Page 120



The need for open space improvements in Eastfield has been identified as a
priority in the Parks Strategy and by the local community in estate planning
work. The Middle Deepdale development provides the ideal opportunity and
timing to carry this out. Funding targets Changing Spaces, a major new grant
scheme from the Big Lottery Fund.

South Cliff Gardens Rose Garden

Restoration of Rose Garden in the historic listed park of South Cliff Gardens.
Project would be the first stage of a more comprehensive restoration of this
important park. It would involve historic research, detailed design and
comprehensive hard and soft landscape restoration together with
interpretation, events and activities. Project makes use of limited heritage
funding available in the short-term future and utilises existing Section 106
funds. There is an increasingly pressing need to restore these gardens due to
their declining condition, and this project provides an appropriate first step to
achieve this long-term objective

Old Railway Line

Access, signage and infrastructure improvements to follow on from Sainsbury
Park Improvement Scheme and continue the development of this important
linear park, sustainable transport corridor and tourist facility. Project builds on
existing Section 106 resources and grants available for this type of project.
The need for improvements to this park has been identified as a priority in
Parks Strategy, by the local community, Urban Renaissance and the Friends
of the Old Railway Line.

White Leys Playing Field

Improvement of play area and open space in an area of the Borough and a
part of Whitby very deprived in these facilities. Mainly children's play area
improvements to a currently derelict site but also including some open space
and access improvements. Project builds on Section 106 funding, negotiated
because of the lack of play and open space facilities in this area.

Composting Demonstration Site

The development of a demonstration site in a urban park for a variety of
composting and recycling methods. The site would include extensive
interpretation and literature along with events and activities. The public could
learn about the wide variety of ways to compost their household and garden
waste as well as re-using materials in a garden setting. Many people are keen
to compost at home but are put off because they are unsure how to do it or
feel they may be doing it wrongly. This facility would contribute in a unique
way to the recycling and sustainability responsibilities of the Council.
                                 Page 121




Falsgrave Park Entrances

Improvements to the accessibility and appearance of key entrances to the
Borough's only Green Flag standard park. Although huge improvements have
taken place in the park over recent years, in order to maintain Green Flag
standard continuous improvements must be sustained. The top priority for the
Council and the Friends group is to improve these entrances and imaginative
designs have been drawn up. Funding has been secured from the Friends and
Section 106 but the poor existing condition of the infrastructure requires
considerable capital investment. The project has been identified as a top
priority in the Parks Strategy and Green Flag judging feedback.

.
Page 122
                                   Page 123


                                                                   APPENDIX C

         ACTION PLAN FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

Objective                         How we will achieve it      Timescales    Lead Officer
1. Budgets are Prudent and -     Adequate provision is Ongoing              SDCS/CA
Sustainable in the Long          made      for     inflation,
Term                             pressures, pay awards,
                                 and new legislation

                             -   The revenue budget is not Ongoing          SDCS
                                 supported by one off
                                 savings, or any significant
                                 use of reserves

                             -   Effective             budgetQuarterly    CA
                                 monitoring to ensure early  reports   to
                                 identification of issues andcabinet
                                 action planning             Monthly
                                                             reporting to
                                                             managers
2. Financial Plans Recognise -   additional investment, and Ongoing       SDCS
Corporate Priorities and         savings proposals make
Objectives                       explicit    reference    to
                                 corporate priorities
                             -   Local and national targets Ongoing       SDCS
                                 are considered
                             -   Long term vision and Ongoing             SDCS
                                 objectives are considered
                                 within the report
                             -   Provision within financial Ongoing       SDCS
                                 planning figures for growth
                                 and contingency amounts
                                 based upon perceived risk

                             -   All      capital      schemes Ongoing      CA
                                 undergo        an       options
                                 appraisal          and      are
                                 prioritised      in     Council
                                 priorities and aims.
3. Significant risks are -       Risk      management          is Ongoing   HFS
identified, and mitigation       embedded in corporate
factors identified               and service planning
                           -     Financial         risks     are Ongoing    SDCS/HFS
                                 specifically considered on
                                 an ongoing basis, and
                                 specifically reflected within
                                 the Financial Strategy
                                    Page 124


4. The Capital Programme is - 10 Year capital programme Within this SDCS/CA
planned over a 10 year developed                        Strategy,
period, with “Unsupported”                              built upon
Borrowing minimised, other                              over    next
than where there is a clear                             year    and
financial business case to                              beyond
borrow

                                -   The establishment of a        Complete   SDCS
                                    Capital Development Fund
                                - The Use of Unsupported          Ongoing    SDCS/CA
                                    Borrowing only on an
                                    Invest to Save Basis
                                - Contingency funding is          Ongoing    SDCS
                                    included within the capital
                                    programme
                                - A Corporate approach to         Ongoing    SDCS/HFS
                                    external           funding
                                    opportunities
5. Constraints on capital and   - specific reference within       Ongoing    SDCS
revenue           resources,    each financial strategy of
including the uncertainties     constraints,    and     current
around future government        issues
funding, are recognised and
taken into account;
                                -   regular  reporting     to Ongoing        SDCS/HFS
                                    Cabinet    on       local
                                    government       finance
                                    issues

                                -   ensure    awareness      of Ongoing      SDCS/HFS
                                    financial position within
                                    the organisation through
                                    an                effective
                                    Communication strategy

6. Council Tax increases will -     financial      plans     take Ongoing    SDCS
be     kept     below     the       account of this level of
Government’s        expected        council tax increase, in
upper level of increase, and        particular     that    target
the     broad     anticipated       efficiency gains reflect the
increase for future years will      likely levels of council tax
be set out within the
Financial Plans, recognising
that these increases may be
subject to change.

7. Prudent levels of general -      Annual review of reserves, Annually,     SDCS/CA
balances,    reserves   and         linked     to    corporate within
contingencies           are         priorities and treasury Financial
                                      Page 125


maintained in the context of        management implications      Strategy
an assessment of the risks
facing the Council
                                -   Ensure capital reserves Ongoing           SDCS
                                    are maintained

8. Value for Money and -            A Value For Money Group Ongoing           HFS
achievement of improved             is established with a clear
efficiency    and     service       work programme
delivery     underpin     the -     Corporate Efficiency        Ongoing       SDCS
Financial Strategy                  programme established

                                -   Adoption of a Value For Complete          HFS
                                    Money Strategy for the
                                    Council

                                -   The Service                  Ongoing      SDCS
                                    transformation group
                                    facilitates improved
                                    service delivery via the
                                    optimum use of IT through
                                    the Council

                                -    Benchmarking the costs of Report via HFS
                                     our services                 VFM group
9. The Financial Strategy   -       An action plan in relation to Ongoing   SDCS
supports the achievement of         the Use of Resources
Excellence in Financial             Assessment
Management and Use of
Resources

                                -   Developing the financial     Ongoing      SDCS
                                    culture within the Council
                                -   Financial reporting and      Ongoing      CA
                                    documentation- based
                                    upon stakeholder needs
                                -   Improved Financial           April 2009   CA
                                    Systems (General Ledger
                                    Upgrade)

                                -   Training and Development     Ongoing      HFS/CA
                                    – finance/non finance

                               Integration of financial and      Ongoing      SDCS/CPM/
                               non financial performance                      CA
                               measures
   SDCS – Strategic Director of Corporate Services
   HFS – Head of Financial Services
   CA – Chief Accountant
   CPM – Corporate Performance Manager
Page 126
                                    Page 127


                                                                  APPENDIX D

                     INVEST TO SAVE STRATEGY
Introduction

The Financial Strategy outlines restrictions on new borrowing. An exception to
this will be made in the case of Invest to Save Schemes.

Invest to Save schemes are those where there is a capital cost, and
associated borrowing costs arise, but the ongoing savings cover the
associated borrowing costs. This results in both an improved revenue position
(ie the benefits of the proposal exceed the borrowing costs) plus improved
service provision through the capital investment.

All such proposals are considered in line with the Council’s capital
programme. The available funding for such proposals is in effect unlimited,
providing the business case can be made.

All schemes will be assed for their viability, and contribution to corporate
priorities.

The maximum period to repay the initial investment is 25 years. This is in line
with standard accounting policies.

The repayments will be expected to repay the capital outlay, interest and a
provision to cover financial risk. In essence the Council incurs the borrowing,
and associated repayment/interest costs are then fully covered through the
revenue savings. An allowance for risk will usually be included in the
assessment. Therefore, most schemes will need to demonstrate that they
more than cover the borrowing costs, and an overall net saving results.

Interest

The rate of interest to be used in assessing whether the scheme meets the
Invest to Save criteria will be the marginal cost of borrowing at the time of the
decision. The interest rate will be fixed for the duration of the scheme.

All Invest to Save Schemes will be subject to a review report once the scheme
has been implemented, to ensure the financial savings identified are achieved.
Where savings are not demonstrated, the relevant service would be expected
to find compensating savings. This rule ensures all services take a prudent
view of such scheme, in the recognition that any risks/non achievement will
ultimately fall back on them.
                              Page 128



Information Requirements

To proceed with a request for Invest to Save, a capital bid must be made in
line with the capital strategy process. This will include detailed financial
appraisal. The appraisal will be subject to review from Finance.

In summary the following stages apply to ITS schemes

   Preparation of a Business Case (Head of Service)
   Financial Appraisal (Chief Accountant)
   Risk Assessment (Head of Service)
   Report to Cabinet / Council (Strategic Director of Corporate Services)
                                    Page 129



                                                                  APPENDIX E

     TREASURY MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND ANNUAL
          INVESTMENT STRATEGY FOR 2008/2009
INTRODUCTION

The Council has customarily considered an annual Treasury Strategy
Statement under the requirement of the CIPFA Treasury Management in
Public Services Code of Practice (CIPFA Code of Practice), which was
adopted by the Council on 26 April 2002 (DCS/02/37). The Local Government
Act 2003 introduced new requirements for the manner in which capital
spending plans are to be considered and approved, and in conjunction with
this, the development of an integrated treasury management strategy
incorporating the Annual Investment Strategy (AIS).

Treasury Management is a key component of the Medium Term Financial
Strategy, as its activities, especially capital borrowing, underpin the financial
affordability in meeting the Council’s objectives.

BALANCED BUDGET

It is a statutory requirement under Section 33 of the Local Government
Finance Act 1992, for the Council to produce a balanced budget. In particular,
Section 32 requires the Council to calculate its budget requirement for each
financial year to include the revenue costs that flow from capital financing
decisions. This, therefore, means that increases in capital expenditure must
be limited to a level whereby increases in charges to revenue from:

1.    increases in interest charges caused by increased borrowing to finance
      additional capital expenditure, and
2.    any increases in running costs from new capital projects

are limited to a level which is affordable within the projected income of the
Council for the foreseeable future.


PRUDENTIAL INDICATORS FOR 2008/2009 TO 2010/2011

Treasury Management is linked specifically to the Capital Strategy, through
the setting of Prudential Indicators for capital investment and financing,
including the level of borrowing to support capital schemes. The Prudential
Indicators proposed for the next three financial years are detailed and
explained within Appendix ‘F’
                                Page 130


The Council’s treasury portfolio position at 30 November 2007 comprised:

                                     Principal              Average Rate
 Borrowings                              £                       %
 Fixed Rate Funding                        8,000,000           4.0719
 Variable Rate Funding                     4,000,000           4.4500
 Total Debt                              12,000,000            4.1978
 Investments
 Internal                                 22,200,000            6.0100
 Total Investments                        22,200,000            6.0100

The level of investments fluctuate during the financial year as a result of cash
flows and the above level is projected to fall to £10m by 31 March 2008,
before increasing during the following financial year.

PROSPECT FOR INTEREST RATES

The US, UK and EU economies have all been on the upswing of the economic
cycle in 2005 and 2006, and have raised their respective interest rates in
order to cool the economies and to counter inflationary pressures stimulated
by high oil, gas and electricity prices.

The US is ahead of both the UK and EU in the business cycle and started on
the downturn of the economic cycle during 2007. The Federal Reserve Rate
(Fed Rate) peaked at 5.25% and was first cut in September 2007 by 0.50% to
4.75%. This was a response to rapidly deteriorating prospects for the
economy in the face of the downturn in the housing market, the sub-prime
mortgage crisis and the ensuing liquidity crisis which started in August 2007.

US banks have written off significant losses relating to the sub-prime
mortgages, and have also tightened their lending criteria, which has impacted
on consumers with poor credit standing.

The Fed Rate was cut again to 4.50% in October and to 4.25% in December
2007, and is expected to reduce further by April 2008 in order to stimulate the
economy and improve the extent of the downturn. However, the speed and
extent of these cuts will be inhibited by inflationary pressures arising from oil
prices and the falling dollar increasing the cost of imports. The downturn in
economic growth in the US will depress world growth, which will also suffer
directly from the impact of high oil prices.

Growth in the EU has been strong during 2006 and 2007 but will be caught by
the general downturn in world growth in 2008.

In the UK, economic growth has been strong during 2007 but is expected to
cool in 2008. The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) raised Bank Rate
gradually through 2007 to reach 5.75% in July. This together with higher
mortgage costs, increased petrol prices and rising food prices has put the
consumer spending power under major pressure. Banks have also tightened
                                    Page 131


their lending criteria since the sub-prime crisis started, which will dampen
consumer expenditure via credit cards and mortgage approvals.

Although the MPC is concerned about the build up of inflationary pressures,
especially the rise in oil prices, it reduced Bank Rate by 0.25% in December
2007. This was, in part, driven by market sentiment and Bank Rate is
expected to fall slowly during 2008 to reach 5.00% in Q2 2009.

CAPITAL BORROWING AND THE BORROWING PORTFOLIO STRATEGY

The Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) new borrowing interest rate across all
periods is expected to fall throughout 2008 reaching its lowest point in Q1 2009,
before rising again during 2009. Variable rate borrowing and borrowing in the
five-year area are expected to be more expensive than long-term borrowing. Any
new borrowing should, therefore, focus on longer dated periods around the 25 –
30 year period towards the end of the 2008/2009 financial year.

This strategy will not only aim to minimise debt interest costs, but also achieve
a better spread in the debt maturity profile after several years concentrating on
new borrowing at or near the 50 year period.

Consideration will also be given to borrowing fixed rate market loans, which
may be at more favourable rates than those offered by the PWLB.

Council officers will, in conjunction with its treasury advisers, Sector Treasury
Services (Sector), continually monitor both the prevailing interest rates and the
market forecasts, and adopt a pragmatic approach to any changing
circumstances.

DEBT RESCHEDULING

On 1 November 2007 the PWLB introduced differential interest rates between
new borrowing and early repayment of debt, with a spread between the two
rates of about 40-50 basis points for the longer period loans and 25-30 basis
points for the shorter dated loans. This has resulted in PWLB to PWLB debt
restructuring being less attractive than before that date. However, interest
rate savings may be achievable through using LOBOs (Lenders Option,
Borrowers Option) loans from the money markets.

PWLB rates are expected to be minimally higher at the start of the year than
later on in the year, and Bank Rate is expected to fall more than the longer
term borrowing rates during the year. This will mean that the differential rate
between long and short rates will narrow during the year and there should
therefore be greater potential for making interest rate savings by undertaking
debt rescheduling earlier in the year.

Based on the traditional average portfolio rate of interest, Sector, estimate that
the Council’s debt performance is within the upper quartile of local authorities.
                                  Page 132


Any rescheduling undertaken will be reported to Cabinet as part of the
Treasury Management Annual Out-turn Report.

ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY (AIS)

INVESTMENT POLICY

The AIS is produced in accordance with the Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister’s (ODPM’s) Guidance on Local Government Investments and states
which investments the Council may use for the prudent management of its
treasury balances during the financial year under the heads of Specified and
Non-Specified Investments. These are detailed in Appendix E1.

The Council aims to achieve the optimum return on its investments
commensurate with the proper levels of capital security and liquidity.

The borrowing of monies purely to invest in order to make a return is unlawful
and this Council will not engage in such activity.

SECURITY OF CAPITAL: THE USE OF CREDIT RATINGS

The Council relies on credit ratings published by Fitch Ratings to establish the
credit quality of counterparties and investment schemes. The Council has
also determined the minimum long term, short term and other credit ratings for
each category of investment.

All credit ratings will be monitored monthly and the Council is also alerted to
changes through Sector’s creditworthiness service.

If a counterparty’s or investment scheme’s rating is downgraded with the result
that it no longer meets the Council’s minimum criteria, its capacity for further
use will be withdrawn immediately.

If a counterparty is upgraded so that it fulfils the Council’s criteria, its inclusion
will be considered in accordance with the Council’s procedure.

The Council currently uses unrated counterparties, such as building societies.
Their creditworthiness is assessed based on the asset value of the
organisation and applicable investment duration determined. The current
minimum net asset value is £400 million. However, the assessment criteria
are being reviewed and an amended policy will be reported to Cabinet at a
later date.

TEMPORARY INVESTMENTS STRATEGY

Bank Rate was raised to 5.75% in July 2007, where it remained until it was
reduced by 0.25% in December 2007. It is forecast to fall again to 5.25% in
Q2 2008 and again to 5.00% in Q2 2009 where it is expected to stabalise at
that level for the rest of 2009 and throughout 2010. Investments representing
a proportion of the core balances will be structured in longer period maturities
                                    Page 133


at higher rates in anticipation of this. Liquidity accounts and short-dated
deposits (overnight to 3 months) will be utilised for cash flow generated
balances in order to benefit from the compounding of interest.

Since May 2005 the Council has employed Tradition (UK) Limited (Tradition)
as a Cash Manager to manage a proportion of the Council’s investment
portfolio. The funds available to Tradition were purely for investment
purposes, which should have enabled them to take greater advantage of the
more favourable investments opportunities (1 year duration) whereas the in-
house team has to manage the Council’s day-to-day cashflow as part of its
investment strategy. For the 2006/2007 financial year the Council’s in-house
team generated a higher rate of return than Tradition.

In addition to this, within the Capital Strategy, the Capital Development Fund
has been established as the primary source to highlight capital funding
availability. In effect this should remove the need for unsupported borrowing
and maintain financial stability. Investments must be aligned to support this
strategy and this is best controlled through the in-house treasury function.

The agreement with Tradition was therefore terminated, with effect from
November 2007, and all funds are now managed by the in-house team.

Another element of the strategy to be considered is that dependant on the
prevailing interest rates for both investments and borrowing during the
financial year it may be beneficial to finance new capital expenditure through
current cash balances.

All investment transactions will be undertaken in accordance with the strategy
and procedures approved in the Treasury Policy Statement (Appendix E2).
The institutions identified in the Council’s approved counterparty investment
list will continue to be used.


END OF YEAR INVESTMENT REPORT

In accordance with the CIPFA Code of Practice the investment activities for
2008/2009 will be reported to Cabinet as part of the Treasury Management
Annual Outturn Report, no later than 30 September following the end of the
financial year.

ASSESSMENT

After several years of strong growth the economies of the UK, US and Europe
are on the downswing of the economic cycle, with a slowdown in consumer
expenditure and weakening domestic growth.

There has also been a major downturn in the housing market through higher
mortgage costs from successive interest rate rises, and now further
exacerbated by the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Whilst the Central Banks are
attempting to control the fallout by reducing interest rates and pumping billions
                                 Page 134


into the economies to alleviate the liquidity problems, there are serious
concerns around the inflation levels in each respective economy.

The borrowing and investment strategies detailed above are designed to
minimise borrowing costs in the short-term, and to optimise investment
returns, whilst protecting the capital invested. In addition, the portfolios are
structured to provide flexibility to react to changing circumstances, both
domestic and worldwide
                                                                                                                           APPENDIX E1

                                              LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS (England)
                                                      SPECIFIED INVESTMENTS

All investments listed below must be sterling-denominated.

Investment                                    Share/     Repayable/   Security /          Capital        Circumstance of use   Maximum
                                              Loan       Redeemable   Minimum Credit      Expenditure?                         period
                                              Capital?   within 12    Rating **
                                                         months?
Debt Management Agency Deposit                No         Yes          Government          No             In-house              1 year *
Facility* (DMADF)                                                     backed
* this facility is at present available for
investments up to 6 months
Term deposits with the UK                     No         Yes          High security       No             In-house and by       1 year
government or with UK local                                           although most                      external fund
authorities (i.e. local authorities as                                local authorities                  managers
defined under Section 23 of the 2003 Act)                             are not credit




                                                                                                                                          Page 135
with maturities up to 1 year                                          rated.
Term deposits with credit-rated               No         Yes          AA- long term       No             In-house and by       1 year
deposit takers (banks and building                                    F1+ short term                     external fund
societies) with maturities up to 1 year                                                                  managers
Forward deals with credit rated               No         Yes          AA- long term       No             In-house and by       1 year
banks and building societies < 1 year                                 F1+ short term                     external fund
(i.e. negotiated deal period plus period of                                                              managers
deposit)
                                        LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT (England)

                                                 NON-SPECIFIED INVESTMENTS
Note : The maximum percentage limit for each investment is based on the aggregate sum managed in-house and through external fund managers

1 Maturities of ANY period


Investment                            Share/      Repayable/         Security /           Capital       Circumstance of use     Max % of      Maximum
                                      Loan        Redeemable         ‘High’ Credit        Expenditure                           overall       period
                                      Capital?    within 12          Rating criteria      ?                                     investments
                                                  months?
Deposits with unrated deposit         No          Yes, but only if   Not rated in their   No            In-house                100           5 years,
takers with unconditional financial               maturity is 1      own right, but                                                           dependant
guarantee from HMG or credit-                     year or less       parent must be                                                           on credit
rated parent institution.                                            rated. AA- long                                                          rating




                                                                                                                                                          Page 136
                                                                     term and F1+
                                                                     short term
Unrated deposit takers (banks and     No          Yes, but only if   Minimum £400m        No            In-house                100           5 years,
building societies) which do not                  maturity is 1      asset value                                                              dependant
have an unconditional guarantee.                  year or less                                                                                on credit
                                                                                                                                              rating
Fixed term deposits with variable
rate and variable maturities
1. Callable deposits                  No          Yes, but only if   AA- long term        No            In-house and external   25            5 years
                                                  maturity is 1      F1+ short term                     fund managers
                                                  year or less
2. Range trade                        No          Yes, but only if   AA- long term        No            In-house and external   25            5 years
                                                  maturity is 1      F1+ short term                     fund managers
                                                  year or less
3. Snowballs                          No          Yes, but only if   AA- long term        No            In-house and external   25            5 years
                                                  maturity is 1      F1+ short term                     fund managers
                                                  year or less
Investment                                  Share/     Repayable/         Security /         Capital       Circumstance of use         Max % of      Maximum
                                            Loan       Redeemable         ‘High’ Credit      Expenditure                               overall       period
                                            Capital?   within 12          Rating criteria    ?                                         investments
                                                       months?
Certificates of Deposit issued by           No         Yes, but only if   AA- long term      No            To be used by fund          50            5 years
credit-rated deposit takers (banks and                 maturity is 1      F1+ short term                   managers; to be used in-
building societies).                                   year or less                                        house after consultation/
Custodial arrangement required prior                                                                       advice from treasury
                                                                                                           consultant
to purchase
Museum Trust (Rotunda)                      No         Yes                Not credit rated   No            In-house                    10            5 years
Money Market Funds                          No         Yes                AAA funds          No            In-house and by             20            the period of
(i.e. a collective investment scheme                                                                       external fund                             investment
as defined in SI 2004 No 534)                                                                              managers subject to                       may not be
These funds do not have any maturity                                                                       the guidelines and                        determined
                                                                                                                                                     at the outset
date                                                                                                       parameters agreed                         but would be
                                                                                                           with them                                 subject to
                                                                                                                                                     cash flow
                                                                                                                                                     and liquidity
                                                                                                                                                     requirements
Reverse Gilt Repos : maturities up          No         Yes                Government         No            to be used by external      20            1 year




                                                                                                                                                                     Page 137
to 1 year                                                                 Backed                           fund managers only
[A transaction where gilts are bought                                                                      subject to the
with a commitment (as part of the                                                                          guidelines and
same transaction) to sell equivalent                                                                       parameters agreed
gilts on a specified date, or at call, at                                                                  with them
a specified price.]

Custodial arrangement required prior
to purchase
Commercial paper**                          No         Yes                F1+ short term     No            to be used by external      20            1 year
[short-term obligations (generally with                                                                    fund managers only
a maximum life of 9 months) which                                                                          subject to the
are issued by banks, corporations and                                                                      guidelines and
other issuers]                                                                                             parameters agreed
Custodial arrangement required                                                                             with them
Investment                             Share/     Repayable/         Security /        Capital       Circumstance of use         Max % of      Maximum
                                       Loan       Redeemable         ‘High’ Credit     Expenditure                               overall       period
                                       Capital?   within 12          Rating criteria   ?                                         investments
                                                  months?
Treasury bills                         No         Yes                Government        No            In-house and external       25            1 year
[Government debt security with a                                     backed                          fund managers subject to
maturity less than one year and                                                                      the guidelines and
issued through a competitive bidding                                                                 parameters agreed with
                                                                                                     them
process at a discount to par value]

Custodial arrangement required prior
to purchase
Bonds issued by a financial            No         Yes, but only if   AAA or            No            (1) Buy and hold to         50            10 years
institution that is guaranteed by                 maturity is 1      government                      maturity : to be used in-
the United Kingdom Government                     year or less       guaranteed                      house after consultation/
(as defined in SI 2004 No 534)                                                                       advice from treasury
                                                                                                     consultant
Any maturity                                                                                         (2) for trading : by
                                                                                                     external cash fund




                                                                                                                                                          Page 138
Custodial arrangement required prior                                                                 manager(s) only subject
to purchase                                                                                          to the guidelines and
                                                                                                     parameters agreed with
                                                                                                     them
Bonds issued by multilateral           No         Yes, but only if   AAA or            No            (1) Buy and hold to         50            10 years
development banks (as defined in SI               maturity is 1      government                      maturity : to be used in-
2004 No 534) any maturity                         year or less       guaranteed                      house after consultation/
                                                                                                     advice from treasury
                                                                                                     consultant
                                                                                                     (2) for trading : by
Custodial arrangement required prior                                                                 external cash fund
to purchase                                                                                          manager(s) only subject
                                                                                                     to the guidelines and
                                                                                                     parameters agreed with
                                                                                                     them
Investment                              Share/     Repayable/   Security /            Capital       Circumstance of use         Max % of      Maximum
                                        Loan       Redeemable   ‘High’ Credit         Expenditure                               overall       period
                                        Capital?   within 12    Rating criteria       ?                                         investments
                                                   months?
UK government gilts                     No         Yes          Government            No            (1) Buy and hold to         50            10 years
                                                                backed                              maturity : to be used in-
                                                                                                    house after consultation/
                                                                                                    advice from treasury
Custodial arrangement required prior                                                                consultants
to purchase                                                                                         (2) for trading : by
                                                                                                    external cash fund
                                                                                                    manager(s) only subject
                                                                                                    to the guidelines and
                                                                                                    parameters agreed with
                                                                                                    them
Floating Rate Notes (FRNs)              Yes        Yes          Yes – varied          Yes           For trading : by external   20            5 years
[Bonds (i.e. debt instruments) with a                                                               cash fund manager(s)
coupon whose rate varies in line with                                                               only subject to the
a market rate of interest and is                                                                    guidelines and
                                                                                                    parameters agreed with
generally re-set every 3 months ]                                                                   them




                                                                                                                                                         Page 139
Custodial arrangement required prior
to purchase

Corporate bonds                         Yes        Yes          YES-varied**          Yes           For trading : by external   20            10 years
[Bonds other than sovereign bonds]                              Suggested                           cash fund manager(s)
                                                                minimum long-term                   only subject to the
                                                                rating :                            guidelines and
                                                                AA- : for bonds                     parameters agreed with
                                                                with maturities up                  them
                                                                to 2 years
                                                                AA : for bonds with
                                                                maturities up to 10
                                                                years
Investment                              Share/     Repayable/   Security /        Capital         Circumstance of use         Max % of      Maximum
                                        Loan       Redeemable   ‘High’ Credit     Expenditure                                 overall       period
                                        Capital?   within 12    Rating criteria   ?                                           investments
                                                   months?
Gilt Funds and other Bond Funds         No         Yes          AA- long term     No,             to be used by external      25            Open
(dependent on set-up structure)                                 F1+ short term    (ensure it is   fund managers only                        ended
*** These are open-end mutual funds                                               not a body      subject to the guidelines
investing predominantly in UK govt                                                corporate       and parameters agreed
                                                                                                  with them
gilts and corporate bonds. These                                                  by virtue of    *Important : In the
funds do not have any maturity date.                                              its set up      selection of a fund the
The fund would hold highly liquid                                                 structure)      manager will ensure
instruments and the Council’s                                                                     that the fund is not a
investment in these funds can be sold                                                             body corporate by
at any time.                                                                                      virtue of its set up
                                                                                                  structure
Sovereign issues ex UK govt gilts :     No         Yes          AAA               No              (1) Buy and hold to         30            10 years
any maturity                                                                                      maturity : to be used in-
                                                                                                  house after consultation/




                                                                                                                                                       Page 140
Custodial arrangement required prior                                                              advice from Sector
                                                                                                  (2) for trading : by
to purchase                                                                                       external cash fund
                                                                                                  manager(s) only subject
                                                                                                  to the guidelines and
                                                                                                  parameters agreed with
                                                                                                  them
2        Maturities in Excess of 1 Year
Investment                                Share/     Repayable/   Security /          Capital        Circumstance of use         Max % of     Maximum
                                          Loan       Redeemable   ‘High’ Credit       Expenditure?                               overall      period
                                          Capital?   within 12    Rating criteria                                                investment
                                                     months?                                                                     s
Term Deposits with UK Local               No         No           High security       No             In-house and by             50           5 years
Authorities (i.e. local authorities as                            although most                      external fund manager
defined under Section 23 of the 2003                              local authorities
Act) with maturities in excess of 1                               are not credit
year                                                              rated
Term deposits with credit rated           No         No           AA- long term       No             in-house and fund           50           5 years
deposit takers (banks and building                                F1+ short term                     managers
societies) with maturities greater than
1 year
Forward deposits with credit rated        No         No           AA- long term       No             To be used by fund          50           5 years
banks and building societies for                                  F1+ short term                     managers; to be used in-
periods > 1 year (i.e. negotiated deal                                                               house after consultation/
period plus period of deposit)                                                                       advice from Treasury
                                                                                                     Consultants.




                                                                                                                                                        Page 141
Page 142
                                    Page 143




                                                                   APPENDIX E2

                 TREASURY POLICY STATEMENT
The Council’s Treasury Management operations will include the raising of capital
finance, investment of surplus monies and managing cash flow both externally
and between the Council’s own funds.

CAPITAL FINANCING

The Capital Finance Requirements will in the foreseeable future be met from the
Public Works Loans Board after having regard to both current interest rate levels
and anticipated rate fluctuations.

The Council’s present debt structure and the low level of capital expenditure to
be financed from loan in the next few years makes it unlikely that other loan
instruments will be required. However, it may be that a straightforward long-term
loan is available from the Money Market at more advantageous terms. In these
circumstances this alternative which is in accordance with the requirements of
the Local Government Act 2003 will be considered. No other borrowing or off
balance sheet instruments will be used to raise capital finance without the prior
approval of the Section 151 Officer.

INVESTMENT OF SURPLUS MONIES

The Council’s practice for the investment of surplus funds is limited to the
following Institutions:-

•   Bank of England Authorised Institutions with a minimum credit rating of F1+
    (or equivalent) short term and AA- (or equivalent) long term at the time of
    dealing from any one of the major credit rating agencies.
•   The wholly owned subsidiaries of the UK clearing banks (subject to statement
    of support from the parent).
•   Building Societies with total assets over £400m.
•   Converted Building Societies with a minimum credit rating of A1 (or
    equivalent) short term and A+ (or equivalent) long term at the time of dealing
    from any one of the major credit rating agencies.
•   Nationalised Industries and other Public Corporations.
•   Central Government and UK Local Authorities.
•   Other Institutions as approved through the Annual Investment Strategy, in
    accordance with the Local Government Investment Regulations.

The strategy which has been implemented over many years is to maximise the
return on the investment of funds whilst having regard to the security of
investment; thus achieving optimum performance commensurate with the level of
risk. Investments are arranged in line with the Annual Investment Strategy under
                                Page 144




the heads of Specified and Non-Specified Investments, which details the
maximum maturity duration for each instrument, bearing in mind future cash flow
requirements and anticipated interest fluctuations. It is stressed that whilst
maximising income is the aim, the first priority is the preservation of the capital
value invested.

Having regard to the above criteria it follows that a spread of investments is
required to minimise the counterparty risk and therefore a maximum investment
at any one time with any one of the Institutions set out above is recommended.
The limit applied is as follows and it is recommended that the maximum applied
to each of the institutions be continued.

Authorised Institutions as above                         £5m
UK clearing banks wholly owned subsidiaries              £3m
Building Societies assets over £400m                     £3m
Converted Building Societies as above                    £3m
Nationalised Industries and other Public Corporations    £3m
Individual Local Authorities                             £3m
Central Government – Debt Management Account            £15m

The following matters are also brought to the Cabinet’s attention:

A     Policy on External Fund Manager

The Council will engage the services of professional external Fund Managers,
where appropriate, in order to maximise its lending and borrowing operations
whilst it is felt that there is added value of such appointments. Contracts will be
awarded in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. The Fund Manager’s
performance will be continually monitored throughout the contract period to
ensure compliance with the risk management controls incorporated into the
agreement.

B     Policy on Delegation

All executive decisions on borrowing, investment and financing shall be
delegated to the Strategic Director of Corporate Services and through him to
Officers in Financial Services who are required to act in accordance with CIPFA’s
Code for Treasury Management in Public Services, and other relevant
regulations. The system of internal check is structured so that Finance Officers
have to obtain independent authorisation before any transaction can be finalised.

C     Treasury Management Practices

The Strategic Director of Corporate Services will maintain Treasury Management
Practices (TMPs), which will set out the manner in which the Council will seek to
achieve and control its treasury management policies, objectives and activities.
                                  Page 145




The TMPs are working documents which assist in the identification, monitoring
and control of the risk associated with treasury management activities.

D     Review and Reporting Arrangements

The system and procedures for Treasury Management will be assessed and
reviewed on a regular basis. Any significant amendment will be reported to the
Cabinet as part of the Treasury Management Annual Out-turn Report.
Page 146
                                     Page 147




                                                                  APPENDIX F

                        PRUDENTIAL INDICATORS
Under the Prudential Regime, which has operated since April 2004, the Council
has the responsibility to demonstrate that its capital investment programme is
affordable, prudent and sustainable. The Prudential Code requires that this is
done by calculating specific affordability indicators for capital expenditure and
financing and by setting borrowing limits and indicators for treasury management.

Affordability Indicators

The indicators of affordability address the revenue implications of the Council’s
capital investment programme. These indicators, recommended for approval,
are set out in Bold in the following table.

                                2007/08     2008/09      2009/10     2010/11
                                Revised     Estimate     Estimate    Estimate
                                Estimate
                                 £000s       £000s        £000s       £000s
Opening Capital Finance
Requirement                       11,185       12,087      12,087       12,087

a) Capital Expenditure            25,596        7,668        4,874       2,108
Sources of finance:
Grants/other contributions       (18,313)     (3,274)      (2,082)        (593)
Reserves & capital receipts       (6,381)     (4,394)      (2,792)      (1,515)
b) Net Borrowing Indicator
and Closing Capital
Finance Requirement               12,087       12,087      12,087       12,087

c) Ratio of Financing Cost
to Net Revenue Stream              0.55%       0.72%        0.82%       0.92%

d) Incremental impact on
the Council Tax                                 £1.22        £2.44       £3.66

a) Capital Expenditure Indicator

The total amount of capital expenditure is the initial driver behind the cost of the
capital programme for Council Tax payers. This is therefore given as the first
indicator. The total cost falling on the Council Tax Payer is though, dependent on
the level of capital expenditure financed by grants and contributions. The Capital
Expenditure Indicator does not therefore by itself, indicate the cost of the Capital
Programme to Council Tax payers either in one year or over the course of the
Financial Strategy.
                                 Page 148




b) Net Borrowing and Capital Financing Requirement Indicators

Capital expenditure in excess of the financing provided by external grants or the
set-aside of reserves or capital receipts, increases the underlying need to
borrow. This underlying need is shown by the indicator, the Capital Financing
Requirement. The Capital Financing Requirement in turn determines the
minimum provision required in the Revenue Budget for repayment of borrowing.

The Capital Financing Requirement is predicted to rise by £0.902m during
2007/08. This reflects the equalisation of the borrowing requirement with actual
borrowing taken out in previous years.

The current level of borrowing (primarily for Coastal Protection) is ‘supported’ i.e.
largely matched by funding in the Revenue Support Grant. Any further borrowing
though is likely to be unsupported. For this reason, in order to stabilise the cost of
borrowing and minimise revenue pressures, the Council has determined to
support future capital investment by identifying matching financing from reserves
and capital receipts. This will stabilise the Capital Financing Requirement and the
related cost of borrowing.

The Council is required to ensure that over the medium term, borrowing will only
be for a capital purpose. This requirement is met by ensuring that actual
borrowing does not, except in the short term, exceed the capital financing
requirement in the preceding year plus estimates of the capital financing
requirement for the current and next two years. As borrowing is in line with the
Capital Financing Requirement, which will remain stable, this requirement is met.

c) Ratio of Financing Cost to Net Revenue Stream Indicator

The costs of borrowing and also the interest received from investments, except
where these are affected by short-term cash fluctuations, are determined by
decisions on past and future capital investment. The proportion of revenue grant
and council tax that is required to cover this net cost is measured by the
Prudential Indicator: Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue Stream. This ratio
is anticipated to increase gradually as cash investments are eroded as a
consequence of capital investment.

d) Incremental impact on the Council Tax Indicator

The Council’s approved capital strategy supports future capital investment by
identifying matching financing from reserves and capital receipts. The Strategy
as revised, requires a further contribution of £50,000 cumulatively per year over
the course of the next nine years. The Incremental Impact on the Council Tax
Indicator measures this in terms of the resulting additional cost each year to
Council Tax (Band D).
                                      Page 149




Borrowing Limits

The level of external debt is determined with reference to the net borrowing limit
(as above) but also by treasury and operational management decisions.
Borrowing Limits are set as a means of reviewing and controlling the amount of
borrowing that can be afforded at any time.

The Council is required to set an authorised limit, which is a self-imposed
maximum borrowing limit, and an operational boundary, which is an indicator to
focus day-to-day treasury management and ensure that the authorised limit is not
breached. The Authorised Limit reflects a level of borrowing which, while not
desired, could be afforded but might not be sustainable. The
operational boundary is a key management tool for in-year monitoring. A
separate limit is set for ‘other long term liabilities’ to recognise the other
alternatives to borrowing, such as finance leases, that could be used to finance
capital expenditure. At present the Council does not use such financing, but
setting a limit provides some flexibility to do so in the future, although this is not
presently planned. The recommended limit and operational boundary proposed
for the following three years are as follows:


 Limits and Boundaries         Authorised    Operational
 for 2008/09 – 2010/11           Limit        Boundary
 Borrowing                         18.0m         15.00m
 Other long term liabilities        0.5m          0.45m
 Total                             18.5m         15.45m


Treasury Management Indicators

The Treasury Management Indicators are set as a means of aiding a prudent
borrowing and investment strategy. The predominant indicator is that the Council
has adopted the CIPFA Code of Practice for Treasury Management in the Public
Services. The Code was adopted in 2002 and has been followed since then. The
Prudential Code further requires three specific indicators to be calculated each
year to set limits to the exposure to risk of additional costs that might arise from
treasury management. These indicators are outlined below.

Upper limits for interest exposure from use of fixed and variable interest
rates

The Council’s borrowing is all at fixed rate and the financial risk associated with
borrowing has been further reduced, by putting a restriction on any further
borrowing in the medium term (see above Capital Financing Requirement). The
risk from exposure to variable interest rates is therefore limited to investments
                                  Page 150




and any short term cash flow borrowing that may be necessary. Fixed rate
investments reduce uncertainty but the flexibility arising from variable rate
investments is advantageous and necessary for at least part of the investment
portfolio. The proposed upper limits for exposure calculated with respect to
projected interest receivable are:

 Upper Limits for interest rate      %
 exposure for 2008/9 –2010/11
 Upper limit - fixed rate            100
 Upper limit - variable rate          30

Upper and lower limits for the maturity structure of the Council’s debt for
the forthcoming year

The risk associated with the maturity structure of debt is dependent on whether
that structure might require an Authority to refinance debt at a time of volatile
interest rates. The risk associated with the present debt structure is low since no
borrowing is due to mature within 10 years. However, the following upper and
lower limits for maturity structure are proposed, to allow for some flexibility in
refinancing should this be a favourable option, while limiting maturity structure
risk.

 Maturity structure of debt for               Upper                 Lower
 forthcoming year                             Limit                 Limit
 Under 12 months                               50%                   0%
 12 months and within 24 months                50%                   0%
 24 months and within 5 years                  40%                   0%
 5 years and within 10 years                   40%                   0%
 10 years and above                           100%                   0%


Upper Limit for Total Principal Sums Invested Over 364 Days

The risk involved in being forced to realise an investment before maturity
increases with the investment term. The Council presently limits this risk by
limiting the term of any investment to under 364 days. It is, however, proposed to
set the following upper limit on sums invested over 364 days in order to give
some investment flexibility whilst limiting risk exposure.

 Total principal sum invested over 364 days
 Limit for 2008/09 – 2010/11                £3.0m
                                     Page 151




                                                                   APPENDIX G

                       RESERVES AND BALANCES
Introduction

The Council’s reserves and balances underpin the sustainability of both the
revenue and capital financial plans. This appendix provides guidance on what is
considered to be best practice for the level and utilisation of reserves and
balances

Guidance on Local Authority Reserves and Balances

When calculating their budget requirement the Local Government Finance Act
1992 requires Councils to have regard to their level of capital and revenue
reserves needed for meeting estimated future expenditure

The Strategic Director of Corporate Services, being the appointed Section 151
Officer, is required to advise the Council on the level of reserves it should hold in
order to ensure a sound financial standing, and also ensure that clear protocols
exist for their establishment and use. Clearly a well-managed Council, with a
prudent approach to budgeting, should be able to operate with a relatively low
level of General reserve. The Audit Commission is in turn required to review the
level of reserves and financial performance over a period of time. However, it is
not the responsibility of the auditor to prescribe an optimum or minimum level of
reserves.

The introduction of the Prudential Code for Capital Finance (The Code)
reinforces the safeguards for financial planning. The Code emphasises the
requirement to consider affordability when making decisions about the Council’s
future capital programme. The development of three-year revenue forecasts and
long term capital programme focus greater attention on the levels and application
of the Council’s Balances and Reserves.

A key issue of The Use of Resources Assessment, which the Council undergoes
on an annual basis, is how the Council reviews and re-prioritises its reserves.

Adequacy of the Council’s Reserves and Balances

In order to assess the adequacy of unallocated reserves the Council must take
into account the strategic, operational and financial risks that it will face in both
the long and short term.

For the last few years the Council has set a high-risk budget, characterised by
the budget being balanced by high levels of savings, significant changes in the
operation of the trading accounts, and budgets that include large levels of
                                Page 152




seasonal income that are heavily weather dependant. A reasonably high level of
reserves was preserved to mitigate these risks.

The development of the Financial Strategy and embedding of the Medium Term
Financial Plan and Risk Strategy allows the Council to be less cautious when
prescribing its minimum level of retained balances. However, it is proposed that
the criteria for the main corporate reserves remain unchanged to last year, as set
out below:

General Fund Balance               the balance be maintained within the range
                                   of £1.5m to £2.0m, plus transitional costing
                                   arising from the loss of the Property
                                   Services Contract

 Capital Contingency               The balance to be maintained within the
                                   range of £0.5m to £1.5m over time

 Insurance Reserve                 A minimum balance to be maintained in
                                   the medium term of £1.350m

 Pension Reserve                   the balance be maintained within the range
                                   of £0.1m to £0.5m

 Capital Development               The approved expenditure from the fund
                                   will match its resources over a 10 year
                                   planned period.

Any variance to these limits will be reported to Cabinet, who will consider the
required action. However, through effective management of resources the
intention is not to breach these criteria, with the exception of the Insurance
reserve, which following the funding issues associated with the Filey Flooding,
needs time to regain its minimum balance status

Summary of Reserves and Balances

To aid understanding of the many Council reserves they have been summarised
into the following three categories:

(a)       General Fund Balance
(b)       Corporate Reserves
(c)       Operational Reserves and Balances

(a) General Fund Balance

This Fund represents an accumulated working balance to meet future
contingencies. Members previously approved that the balance of this fund should
                                   Page 153




be maintained within the range £1.5m to £2.0m, plus an additional sum to
mitigate the transitional costing arising from the loss of the Property Services
Tender with Yorkshire Coast Homes (YCH).

The current balance on the General Fund is £2.38mm including £0.56m in
respect of the agreed transitional costs for mitigating the loss of the Property
Services contract with Yorkshire Coast Homes.

The 2008/09 budget does not require a draw from General Fund Balances and
therefore the net balance of £1.82m is within the predetermined criteria.

The Medium Term Financial Plan does not plan to draw any further monies from
the General Fund balance, except for the costs in relation to the YCH contract.

Yorkshire Coast Homes Contract

The initial estimate for the transitional costs associated with the loss of the
contract was £1m, with additional revenue growth built into the budget of £0.4m,
spread over 3 financial years.

In December 2006 the Borough Council received notice that it had also been
unsuccessful with its bid to retain the Gas Contract with Yorkshire Coast Homes,
creating an additional £78,000 burden within the budget.

Table 1 summarises the effect of these contract losses on the revenue budget,
taking into account the original approved growth of £0.4m. Subsequent growth of
£0.124m has needed to be included in the Medium Term Financial Plan in
2009/10 to accommodate the effects of these losses. Table 1 shows that the £1m
General Fund Balance set aside to cover the transitional costs will be sufficient

Table 1 - Cumulative Year on Year Costs

                               2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
                               £000’s £000’s £000’s £000’s £000’s
Revenue Base Shortfall b/f           -       -   (341)   (304)   (224)
Part Year Effect of Loss of
Property Services Contract                  (341)          -
Full Year Effect of Loss of
Property Services Contract                             (35)
Effect of Loss of Gas
Contract                                               (78)
Superannuation Costs                                              (70)
Approved Budget Provisions                              150       150       100
Further Growth Required                                                     124
Revenue Base Shortfall c/f            -     (341)     (304)     (224)         -
                                 Page 154




Table 2 – General Fund Balance Set Aside

                                2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
                                £000’s £000’s £000’s £000’s £000’s
Balance Brought Forward           1,000    900     559     255       31
One off Costs
Redundancy Provision               (100)
Revenue Base Shortfall                 -     (341)      (304)       (224)             -
Set aside Balance Available          900       559        255          31            31

(b) Corporate Reserves

Capital Development Reserve

The Capital Development Fund underpins the Capital Strategy. It unifies all
capital resources with the intention of focusing investment into priority areas over
the medium term. Table 3 shows how the Capital Development Fund will match
resources to investments over the 10-year period from 2007/08 to 2017/17.

Table 3 – Capital Development Fund 2007/08 to 2017/2017
                                                       £                     £
                                                      000                   000
Balance Brought Forward                                                       597
Transfers In
Revenue Contributions to Corporate Reserves          15,882
Revenue Contributions for Asset Management            3,450
Disabled Facility Grant                               2,530
LSVT Receipt                                          4,140
                                                                            26,002
Transfers Out
Capital Contingency Reserve                                     -1,500
Revenue Development Reserve                                       -500
Value for Money Reserve                                           -500
                                                                            -2,500
Anticipated Expenditure
Asset Management Capital Budgets                             -3,450
Mandatory Disabled Facility Grants                           -4,220
Vehicles Plant and Equipment                                -12,431
IT Replacement / Development                                 -3,500
                                                                         -23,601
Surplus                                                                      498
2007 Approved Schemes                                                     -2,522
Potential General Capital Receipts                                         2,485
Allocated Resources if Capital Receipts are achieved*                        461
                                     Page 155




* Equals approved Capital Expenditure shown in Appendix B

Capital Contingency Reserve

The Capital Contingency reserve is essential in the management of Capital
Resources.

There are two likely uses for the Capital Contingency Reserve.

   (iii)   it will provide a flexible and responsive resource to fund small-scale
           ad hoc capital schemes.

   (iv)    It will provide contingency funding for potential additional costs
           incurred on the existing capital programme.

Last years Financial Strategy reported the need to increase the balance on the
Capital Contingency Reserve to over £0.5m over time. This financial objective
has been met with the uncommitted balance on the Reserve currently standing at
£799,000. The Capital Contingency Reserve receives an annual revenue
contribution of £150,000.

Insurance Fund

The Insurance fund covers risks that are by their nature difficult to insure such as
cliff slippage and certain storm damage and risks that are generally uneconomic
to insure such as damage due to leakage from water pipes and the theft of small
items of equipment. The fund also meets the cost of some insurance excesses.

During July 2007 Filey suffered from a severe storm blocking access roads,
which affected approximately 100 properties. Cabinet exercised its right to
endorse emergency powers and approve the use of the Insurance Fund to meet
essential repairs and emergency works not covered by the Bellwin Scheme. The
report to Cabinet clearly pointed out that such a decision would breach the
minimum balance requirement of the Fund.

In addition, Cabinet on the 18 December 2007 recommended to Full Council the
use of the Insurance Fund (£85,000) to undertake remedial landslip works at the
rear of the Scarborough Spa

 These financial demands on the Insurance Fund amount to over £0.5m.
Assuming that there are no further incidents requiring major draws on the
reserve, the Medium Term Financial Plan aims to gradually build up the balance
on the Fund to £1.350m over the next 5 years.
                                 Page 156




Pension Fund

The balance on the Pension Fund is fully committed to cover the costs of the
Senior Management Restructure.

Phase 2 of the Corporate Efficiency Reviews plans to review the next tiers of
Management. It is anticipated that any savings taken as part of this review will be
calculated net of any associated term pension and redundancy costs. However,
the necessity to finance redundancy costs upfront will represent a further draw
from the pension reserve in the short term.

It is proposed that the criteria for the fund be unchanged but in the short term the
balance needs to be at the top end of its range (£0.5m). To do this it is
recommended that the anticipated savings in the current financial year that relate
to salary savings be transferred to the Pension Fund at the year-end.

Value for Money

The Value for Money Reserve was established as part of the 2006 Financial
strategy to provide a resource to support the efficiency agenda and to help
deliver more effective services. The value for Money Reserve receives an annual
revenue contribution of £50,000.

To date £350,000 commitments have been approved over a seven-year period.
The unallocated balance for 2008/09 is currently £111,000.

A request for further funding has been received for an additional contribution
towards the Ground Work Trust of £40,000 (over 5 years). The Council has
already approved a contribution to the Groundwork Trust of £65,000 from the
Value for Money Reserve (£60k core funding and £5k towards a feasibility study)

The Trusts Business Plan estimates that in 5 years time, its turnover will be
£1.5m per year and that it will have invested £4m in Community Development.

The Council has been asked to match fund contributions from Selby District
Council and North Yorkshire County Council (£20,000 per year for 5 years). The
monies will be used to establish a Groundwork office in Scarborough and to
appoint development workers. The Council’s Neighbourhood Regeneration Unit
will work in partnership with the Groundwork Development Officers to maximise
benefits for the local community

The proposed Invest to Save Schemes, as outlined in Appendix B, will be
managed through the Value for Money Reserve.
                                   Page 157




Revenue Development

The Revenue Development Reserve was established to fund small one off
revenue items. The uncommitted balance on the fund for 2008/09 is £108,000.

Bids have been proposed for funding to support essential services and functions
provided by the Council. These include:

Neighbourhood Regeneration £70,000 - The contracts for the 2
Neighbourhood Regeneration Officers run out in March 2008. This additional
funding would enable the contracts to be extended for a further year to 2009 and
this could be used to match fund Yorkshire Forward and European funding to
provide a 3-4 year programme of activity in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

Seafest £10,000 – In 2007/08 Seafest relied upon a £10,000 contribution from
the Revenue Development Reserve to ensure the festival could go ahead. A
similar sum is needed for 2008 should Members agree to proceed with the event.

Anti-Social Behaviour Officer £10,000 (part year) – The Value for Money
Reserve has funded the pilot of the Anti-Social Behaviour Post for 2 years with
funding running out in October 2008.

Funding for all these schemes can be met from the Revenue Development
Reserve for one year only. The remaining balance of the reserve would be
£18,000.

Should Members wish to continue to provide these services beyond 2009 then
sustainable funding needs to be considered through the Medium Term Financial
Planning processes.

Operational Reserves

There are no changes proposed to Operational Reserves. These reserves are
held for each Head of Service. The reserves primarily relate to accumulated
under spending that has been carried over to support known future operational
requirements, and to provide a working balance to equalise fluctuations in
seasonal income and expenditure. All transactions to and from these reserves
are subject to the approval and review of the Strategic Director of Corporate
Services, in accordance with the Council’s Financial Regulations, and the broad
Policy Framework. Any proposed use of the reserves not within the overall Policy
Framework would be reported to Cabinet/Council.
Page 158
                                      Page 159




                                                                                         APPENDIX H
                                     CAPITAL PROGRAMME 2007/08 - 2010/11
                                                Expenditure Profile                            Total
                                                to 31/03/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11    Cost
Building Prosperous Communities
Station Square Feasibility                                                25                        25
Rotunda Museum Development                            1,184    2,666      50                     3,900
Whitby Upper Harbour                                    601      513     907                     2,021
Green Lane Neighbourhood Centre                          60    1,284     160                     1,504
Spa Refurbishment - Reception completion                                          34                34
Shellfish Holding Facility (Whitby)                              302      28                       330
Scarborough Harbour Feasibility                                  100      25                       125
Marina On Shore Facilities                                                       375               375
Lobster Hatchery Feasibility Study                                                25                25
Business Park                                           484    9,142                             9,626
Creative Industries Centre Phases 1&2                 2,192    2,908                             5,100
Creative Industries Centre Phases 3&4                            850                               850
Sandside Environmental Improvements                   1,288    1,088                             2,376
Spa Technical Enhancements                            1,603       20                             1,623
Spa Building Refurbishment                            2,000      113                             2,113
Inner Harbour Pontoons                                  484         2                              486
Shellfish Holding Facility Feasibility (Whitby)          25         3                               28
Filey Caravan Site - Toilet Block                       178         5                              183
Whitby Beach Control Centre                             193      107                               300
Staithes Fishing Store                                   13         5                               18
Total                                                10,305   19,108   1,195     434       0    31,042
Healthy & Vibrant Communities
Evron Centre Concert Hall                                                 94                        94
Filey Multi Use Games Area                                               240                       240
Bankside Play Area                                                        60                        60
Lottery Fund Play Facilities                                             115                       115
Disabled Facilities/Home Renovation Grants                       853     823     422     422     2,520
Energy Grants (RegHousPot07/08)                                   72      72                       144
Energy Grants (RegHousPot06/07)                           5      123                               128
Whitby Skateboard Park                                   10      139                               149
Filey Sports Facilities Grant                                     20      80                       100
Rafters                                                  16       82                                98
Middle Deepdale Planning Application work                        190                               190
Total                                                    31    1,479   1,484     422     422     3,838
Safer & Stronger Communities
Eastfield Community Cafe                                          82                               82
Digital system improvements - CCTV Centre                        120                              120
Upgrade of PNC3 System in CCTV Centre                             54                               54
Cemetery Safety                                           5              141                      146
Total                                                     5      256     141       0              402
                                   Page 160




                                              Expenditure Profile                                   Total
                                              to 31/03/07 2007/08   2008/09    2009/10    2010/11   Cost
Creating Quality Environments
Glen & Crescent Gardens                                                 160                             160
Landslip at Crag Hall                                                   100                             100
Northstead shops parking bays                                            25                              25
Public conveniences                                                      50                              50
Olivers Mount/The Mere Section 106                                       52                              52
Royal Albert Park Phase 2                                     150       300                             450
Royal Albert Park Phase 3&4                                             505        505                1,010
Pannett Park                                                            829        829                1,658
Peasholm Park - Restoration Project                 516        28                                       544
Royal Albert Park - Phase 1                           1       214                                       215
Pannett Park Consultancy                              1       189                                       190
Sainsbury's Park Improvement Scheme                           160                                       160
St Nicholas Gardens Further Work                      90       25                                       115
Ayton Castle Stone Repairs Phase 1                    85        1                                        86
Ayton Castle Phase 2                                           84                                        84
Town Lighting                                                  36                                        36
Green Flag (Revenue from Capital Resources)                    10                                        10
Glen & Crescent Gardens Improvements                            3                                         3
South Cliff/Holbeck Gardens Shelters                 49        39                                        88
Total                                               742       939      2,021      1,334         0     5,036
Improving the Council
Dredger Pump                                                             56                              56
Disability Discrimination Act works                  120      198        41        274                  633
Town Hall Customer First Centre                    1,068        9                                     1,077
Recycling : Alternate weekly collection                       550                                       550
Recycling: Garden waste scheme                                410                                       410
Recycling: Sites and stations                                  31                                        31
On line bookings                                       6       18                                        24
PowerPerfector                                                 43                                        43
Total                                              1,194    1,259        97        274          0     2,824
                                          Page 161




                                               Expenditure Profile                                        Total
                                               to 31/03/07 2007/08       2008/09    2009/10    2010/11    Cost
Asset Management
Spa repairs & floor replacement                          100      206        142                              448
Peasholm Lighting Columns                                         150         21                              171
Whitby Pavilion Roof and Stone Restoration                                   110        107                   217
Scarborough Market Roof and Stone Restoration                                 93                               93
Scarborough Spa Energy Management                                            100                              100
Unallocated Asset Management                                                            348        547        895
South Cliff Lift                                           6      180                                         186
Scalby Viaduct                                             9       91                                         100
Whitby Spa Fire Alarm System                                       80                                          80
Scarborough Harbour - Steel Piling Inspection              2       48                                          50
Whitby Harbour - Steel Piling Inspection                   5       73                                          78
Hanover Road Purchase                                              22                                          22
Total                                                    122      850        466        455        547      2,440
Vehicle & Equipment Replacement
Vehicles, Plant & Equipment                                      1,204        837      1,552        866     4,459
IT Replacement and Development                                     350        942        350        350     1,992
Total                                                      0     1,554      1,779      1,902      1,216     6,451
Invest to Save
Attended Toilet Improvements                                      190                                        190
St Thomas St William St Toilets Demolition                         33                                         33
Video Conferencing                                                 32                                         32
Filey TIC/Cash Office Amalgamation                                 30                                         30
LED Strip Lighting - Peasholm Park                                 14                                         14
Total                                                      0      299          0          0                  299
Coast and Flood Protection and Repair
Filey flood remedial works                                        175        300                              475
Robin Hoods Bay Coastal Defence Strategy                           60         61                              121
Whitby Coastal Defence Strategy - Phase 2                         176        143                              319
NECAG Strategic Coastal Monitoring 2007-08                        200        126                              326
NECAG Strategic Coastal Monitoring 08-11                                     650        420        340      1,410
East Pier, Castle Headland & The Holms                 52,003     153                                      52,156
Shoreline Management Plan Review                          288       8                                         296
Scalby Ness Strategy                                      344      13                                         357
Scarborough Strategy: Holbeck to Scalby Mills             114      19                                         133
Strategic Coastal Monitoring                                       20                                          20
Total                                                  52,749     824       1,280       420        340     55,613

Total all                                              65,148   26,568      8,463      5,241      2,525   107,945

New schemes proposed in this Strategy are in italics
          Page 162




This page is intentionally left blank
                                       Page 163                Agenda Item 7

                                                                          ‘A’ ITEM

                                                       REPORT TO
                                                         Cabinet
                                                     TO BE HELD ON
                                                     22 January 2008

                                         Key Decision               YES

                                         Forward Plan Ref No


Corporate Priority                       Cabinet Portfolio          Cllr Chambers
                                         Holder
Improving the Council


REPORT OF:           HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES -
                     HLDS/08/04
WARDS AFFECTED: All

SUBJECT: MEMBERS’ ALLOWANCES

RECOMMENDATION (S):
To recommend that Council adopt the recommendations of the Independent
Remuneration Panel relating to members’ allowances which are:

   1. Elected Members be allowed to claim expenses for attendance at Area
      Forums if the council mandates that councillors attend the Area Forum
      meetings.

   2. The allowance of £255 per annum remain to all members to cover the cost of
      all telecommunications and Internet connections. Members holding
      positions which require mobile equipment due to their specific
      responsibilities should be identified in the scheme. The decision whether a
      position requires mobile equipment be made by the Chief Executive. When
      a member ceases to have the specific responsibility the equipment should
      be returned to the council.

   3. The scheme for special responsibility allowances to remain unchanged save
      that an allowance to cover chairing an Overview and Scrutiny Task and
      Finish Group meeting of £25/meeting be introduced.

   4. The basic allowance be revised to £3800 from April 2008. This allowance to
      be increased in future annually by the same rate as was applied to officer’s
      salaries. The multipliers used for positions of responsibility in the council to
      remain the same.


                                                                           HLDS/08/04
                                     Page 164



      5. The expenses rate for councillors should be amended to be the same as that
         for officers.

      6. Elected Members not be offered the right to join the council pension scheme.

      7. To agree that the additional costs of £15,000 be funded from service
         reserves in 2008/09, and that the costs for future years are agreed as a
         budget growth item.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
To ensure that Elected Members are not in a financially disadvantaged position
when they carry out their public duties.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
None

1.       INTRODUCTION
1.1      Local Authorities can only adopt amendments to their allowance schemes
         after considering recommendations made by an Independent Remuneration
         Panel. Local authorities must have regard to advice given by the Panel.

1.2      Local authorities must include in their scheme of allowances a basic
         allowance, payable to all members, and may include provision for the
         payment of special responsibility allowances.

1.3      The allowances which are or may be payable to elected members of local
         authorities are as follows:
         • basic allowance
         • special responsibility allowance
         • childcare and dependent carers' allowance
         • travel and subsistence allowances
         • conference and meetings allowance

1.4      The Independent Remuneration Panel for Scarborough Borough Council met
         on 20 December 2007 and the minutes of the meeting are attached as
         appendix A.

1.5      Comparative data from Harrogate Borough Council is appended at Appendix
         B.

1.6      The current rates are included at Appendix C.

2.       CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1      The Members Allowance provides individuals with some compensation for the
         financial losses that they incur when carrying out their role as a Councillor and



                                                                             HLDS/08/04
                                      Page 165


      thus ensures that members of the public are not discouraged from standing
      for public office. As such it meets all five aims of the council.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   Under the Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) Regulations 2003 a local
      authority may only adopt a members’ allowances schemes after considering
      recommendations from an Independent Remuneration Panel. The
      Independent Remuneration Panel for Scarborough Borough Council met on
      20 December 2007. They were asked to consider ten questions relating to
      members’ expenses. The minutes of that meeting are provided in Appendix A.

3.2   The Panel were provided with information about the allowances paid in
      Scarborough and those of comparative councils. They also took note of the
      Government Guidance in relation to Remuneration Panels that gave guidance
      on the Local Authorities (Members Allowances) Regulations 1991 No 351, the
      Local Authorities (Members Allowances) (Amendments) Regulations 1995 No
      553, and the Local Authorities (Members Allowances) (England) Regulations
      2001 No 1280.

3.3   The present scheme provides that the Basic Allowance for Members be
      increased annually. This sum was increased annually until 2006 when it was
      agreed that the arrangements be reviewed in accord with the Local
      Government Pay Award for officers.

3.4   The Regulations also provide that special responsibility allowances may be
      paid for special responsibilities within one or more of the following categories:
      • membership of the executive where the authority is operating executive
         arrangements
      • acting as leader or deputy leader of a political group within the authority
      • presiding at meetings of a committee or sub-committee of the authority, or
         a joint committee of the authority and one or more other authorities, or a
         sub-committee of such a joint committee
      • representing the authority at meetings of, or arranged by, any other body
      • membership of a committee or sub-committee of the authority which meets
         with exceptional frequency or for exceptionally long periods
      • acting as spokesperson of a political group on a committee or sub-
         committee of the authority
      • such other activities in relation to the discharge of the authority's functions
         as require of the member an amount of time and effort equal to or greater
         than would be required of him by any one of the activities mentioned
         above whether or not that activity is specified in the scheme.

3.5   The current scheme does not presently provide for the payment of expenses
      for attendance at Area Forum meetings. The panel were asked to consder
      payment of expenses to councillors attending these meetings in recognition of
      their role as Community Leaders.




                                                                          HLDS/08/04
                                  Page 166


3.6   The recommendations of the Panel have been included in this report.

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   An Independent Panel at a meeting on 20 December 2007 produced the
      recommendations on the Allowances paid to Elected Members.

5.    ASSESSMENT
5.1   The Independent Remuneration Panel were asked to consider the following
      ten questions:

      1. Should members receive expenses for attending Area Forum meetings?
      2. Should there be a deduction from a member’s allowance for non-
          attendance at meetings?
      3. Should there be a change to the allowance members receive for Internet
          access and telephones?
      4. Should the allowance scheme be amended to special responsibility
          allowance for members who were identified to Champion issues within the
          authority?
      5. Should the allowance scheme be amended to provide for a special
          responsibility allowance to reflect the work involved for members who were
          part of an Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Group?
      6. Should two special responsibility allowances be paid to members who
          fulfilled more than one role?
      7. Should the allowance scheme generally be increased in line with the
          government pay award?
      8. Should the member’s expenses be aligned to that for officers so that both
          Elected Members and officers were able to claim the same amounts in
          expenses?
      9. Should members be allowed to join the final salary pension scheme?
      10. Should members be allowed to claim a carer’s allowance?

5.2   Question 10 was deferred for until the next meeting in order that further
      information could be provided. The Panel considered the rest of the questions
      and their recommendations have been included in the recommendations in
      this report.

6.    IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Financial - The current scheme of allowances is within the Council’s budget.
      It would be proposed that any changes to the scheme be brought in with
      effect from 1 April 2008 and the financial implications be considered within the
      budget report to Council on 25 February 2008. At present no increase other
      than an inflationary increase to the allowances in the current scheme is
      provided for and therefore were increases recommended, consideration would
      need to be given to how this could be funded. The consequences of the
      proposals put forward by the Independent Remuneration Panel would result in
      an increase of £15,000 beyond current provision in the budget. In 2008/9 the



                                                                         HLDS/08/04
                                       Page 167


      increase can be met from reserves, however, in subsequent years this would
      be a growth item on the annual budget.

6.2   I have considered whether Staffing Implications, Planning Implications, Crime
      and Disorder Implications, Health and Safety implications, Environmental
      implications arise from this report and I am satisfied that there is no identified
      implication that will arise from this decision

7.    ACTION PLAN
7.1   If approved by Cabinet these recommendations will go to full Council on 25
      February 2008.




Ian Anderson
Head of Legal and Democratic Services


Author: Gill Wilkinson
Telephone No: 01723 232303
E-mail address: gill.wilkinson@scarborough.gov.uk


Background Papers: None

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT Gill Wilkinson on 01723
232303 e-mail gill.wilkinson@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                                           HLDS/08/04
Page 168




           HLDS/08/04
                                           Page 169


                                                                             Appendix A
                       INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL

                   At a meeting held on Thursday, 20 December, 2007
                                        Present:-
          The Very Reverend J. Allen (Chairman), Mr I Anderson and Mr P Ingham



1.   DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
     Mr Ian Anderson FCA, A.Inst.M, declared a Personal interest in agenda item 3,
     Independent Remuneration Panel - Review of Allowances, as he was a Risk
     Champion for the Audit Committee.

2.   MINUTES
     The minutes of the meeting held on 7 September 2006 were agreed as correct and
     signed by Reverend Allen, who was appointed Chair of the meeting.

3.   INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL - REVIEW OF ALLOWANCES
     The Panel considered the report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services on
     the review of allowances for Elected Members. The Panel were informed that there
     were ten questions that they needed to consider.
     These were:

     1.  Should members receive expenses for attending Area Forum meetings?
     2.  Should there be a deduction from a member’s allowance for non-attendance at
         meetings?
     3. Should there be a change to the allowance members receive for Internet
         access and telephones?
     4. Should the allowance scheme be amended to special responsibility allowance
         for members who were identified to Champion issues within the authority?
     5. Should the allowance scheme be amended to provide for a special
         responsibility allowance to reflect the work involved for members who were part
         of an Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Group?
     6. Should two special responsibility allowances be paid to members who fulfilled
         more than one role?
     7. Should the allowance scheme generally be increased in line with the
         government pay award?
     8. Should the member’s expenses be aligned to that for officers so that both
         Elected Members and officers were able to claim the same amounts in
         expenses?
     9. Should members be allowed to join the final salary pension scheme?
     10. Should members be allowed to claim a carer’s allowance?

     The Panel considered each question in turn and gave the following
     recommendations:

     Should members receive expenses for attending Area Forum meetings?
     The panel considered this question carefully and noted that the basic allowance for
     members included an allowance for them attending meetings within their ward. A


                                                                             HLDS/08/04
                                   Page 170


part of their role as a councillor was to act as a community leader and attend
meetings. However it was acknowledged that the Area Forum meetings were part of
the Local Strategic Partnership and that it was government policy that councils
worked in partnership with other organisations. Thus the panel recommended that
Elected Members be allowed to claim expenses for attendance at Area Forums
if the council mandates that councillors attend the Area Forum meetings.

Should there be a deduction from a member’s allowance for non-attendance at
meetings?
Panel members considered this was a matter of party discipline and there should not
be deduction for non-attendance at meetings. It was considered to be unfair to
councillors who volunteered to sit on several committees and could have the effect of
discouraging councillors from putting themselves forward for committees. The panel
further noted that members’ attendance record at meetings was now published on
the council’s website. The panel recommended that non-attendance at meetings
be addressed by Group Leaders within political groups.

Should there be a change to the allowance members receive for internet access and
telephones?
The panel heard that members currently receive an allowance of £255 per annum if
they arrange their own Internet connection. This was reduced if the Council paid for
the Internet connection. The panel thought that the allowance should be the same for
all members and that the council should not be involved in arranging Internet
connections. The sum of £255 was considered to be more that adequate as prices
for all forms of telecommunication were reducing.
It was noted that due to historical factors some councillors received payment for
faxes and/or mobile telephones. The panel recommended that the allowance of
£255 per annum be given to all members to cover the cost of all
telecommunications and Internet connections. Members who required
additional mobile equipment due to their specific responsibilities should be
identified in the scheme and the decision whether a member requires the
equipment should be made by the Chief Executive. When a member ceases to
have the specific responsibility the equipment should be returned to the
council.

Should the allowance scheme be amended to reflect the responsibility members had
as Champions?
The panel were informed that under the Key Lines of Enquiry the council was
assessed on certain standards, these included acting as a Champion on issues that
affected the authority. The panel discussed this and considered that championing an
issue was part of the role that every member should be prepared to undertake. It
was noted that under the legislation, special responsibility allowances were provided
for a minority of circumstances, as follows:
•    membership of the executive where the authority is operating executive
     arrangements
•   acting as leader or deputy leader of a political group within the authority
•   presiding at meetings of a committee or sub-committee of the authority, or a joint
    committee of the authority and one or more other authorities, or a sub-committee
    of such a joint committee


                                                                           HLDS/08/04
                                       Page 171


•   representing the authority at meetings of, or arranged by, any other body
•   membership of a committee or sub-committee of the authority which meets with
    exceptional frequency or for exceptionally long periods
•   acting as spokesperson of a political group on a committee or sub-committee of
    the authority
•   such other activities in relation to the discharge of the authority's functions as
    require of the member an amount of time and effort equal to or greater than
    would be required of him by any one of the activities mentioned above whether
    or not that activity is specified in the scheme.
The panel considered that the increased workload of councillors would be better
covered by consideration of the basic allowance for every councillor.
Therefore the panel recommended that Elected Members do not receive a
special responsibility allowance when appointed a Champion.

Should the allowance scheme also be amended to reflect the work involved for
members who were part of an Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Group?
The panel felt that this issue was similar to the question of whether members should
receive a special responsibility allowance for being a Champion. The panel debated
the potential inequity if some members participated in several task and finish groups
while others did not. The panel concluded that this issue was a matter for the
Leadership of each group to ensure that work was divided fairly between members.
It was noted that the special responsibility allowance scheme was for members who
carried a continuing responsibility, rather than a short term role. The panel
recommended that Elected Members did not receive a special responsibility
allowance for members who were part of an Overview and Scrutiny Task and
Finish Group. It was acknowledged however, that the chairs of such groups carried
a particular responsibility. It was noted that the Harrogate scheme provided a
£25/meeting allowance for the chair. It was recommended that an allowance to
cover chairing a meeting of £25/meeting be considered.

Should two special responsibility allowances be paid to members who fulfilled more
than one role?
The panel were informed that it had been suggested that the arrangement under
which the Council paid the highest responsibility allowance be reviewed, and
consideration given to paying a member for each special responsibility allowance. It
was considered that the approach adopted by the Council of providing an allowance
based on applying a multiplier to the role undertaken by the member which carried
the highest multiplier would not allow for such an approach. The scheme would
need to be amended in its entirety, in any event by increasing the basic allowance
the multiplier would generate a significant enhancement to those carrying a special
responsibility allowance. The panel therefore recommended that the scheme for
special responsibility allowances remain unchanged.

Should the allowance scheme generally be increased in line with the government
pay award?
The panel were informed that the work level for Elected Members has increased
generally. The panel debated the level of allowance and agreed that this should be
enough so that a person can carry out the duties of a councillor without being


                                                                           HLDS/08/04
                                  Page 172


penalised financially. However the role was not a salaried one. It was noted that the
basic allowance for councillors in Harrogate Borough Council was £3939.96,
although there were other district councils that paid less than this as a basic
allowance.
The panel recommended that the basic allowance should reflect the increased
workload for and expectations upon councillors and thus recommended a basic
allowance of £3800 from April 2008. This allowance to be increased in future
annually by the same rate as was applied to officer’s salaries. The multipliers
used for positions of responsibility in the council to remain the same.

Should the member’s expenses be aligned to that for officers so that both Elected
Members and officers were able to claim the same amounts in expenses?
The panel discussed this issue and agreed that it was not sensible for councillors
and officers to have two different rates of payment for expenses.
The panel therefore recommended that the expenses rate for councillors
should be amended to be the same as that for officers.

Should members be allowed to join the final salary pension scheme?
The panel discussed this issue and noted that the allowances paid to councillors
were to cover expenses and were not a salary. Pensions were a deferred salary and
would require a contribution from the council of an additional 19% above what
councillors currently received. It was considered inequitable to offer a pension for
some members but not others.
The panel stated that they would only consider providing pensions, if this was
available to all members. Additionally the increase in council contributions would
need to be met by a compensating reduction in the basic allowance and the panel
believed it was better to provide a reasonable basic allowance.
Thus the panel recommended that pensions were not offered to Elected
Members.

Should members be allowed to claim a carer’s allowance?
The panel considered this but felt that they would require further information upon
best practice and on what other councils offered to Elected Members. Therefore they
asked that this item be deferred until the next meeting.




                                                                          HLDS/08/04
                                    Page 173


                                                                  Appendix B

                                  Part 6

              Members' Allowances Scheme


This scheme of allowances was introduced by the Council on 10
November 2003. The scheme complies with Regulation 3 of the
Local Authorities (Members' Allowances)(England) Regulations
2003 in that it has regard to the recommendations of an
Independent Remuneration Panel. The panel is appointed and its
terms of reference determined by the Council’s Audit Committee.

The recommendations of the panel have been accepted by the
Council.
The scheme provides for the following payments:



              Responsibility                 Allowance      Value (£)

Leader                                       Basic x 4        14,000.64
Group Leader*                                Basic x 1.5       5,250.24
Cabinet Member                               Basic x 2         7000.32
Planning and Development Committee Chair     Basic x 1.8       6,300.29
Scrutiny Committee Chair                     Basic x 1.66      5,810.28
Audit Committee Chair                        Basic x 1.66      5,810.28
Human Resources Committee Chair              Basic x 1.66      5,810.28
Licensing Committee Chair                    Basic x 1.66      5,810.28
Standards Committee Chair                    Basic x 0.66      2,310.12
Area Committee Chair                         Basic x 1.33      4,655.28
All other Members – Basic                    Basic x 1         3,500.16




                                                                  HLDS/08/04
Page 174




           HLDS/08/04
                                      Page 175


                                                                        Appendix C

Harrogate Borough Council 2006/7 Allowances

Basic allowance of elected members £3939.96
Basic allowance for Independent members of the Standards Committee £1250.04.
Councillors also received £240 IT allowance

The special responsibility allowances for Harrogate Councillors are added to the
basic allowance. The additional sums are:

1. Leader of Council £12,800
2. Deputy Leader £6400
3. Cabinet member £4270
4. Opposition Group Leaders
   • Leader of a Group with 2-10 Members £1280
   • Leader of a Group with 11+ Members £2130
5. Chair of Planning £4270
6. Vice Chair of Planning and all members of Planning £840
7. Chair of Scrutiny £840
8. Chair of Standards £840
9. Chair of Licensing £2820
10. Members of Licensing £620

Chairing Allowance
£25 for chairing an ad-hoc Committee.
£50 per meeting can be claimed for chairing a sub-committee meeting of Standards




                                                                        HLDS/08/04
          Page 176




This page is intentionally left blank
                                        Page 177                Agenda Item 8

                                                  REPORT TO CABINET

                                                      TO BE HELD ON

                                                      22 January 2008

                                          Key Decision               No

                                          Forward Plan Ref No        N/A

Corporate Priority:                       Cabinet Portfolio          Cllr A
Creating Quality Environments             Holder                     Backhouse


REPORT OF HEAD OF ENGINEERING AND HARBOUR SERVICES -
HEngH/08/05

WARDS AFFECTED: FILEY

SUBJECT: PROGRESS REPORT ON FILEY FLOODING ISSUES

RECOMMENDATION(S):
Cabinet is recommended to:

i.     note the actions being taken by the Borough Council and Yorkshire Water
       and the progress in achieving long term solutions to the risk of flooding
       issues at Filey;

ii.    to agree a capital budget in the sum of £188,000 funded 100% from the
       Environment Agency (EA)/ Defra to allow further studies to be progressed to
       enable sustainable flood alleviation measures to be developed;

iii.   note that tenders have been received from consultants on the Council’s
       framework contract for the ground investigations and design of remedial
       works for the areas of slope instability at (a) Martins Ravine; (b) rear of
       Royal Parade Chalets; and (c) Crescent Hill, Filey. These tenders are
       currently under analysis and details will be reported to Cabinet; and

iv.    note the findings of the recent “Pitt Report” into the flooding events in
       England in 2007 and refer this to the Corporate Strategy & Scrutiny
       Committee for monitoring in terms of local issues; and

v.     request that further progress reports be provided in due course of the
       various issues raised in this report.




                                                                           HEngH/08/05
                                   Page 178


REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
To acquaint Members with the issues relating to the risk of flooding in Filey and
associated actions.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
The principal risk identified in this report is the continued adverse impacts of storm
events on parts of Filey. See also Appendix A to this report.


1.     INTRODUCTION
1.1    Members will recall the report to Cabinet on 16 October 2007 (ref.
       HEngH/07/62) sought funding approval to undertake investigations in the
       areas of coastal slope instability which resulted from the intensive period of
       extremely heavy rainfall on Filey town on 18 July 2007. The report also
       sought Member approval for Officers to approach the EA for funding to
       undertake further studies to enable flood alleviation measures to be
       developed. One of the purposes of this report is to provide Cabinet with an
       update on the progress of the issues and actions contained within the report
       HEngH/O7/62.

1.2    The report will also:

       •      Summarise the Borough Council’s other actions being implemented to
              help mitigate against the flooding risk to properties in Filey (and other
              parts of the Borough)

       •      Provide an update on progress of the work undertaken by partners on
              the Filey Flood Working Group, in particular those undertaken by
              Yorkshire Water

       •      Provide the outcome of the Planning Appeal for the proposed housing
              site off Muston Road, Filey

       •      Outline the recommendations of the recently published flooding report
              by Sir Michael Pitt. This interim report is an independent review by
              Government to learn lessons from the flooding events across the UK in
              the summer of 2007

2.     CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1    The recommendations of this report support the objectives of the Borough
       Council of looking after the well-being of the Borough and creating quality
       environments.




                                                                          HEngH/08/05
                                      Page 179


3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   It is now well established that historically Filey has experienced flooding to
      varying degrees since the 1980’s and since 2000 more significant flooding
      events have occurred almost on an annual basis.

3.2   Following the July 2007 flooding, a survey was commissioned by the Filey
      Flood Working Group (FFWG). This revealed the following headline facts:

      •      112 properties flooded inside house and under the floor
      •      99 properties flooded inside house and above the floor
      •      212 garages flooded
      •      298 driveways flooded
      •      279 reports of flooding of roads
      •      59 conservatories flooded
      •      417 gardens flooded
      •      284 reports of flooding of footpaths

3.3   In brief summary there are four principal locations of concern. These are at:

      •      North Filey (Filey Beck)
      •      Long Plantation Watercourse
      •      Wharfedale Estate
      •      Muston Road

      Further details of the problems at these 4 principal locations was provided in
      the previous report to Cabinet.

3.4   In addition to the drainage problems the coastal slopes at Filey suffered
      significant land instability problems. These slopes consist of glacial deposits
      which are susceptible, to varying degrees, to the impact of water which can
      trigger slope erosion and failures.

3.5   Whilst some private lands suffered instability, e.g. to the rear of the Beach, the
      majority of the land affected in this way is in Borough Council ownership.
      These sites are at:

      •      Martin’s Ravine
      •      Rear of Royal Parade Chalets
      •      Crescent Hill
      •      Private Walk (Crescent Gardens)
      •      Coble Landing
      •      Arndale

      Details of the problems at these sites were also provided in the previous
      report to Cabinet.

3.6   On 5 July 2007 the Borough Council’s Planning & Development Committee
      rejected a planning application for proposed 300 new homes off Muston


                                                                          HEngH/08/05
                                  Page 180


      Road, Filey. The developer appealed against the decision. The Planning
      Inspectorate held the Appeal at the Evron Centre on 13/14 November 2007.

3.7   Following serious flooding across parts of England in 2007 (including Filey) an
      independent review was commissioned by the Government to learn lessons
      from the experiences of the flooding. This review was lead by Sir Michael Pitt.

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   Engagement with key stakeholders and the community of Filey, including
      Ward Members, has been ongoing for several years about flooding issues.
      On 10/11/12 September 2007 a 3 day flood surgery held at the Evron Centre
      allowed much exchange of views in connection with the flooding risk and
      slope instability issues at Filey. This was facilitated in no small measure by
      the good work of the FFWG. So far as the land instabilities are concerned
      liaison with interested parties has taken place. The results of the
      questionnaire (referred to in section 3.2 above) to residents in Filey following
      the July 2007 storm event revealed the extent to which properties were
      affected by the July 2007 flooding.

4.2   Following the work outlined in this report, further stakeholder engagement will
      take place.

4.3   It is understood that separate consultations have been carried out by
      Yorkshire Water as part of their proposed works at the Wharfdale Estate.

4.4   It is also noted that following a request from Government, Caroline Flint,
      Minister for Yorkshire and Humberside, visited Filey on 10 January 2008 to
      gain first hand knowledge of the issues and problems at Filey, particularly as
      to how it suffered during the July 2007 flooding. This visit, in addition to an
      earlier visit by the Duke of Gloucester on 5 September 2007, has helped to
      raise the profile of Filey's issues.

5.    ASSESSMENT
5.1   Response to July 2007 Flooding

5.1.1 Final costs are still being determined for the Council’s emergency response
      and clean up works following the 18 July 2007 flooding incident and an
      application for funding under the Government’s Bellwin Scheme is being
      progressed. Total costs for the first response to the incident (sand bags,
      labour, general clean up including the clearing of watercourses blocked by the
      event, etc) and urgent repairs to flood damage to Arndale Ravine, Crescent
      Gardens adjacent to Private Walk, etc are in the order of £160,000. It is
      hoped that the Government Office will reimburse the majority of these costs.
      Although it would not comply with the current criteria for funding through the
      Bellwin scheme, officers are attempting to make a case to demonstrate the
      eligibility for funding to undertake remedial works to the various other slope
      instabilities. If successful this will allow these works to be funded by Bellwin



                                                                         HEngH/08/05
                                      Page 181


      and hence funding from the Council’s Insurance fund previously requested
      would not be required.

5.2   The Pitt Review

5.2.1 Following serious flooding across parts of England in 2007 an Independent
      Review was commissioned by the Government to learn lessons from the
      experiences of the flooding. This Review was chaired by Sir Michael Pitt.
      The Review’s interim report was published on 17 December 2007 has three
      main objectives, namely:

      •      To identify issues regarding urgent action
      •      To set out the direction for the remainder of the review
      •      To provide a document for consultation prior to publication of the final
             report in the Summer of 2008

      The interim recommendations of the Pitt Review, as summarised by the Local
      Government Association’s Briefing Note are included in an appendix to this
      report.

5.2.2 The Borough Council will want to reflect upon these and will be proactive in
      meeting other agencies to determine how best to implement the
      recommendations in the context of local circumstances. It is therefore
      considered prudent to refer this matter to the relevant Overview and Scrutiny
      Committee for monitoring and action planning.

5.3   Remedial works to Coastal slope instabilities

5.3.1 Following approval at the previous Cabinet, a consultant’s brief was prepared
      and negotiations are currently progressing to appoint a consultant from the
      Borough Council’s consultancy framework to undertake investigations and
      design appropriate remedial measures. Further details will be provided
      verbally at the Cabinet meeting.

5.4   Muston Road Housing Development

5.4.1 Members will recall that in July 2007 the Council’s Planning and Development
      Committee rejected a planning application for the proposal for 300 houses to
      the site off Muston Road, Filey. The developer appealed against the decision
      and the planning appeal was duly held on 13/14 November 2007 at the Evron
      Centre, Filey with representations by officers. The Council’s technical expert
      witness, Ward Member and representatives of local residents. The decision
      subsequently made by the Planning Inspector is that the development may
      proceed subject to a number of conditions, one of which place an onus on the
      developer to design the site drainage to a 1 in 100 year design standard and
      not to the 1 in 30 year design standard which is generally accepted as the
      industry norm.




                                                                         HEngH/08/05
                                     Page 182


5.5    Improvements to Yorkshire Water Sewers

5.5.1 Prompted by the work of the FFWG, Yorkshire Water have agreed to
      undertake improvements to the public sewers in the Wharfdale Estate area.
      These works are scheduled to be completed by May 2008. When completed
      this will reduce the risk of surface water flooding in the Wharfdale Estate area
      by the provision of increased storm water storage capacity into the Yorkshire
      Water drainage system.

5.5.2 This is the first phase of improvements which Yorkshire Water are considering
      in Filey and are to be welcomed.

5.5.3 In addition to the above, Borough Council Officers have taken the lead and
      are to host an Officers meeting on 1 February 2008 to address a number of
      outstanding issues in Filey relating specifically to the July 2007 flooding of the
      recent housing developments at Coxswain Close/Seadale.

5.6    Filey Flood Alleviation Study.

5.6.1 An application for funding was made to the Environment Agency to undertake
      further studies to supplement the earlier Atkins study and embrace the
      additional information and experience from the July 2007 flood event.
      Amongst other elements the new study will include topographic surveys, flow
      monitoring, soil investigations, ground modelling, the enhancement of the
      existing hydraulic model for the town, development of solution options and
      preferred options taking cognizance of environmental and economic factors.
      The study will incorporate public exhibitions and consultation to keep
      residents and stakeholders engaged in the process.

5.6.2 Although at the time of writing this report formal confirmation has yet to be
      received from EA, Officers have had informal discussions with the EA and the
      indications are that £30,000 is likely to be confirmed shortly for 2007/08 and
      the remaining sum allocated for 2008/09. Progress on this study will proceed
      as soon as formal approval is received

6.     IMPLICATIONS
       (a)    Policy

6.1    There are no policy implications arising from this report.

       (b)    Finance

6.2    The following table illustrates the financial implications:

        Martins Ravine - Slope           Est £200,000      Approved to be funded
        Instability remedial works                         from SBC Insurance Fund
        Rear of Royal Parade             Est £240,000      Approved to be funded
        Remedial works to slope                            from SBC Insurance Fund
        instability


                                                                          HEngH/08/05
                                      Page 183


       Martins Ravine - Slope          Est £200,000     Approved to be funded
       Instability remedial works                       from SBC Insurance Fund
       Crescent Hill Remedial           Est £25,000     Approved to be funded
       works to slope Instability                       from SBC Insurance Fund
       Consultant fees and GI             To be         Cost included within the
       works                            determined      sums approved above

       Filey Flood Alleviation           £188,000       Awaiting confirmation from
       Study                                            EA for funding. Note
                                                        funding will be 100% grant
                                                        aided

      (c)    Risk

6.3   The risks are set out in the attached Appendix A.

      (d)    Legal

6.4   There are no legal issues arising from this report.

      (e)    Environmental and Sustainable Development

6.5   It is not envisaged that the proposed investigation and design work will
      adversely impact on the environment. Any proposed invasive work will have
      to have regards to health and safety and other legislation. When completed,
      the schemes will help enhance and sustain the local environment.

      (f)    Others

6.6   I have considered whether the following implications arise from this report and
      am satisfied that there is no identified implication that will arise from this
      decision to process with the investigation and design work:

      Equalifies and Diversity
      Staffing
      Planning
      Crime and Disorder

7.    ACTION PLAN
7.1   Submit provisional bids to Capital Strategy Group for        September 2007
      works to coastal slopes (Complete)

      Report to Cabinet on progress on flooding issues             October 2007
      (Complete)

      Appoint consultants and a contractor to undertake            January 2008
      investigations and design to coastal site




                                                                       HEngH/08/05
                                 Page 184


      Report to Cabinet on the outcome of bid to EA                January 2008
      regarding watercourse study

      Consider recommendations of Pitt Review interim report       January 2008
      with others and participate with other agencies in drawing   onwards
      up any necessary Action Plan

      Complete investigations and design to coastal sites          April 2008

      Report to Cabinet on design and costings for coastal         May 2008
      sites including negotiations of programme and costs
      with the selected contractor




J Riby
Head of Engineering and Harbour Services
Author:            Neil Corrie
Telephone No:      01723 232460
Fax No:            08701913997
E-mail address:    neil.corrie@scarborough.gov.uk

Background Papers:
None




11 January 2008




                                                                      HEngH/08/05
                 Page 185




               Appendix A

             The Pitt Review

Local Government Association Briefing Note




                                             HEngH/08/05
Page 186




           HEngH/08/05
                               Page 187


                             Appendix B


Muston Road Housing Development – Planning Inspectors Decision Notice.




                                                           HEngH/08/05
Page 188




           HEngH/08/05
                                                                Risk Matrix

       Issue/Risk                Consequences if          Likelihood   Impact          Mitigation           Mitigated     Mitigated
                                allowed to happen                                                          Likelihood      Impact

Schemes carried out so       Borough Council funding      Not Likely    Major   Ensure Bellwin scheme      Not Likely       Minor
far do not attract Bellwin   will be necessary in the                           administrators are fully
funding                      sum of £125,000                                    acquainted


Site investigation,          Cost of site investigation     Likely      Major   Work with consultant and     Likely        Medium
impacts of weather and       increases and cost of                              contractor to mitigate
ground conditions            works increases                                    against cost increases




                                                                                                                                      Page 189
Budget estimate              Scheme exceeds                 Likely      Major   Work with consultant and   Not Likely      Medium
exceeded                     available budget                                   contractor to mitigate
                                                                                against cost increases


Defra/EA grant not           No progress without            Likely      Major   Submit grant application     Likely        Medium
forthcoming for              alternative funding                                in a form to maximise
watercourse study                                                               opportunity


Yorkshire Water              Flooding continues in          Likely      Major   Support Yorkshire Water      Likely        Medium
sewerage improvements        certain areas of Filey                             in its efforts to secure
not carried out              under storm conditions                             funding




                                                                                                                      HEngH/08/05
       Issue/Risk               Consequences if         Likelihood   Impact           Mitigation         Mitigated     Mitigated
                               allowed to happen                                                        Likelihood      Impact

Not able to negotiate an    Budget would be               Likely     Major    Adopt NEC Option 3 form     Likely        Medium
acceptable programme        exceeded                                          of contract and early
and contract sum with                                                         contractor involvement
the delivery team                                                             philosophy

                                                                              Third party audit of
                                                                              process


Slope stability works not   Deterioration in site         Likely     Major    Implement works           Not Likely       Minor




                                                                                                                                   Page 190
carried out                 conditions

                            Loss of revenue to local
                            economy

                            Loss of reputation to the
                            Borough Council




                                                                                                                   HEngH/08/05
                                            Page 191




                                                                                         234
Flooding Lessons Learned Interim Report
17 December 2007
1. Introduction
Sir Michael Pitt’s Interim Report on the floods this summer aims to identify the
lessons to be learned and to make recommendations to help the country adapt to
and respond more effectively in any future flooding emergency. The Interim Report
was published on 17 December and a Final Report is expected next summer.

The floods this summer affected nearly 50,000 homes and 7,000 businesses, as well
as schools, roads and hospitals in more than 80 local authorities. They caused 14
deaths, trauma and disruption to many thousands of people and billions of pounds
of damage. Local authorities were in the forefront of the response and recovery
operations and are continuing to provide essential support to affected communities.




                                                                                                        briefing
Much of the flooding this summer was due to drains and sewers being unable to
cope with sudden and extreme rainfall. Responsibility for the drainage system is
shared by a number of organisations and owners, with no overall strategic planning,
control, duty to co-operate or agreed standards of maintenance. The Environment
Agency has developed detailed flood risk maps for coastal and river flooding, but
there are no similar maps available for surface water flooding.

2. Background
The Government set up a Flooding Lessons Learned Review in August, led by Sir
Michael Pitt, to examine the emergency response and how to reduce the risk and
impact of flooding in the future. It sought views from those involved in the floods:
affected residents, businesses, emergency services, professional associations and
local authorities. The LGA has been in close contact with affected authorities and the
Flood Review team and will continue this liaison during 2008, to feed into the Final
Report. The Interim Report and information about the Pitt Review is available on:
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/thepittreview .

3. Findings and Recommendations
The Report analyses the response of the emergency services, local authorities and
public and regulatory bodies to the summer floods. It places the flooding firmly
within the context of climate change and the increased likelihood of more extreme
                                                                                          Local Government House, Smith Square, London SW1P 3HZ




weather, which we will all need to plan for and adapt to. The Report says that the
                                                                                          Information centre 020 7664 3131 www.lga.gov.uk




country should have been better prepared for the flooding this summer and makes
                                                                                          DX 119450 Clerkenwell 3 Email info@lga.gov.uk




87 recommendations, including 15 ‘urgent’ recommendations, aimed at:
        Reducing the risk of flooding
        Reducing the impact of flooding
                                                                                          Tel 020 7664 3000 Fax 020 7664 3030




        Improving the emergency response
        Informing and preparing the public
        Ensuring a smooth transition from response to recovery

The report calls on the government to take a more ‘strategic role’ by making the
case for adaptation to climate change, developing an action plan to deliver the
Climate Change Bill and improving adaptation to cope with extreme weather.

Other ‘urgent actions’ include:
       Greater leadership by local authorities

Page 1 of 6
                                         Page 192
         Clearer roles and responsibilities on drainage
         Adaptation of buildings to ensure they are more flood resilient
         Preventative and preparatory actions by residents

The Secretary of State for the Environment, Hilary Benn, has accepted the urgent
recommendations in the Report.

The additional conclusions and recommendations cover a range of issues from
maintenance of watercourses, to sandbags to habitat conservation. Some of the
most pertinent recommendations are reviewed here, together with an LGA view on
the implications for local authorities and their partners.

LGA view
The LGA welcomes the publication of the Interim Report and acceptance of its’
urgent recommendations by the Secretary of State. It is very helpful for local
authorities and the public to see the initial findings and recommendations. The
Interim Report has highlighted the full impact of these devastating floods on local
communities and the essential role of all responders in managing the emergencies.

We are pleased to see the recommendations for a more strategic leadership role for
local authorities on flooding. Councils are best placed to understand the risks to
communities and their concerns. More strategic leadership is crucial in the context of
climate change. Local authorities and their partners are willing and able to take on a
more strategic role to reduce the risk of flooding, help communities adapt to more
extreme weather and ensure the best response in emergencies.

However, stronger leadership requires stronger powers and a duty on other key
players to co-operate. We hope that Government will work with all the key
stakeholders to ensure that the recommendations are quickly translated into an
action plan. There is a question of ensuring the resources are available to achieve
some of the proposed institutional arrangements and actions.

4. Flood risk management
The Report makes the following recommendations:
       More frequent and systematic monitoring by the Environment Agency (EA) of
       groundwater levels

         Environment Agency, local authorities and water companies to work
         together to map areas at risk of surface water flooding and establish
         effective warning systems for this type of flooding

         Clearer roles and responsibilities for managing drainage systems

         Minimum levels of flood protection for critical infrastructure

         Controls on hard standings – at present householders and businesses are
         able to lay paving and other impermeable surfaces. This reduces the area of
         ground able to absorb rainwater and increases run-off and the risk of local
         flooding

         Only resilient buildings should be approved in flood risk areas and flood
         damaged properties should be reinstated to a higher standard of flood
         resistance

LGA view:
The LGA agrees that the Environment Agency, local authorities and partners need
better information to assess the flood risk we are facing from surface water flooding
and to help us all to take proactive steps to reduce this risk. Local government is
Page 2 of 6
                                               Page 193
keen to work with the Environment Agency and water industry at a national,
regional and local level to ensure better analysis of flood risk and better planning to
help reduce this risk. Mapping of areas at risk of flooding from surface water will
require additional resources.

Better protection of critical infrastructure is essential – flooding at key installations
was only narrowly avoided this summer. There are serious implications for the
national economy if we do not adequately protect our critical infrastructure. There
has been historic under-funding in protecting existing flood risk areas and more
investment in defences to better protect infrastructure, property and agricultural
land must now be prioritised.

The LGA has called for controls on the current right to ‘pave over’ and we hope this
simple measure can be included in planning regulations at the first opportunity. We
support the need for more resilient buildings and resilient refurbishment of damaged
buildings in flood risk areas.

In designing better drainage systems we need to reassess the risk we are now facing
and build in any increased risk (from climate change) to future designs and
management systems. The EA, OFTWAT and Defra will need to work closely to
ensure water companies are able to improve our drainage system to better cope
with extreme rainfall. Funding to upgrade systems, replace combined sewers and
improve maintenance will be costly and require clarity and direction from OFTWAT.
We agree that this investment should form part of the forthcoming water industry
pricing review.

We would like to see a system of incentives provided by the Government and
insurance industry, to support proactive measures by the community.

The LGA hopes that the Final Report will also consider how to balance the needs for
well maintained watercourses and a perceived conflict with ecological protection

5. Emergency Planning
Observations:
       Government departments and agencies responded well and collaborated
       effectively

         Preparedness was not evident at all levels, particularly amongst the general
         public living in flood risk areas – the report makes simple recommendations
         for reducing damage in flood situations

Recommendations:
     Defra should develop a national flood emergency framework

         Category 1 responders should urgently be provided with a detailed
         assessment of local critical infrastructure to help them assess vulnerability to
         flooding

         Local Resilience Forums should urgently review current arrangements for
         water rescue, community risk registers, rest centres etc, to ensure they are
         adequate

         Local Resilience Forums should work more closely with local media in
         preparing and responding to emergencies, to ensure public information is
         improved

         Upper tier (unitaries, or counties in two tier areas) authorities should lead the
         planning for weather emergencies and in triggering multi-agency
Page 3 of 6
                                         Page 194
         arrangements in response to severe weather warnings. The police will retain
         responsibility for leading the emergency response (unless agreed otherwise
         locally)

LGA view:
The LGA agrees with recommendations for a national flood emergency plan,
providing its development and solutions are properly funded.

Local Resilience Forums are currently reviewing their plans and responses and we
expect reviews of their preparedness for future emergencies, in the light of lessons
learned this summer, will be placed within the context of climate change. Local
authorities are well placed to provide strategic local leadership in planning for
extreme weather. Working with local partners, they can help to orchestrate the
relationships and co-operation necessary to create greater security for their
communities in facing the challenges of climate change. It is essential that leadership
on the environment becomes a top priority in all areas - the LGA’s Climate Change
Commission has recommended actions that local authorities can take to embed this
priority within their local area. The Commission’s final report is available on the LGA
website: www.lga.gov.uk .

Many people in flood risk areas are not signed up to flood warning systems and in
some cases ignored warnings. Taking out appropriate insurance, adapting homes to
minimise damage, registering on the EA Flood Warnings Direct scheme and
preparing a ‘flood kit’ are all recommended. Local authorities can do more to raise
awareness of flood risk amongst householders and businesses, promote actions to
help people minimise flood damage and stay informed and safe in emergencies.

6. The role of local authorities
The Report makes the following recommendations:

         Local authorities to help co-ordinate the mapping of local surface flood risk
         and review local water assets

         A clear leadership and forward planning role by local authorities in managing
         surface water flooding and drainage at the local level

         Rigorous application of PPS25 (Planning for Climate Change) by planning
         authorities to consider all sources of flood risk and ensure developers
         contribute to building and maintaining defences

         A local register of water assets to be compiled by the local authority

         A scrutiny role for local authorities in assessing Surface Water Management
         Plans and Local Development Frameworks to ensure they consider and
         actively manage flood risk

LGA view:
In its’ response to the Pitt Review, the LGA called for greater clarity on the roles and
responsibilities for managing flood risk and maintaining drainage systems. We
welcome an enhanced leadership role for local authorities in bringing together all
the key players involved in drainage and surface water management. Local Surface
Water Management Plans should provide an essential tool for local authorities in
managing flood risk.

It is essential that good practice on management and maintenance is put in place by
all those with responsibility for our water assets. However, there has been historic
under-funding in this area and we will need a clear investment strategy and
commitment by Government, water companies, OFTWAT etc. to ensure that
Page 4 of 6
                                             Page 195
improvement plans actually happen. Compiling a register of local water assets is
crucial in reviewing the condition of these assets and managing flood risk, but this
register will impose a cost burden and the recommendations it identifies will need to
be managed – we look forward to clarity on resourcing this.

7. Information and communication
The Report recommends work by local authorities and EA to improve the range of
mechanisms to identify vulnerable people and warn the public in flooding
emergencies.

LGA view
Effective information and communication are key to protecting and reassuring the
community and preventing chaos in emergencies. The LGA is keen to improve the
use of telecommunications and information channels by responders in emergencies
and agrees with all the recommendations on communicating advice and
information.

8. Responding to flooding
The Report recommends that the LGA should consider best mutual support
arrangements between authorities in the event of any future emergencies

LGA view:
Mutual aid between authorities often works well, but where all neighbouring
authorities are affected by an emergency, as happened this summer, it is sensible to
have agreements at a wider, cross-regional or national level, to ensure all local
authorities are able to access the facilities, equipment, specialists and support staff
needed to respond well in an emergency and provide essential services to residents.
The LGA will be working with our emergency planning networks and regional
contacts to recommend improvements to current support arrangements.

9. Financial assistance
The report recommends a simpler system for providing financial assistance to areas
affected by flooding (and other emergencies).

LGA view
The LGA welcomed the swift and generous response by the Government this
summer, but has called for a review of the Bellwin scheme to reduce bureaucracy
and ensure more of the costs incurred by authorities and communities are recovered.

10. Recovery from flooding
The Pitt Review has been given an additional remit, to investigate and make
recommendations on recovery, which will be included in the Final Report.

11. Climate Change and Extreme weather
The report places the flooding this summer within the context of climate change and
calls on Government to deliver a clear strategy and action plan to respond to the
risks we are facing.

12. LGA key messages
More extreme weather is one of the unavoidable consequences of climate change
and it is essential that local authorities take a strategic leadership role across the
environment to ensure they and their communities help reduce and adapt to the risk
of flooding.

We need to invest now, in defences, drainage and management of water courses, to
save the much bigger costs and disruption of future flooding. This means increased
funding for risk management and defences, to address the shortfall on maintenance

Page 5 of 6
                                         Page 196
costs; provision for asset renewal; additional provision for infrastructure (particularly
in those parts of the country not designated as ‘growth areas’).

We need a systematic review of the flood risk we are facing in the UK, our
preparedness for this risk and the steps we need to take to both mitigate and adapt
to this risk.

Greater clarity is needed on the roles and responsibilities of each agency in flood
emergencies.

The LGA is pleased to see many of its’ recommendations to the Pitt Review included
in the Interim Report. We hope that the Final Report will clarify the additional
investment required by Government, water companies, utilities, developers and
householders to meet the recommendations. It is clear that investment is needed
now to reduce flood risk and avoid costly damage in the future. Some of the specific
recommendation will place a cost burden on local authorities and it is essential that
resources to support more strategic planning and preparation are provided. With
additional resources, local authorities can immediately improve planning to manage
flood risk and better protect their communities.

13. Next steps
The Flood Review Team is inviting further contributions, to inform the Final Report,
with a deadline of 31 March 2008. The Team will be organising and taking part in a
range of meetings, stakeholder forums and conferences to gather further evidence
and comments. Comments can also be submitted by email to:
ThePittReview@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk

14. What is the LGA doing?
The LGA is now planning work with member authorities and partners to ensure we
are better prepared for future flooding emergencies. This will include:
        A follow up survey of affected councils, to identify long term impacts and
        recovery issues
        A Debate on the Interim Report with external stakeholders and affected
        councils in the new year (details to follow)
        Research study to explore in more detail:
        o What went well and what didn't go well this summer
        o To consider the Interim Report recommendations
        o The urgent issues facing authorities and partners:
                o How well or ill prepared are we for future flooding events? –what
                     risks are we facing and how much can we predict flood events?
                o If flooding does occur more frequently, what does this mean for
                     public services?
        o To identify useful areas of work/research/collaboration
        o To make recommendations for developing effective solutions - both to
            reduce flood risk and improve response and recovery - eg:
                o What measures can councils, the government, partners, land
                     owners, householders take and how to provide incentives for
                     helpful actions?

15. Further information
The LGA has submitted a response to the Review which has been informed by
evidence from affected authorities and communication with advisers and colleagues.
LGA officers have been liaising with other key stakeholders and the Flood Review
Team and will continue to work closely with member authorities, advisers and
partner organisations to help improve our preparedness for flooding emergencies.
The LGA’s response to the Pitt Review is available on:
http://www.lga.gov.uk/Briefing.asp?lsection=59&id=SXD283-A784A739&ccat=1114


Page 6 of 6
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
                                      Page 211                 Agenda Item 9


                                          REPORT TO PLANNING AND
                                         DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO
                                         BE HELD ON 10 JANUARY 2008
                                                 AND CABINET
                                          TO BE HELD ON 22 JANUARY
                                                     2008

                                         Key Decision              NO

                                        Forward Plan Ref No


Corporate Priority                      Cabinet Portfolio          Cllr D
                                        Holder                     Bastiman
Aim 4 – Creating Quality
Environments


REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES - HPlg/08/05
AND HEAD OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES - HEHS/08/02

WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL MINERALS
AND WASTE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

RECOMMENDATION(S):
The Borough Council makes the following response to the consultation on the North
Yorkshire County Council Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF)
“Site Allocations Preferred Options”:

1.    Support for waste transfer facility at Seamer Carr

2.    Support for the discounting of Site M21 of Land near Seamer Carr (adjacent
      to the A64)

3.    Raise no objections to the extension of Wykeham Quarry (Site M22)

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
The site-specific options for waste disposal/treatment and mineral extractions being
consulted upon could have significant implications for the Borough’s environment
and economy.



                                                           HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                                  Page 212


HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
If the Borough Council’s concerns regarding the individual sites proposed are not
expressed in time, or not taken into account, future policy and development could
have adverse environmental consequences for the Borough.


1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   Reports HPlg/06/320 and HEH/06/83 were considered by Members of the
      Planning and Devlopment Commiteee of 29 November 2006 and Cabinet of
      21 November 2006, concerning the Issues and Options stage of the County
      Council’s “Core Strategy Stategic Options” and “Site Allocations Issues and
      Options”.

1.2   North Yorkshire County Council have now produced Preferred Options
      documents for both Minerals and Waste Sites Allocations DPDs. The
      feedback to these documents will inform the development of the MWDF site
      allocation documents for submission to the Secretary of State, which the
      County Council aims to do in the Spring of 2008. The documents have been
      placed in Member’s rooms.

1.3   A response to these documents was required by the 24 December 2007 and
      to meet that deadline officers have submitted comments as set out in this
      report, with a proviso that they need to be endorsed by Members.

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   Ensuring the Minerals and Waste LDF properly reflects the Borough’s needs
      and concerns will help deliver the following aims from the Community Plan:

      Aim 4: Creating Quality Environments.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   Issues for consideration by Members are:

      Implications for Scarborough Borough of the MWDF site allocations preferred
      options.

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   The subjects of this report are consultation documents produced by the
      County Council. As Consultees, the Borough Council is making formal
      representations on those documents.




                                                        HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                                     Page 213


5.    ASSESSMENT
      Minerals

5.1   At the Issues and Options stage three sites were considered for sand and
      gravel extraction within Scarborough Borough. The first was 128 Ha of land to
      the south east of Seamer, adjacent to the A64 (M21). The second and third
      comprised two extensions of Wykham Quarry, one of 22.45 Ha and the other
      27.56 Ha (M22).

5.2   The Borough Council raised concerns regarding the environmental impacts of
      all three sites identified.

5.3   In this Preferred Option stage, the County Council has discounted the Seamer
      (M21) site for the following reasons: “Lack of need. Potentially adverse impact
      on Cayton and Flixton Carrs Wetland Project, and advserse impact on the
      Burton Riggs SINC and upon network of public rights of way”. Within the
      Sustainability Appraisal is also refers to the ‘Major Negative’ impact on the
      Historic Environment and Cultural Heritage, concluding that the negative
      effects on the archaeology could not be effectively mitigated against.

5.4   It is recommended that the Council supports the discounting of this site, in
      addition reaffirming another factor which also should be considered; the
      detrimental impact on the visual landscape adjacent to the A64, and mainline
      railway which provide two of the principal ‘gateways’ to the Borough. Policy
      E5 of the Local Plan seeks to protect principal views on road and rail
      entrances to the Borough. As such, it is considered that for the reasons
      above, and the outcome of the Sustainability Appraisal, this site should
      remain discounted.

5.5   The two sites at Wykham Quarry have, however, been proposed as preferred
      option sites for sand and gravel extraction.

5.6   It was noted in the previous report to Members that the Wykham sites would
      have a reduced visual impact on the landscape, in comparison to the Seamer
      Carr site, as views from the site from principal roads would be at long
      distance. The activites would use existing plant and access roads- and
      therefore have no net increase in traffic. Regarding the long term restoration
      of land, there would be an extension of the mosaic of wetland in the Vale of
      Pickering.

5.7   The continued existence of sand and gravel extraction in the Borough would
      provide a locally-sourced form of aggregate for the construction industry
      active in the Borough, and provide a continued source of employment.

5.8   Regarding the Sustainability Appraisal undertaken, both the Seamer Carr site
      and the two Wykeham sites are generally comparable in terms of the impacts
      of quarrying on the environment, community and economy. However, where
      the impacts differ is the ‘major negative’ impact on the archaeology at Seamer
      Carr and the ‘minor negative’ impact on biodiveristy at Wykeham. At


                                                        HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                                    Page 214


       Wykeham the southern most site is 100m from the The River Derwent, which
       is 18km upstream from a Natura 2000 site. In the Assessment Under the
       Habitats Regulations and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, the following
       comments are made regarding the Wykeham Sites:

       “A planning application and supporting environmental information should,
        however, demonstrate that there would be no unacceptable effects upon
        nearby water courses and sensitive receptors, including nature conservation
        sites”.

       ”This strategic assessment is unable to establish if the water level of the River
       Derwent would be adversely affected, but given the proposal is for an
       extension to existing permission it is unlikely to present an increased risk from
       extending operations. It must also be considered that the proposal may offer a
       positive effect on flooding through the potential delivery of a flood alleviation
       scheme.”

5.9    In light of the above, with the application of suitable mitigation measures, such
       as reinstatement of the existing shelter belt, imposed at the granting of any
       planning permission, it would be difficult to sustain an objection. Therefore, it
       is propsed that the Council make no objection to the inclusion of the
       Wykeham sites (M22) as preferred option sites for sand and gravel extraction.

       Waste

5.10   At the Issues and Option stage one site, Seamer Carr (W13) was proposed by
       Yorwaste for a waste transfer and thermal treatment facility to deal with
       approximately 25-30,000 tonnes of waste a year. The site would also deal
       with recycling. It also states that any proposals at this site will be expected to:

       •       Screen long distance views from the west and north west sides;

       •       The proposed development should be located close to current waste
               management facilities to minimise impact along the eastern boundary;

       •       Implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to protect Burton
               Riggs Nature Reserve.

5.11   At the Preferred Options stage, the County Council propose Seamer Carr
       (W13) as a preferred site, complying with the scale and locational criteria
       identified in the Core Strategy. The site would be covered by Policy WSA2
       ‘Other Waste Management Facilities’, which states:

       “Planning permission will be granted for the development of other waste
       management facilities at the following locations, as shown on the proposals
       map, provided that there are no unacceptable effects on communities or the
       environment:”




                                                           HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                                         Page 215


5.12   The Borough Council supports the inclusion of the Seamer Carr site W13 as a
       preferred option allocated site for waste treatment/transfer. Given the relative
       geographical isolation of the Borough, is important to have a localised waste
       treatment/transfer facility to ensure that the treatment of the Borough’s waste
       is undertaken in a sustainable manner.

6.     IMPLICATIONS
       Policy

6.1    The Minerals and Waste Local Development Framework will eventually
       become part of the statutory development plan for the Borough, along with the
       Regional Spatial Strategy and the Borough’s own LDF. Some aspects of the
       MWDF will need to be addressed in the Borough’s LDF in due course.

       Financial

6.2    There are no financial implications.

       Legal

6.3    The Borough Council is a statutory consultee on the MWDF under the
       Planning Acts.

       Equalities and Diversity

6.4    There are no implications for equalities and diversity.

       Environmental

6.5    Any proposals pursued by the County Council in the MWDF will be subject to
       a Sustainability Appraisal, Strategic Environmental Assessment and
       Appropriate Assessmen which will ensure that they meet the aims of
       sustainable development.

       Staffing, Crime and Disorder and Health and Safety implications

6.6    I am satisfied that there is no identified implications that will arise from this
       decision.

7.     ACTION PLAN
7.1    Arising from consideration of the issues, the following action plan is proposed:

       Officers submitt comments to NYCC                          21 December 2007

       Planning Development Committee and Cabinet
       consider/endorse coments                                   January 2008




                                                             HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                               Page 216


      NYCC consider comments and prepare
      MWDF Submission for Minerals Site Allocations DPD
      And Waste Site Allocations DPD                    Spring 2008




G Somerville                         A Skelton
Head of Planning Services            Head of Environmental Health Services


Author: Rachael Richardson……………………………
Forward Planning Officer
Telephone No: 01723 384406
Fax No: 01723 503826
E-mail address: rachael.richardson@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:
None

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT RACHAEL RICHARDSON
ON 01723 384406 e-mail rachael.richardson@scarborough.gov.uk




20 December 2007




                                                    HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
                                                    RISK MATRIX
  Issue/Risk       Consequences        Likelihood       Impact       Mitigation         Mitigated    Mitigated
                     if allowed to                                                     Likelihood    impact
                        happen
Borough Council   Local concerns     Very Likely    Major         Ensure            Not Likely       Minor
representations   may not be                                      representations
not submitted     addressed in                                    are submitted
                  allocating sites
                  for development
Borough Council   Inappropriate      Likely         Major         Maintain          Not likely       Minor
representations   site allocations                                dialogue with
not taken into                                                    NYCC
account




                                                                                                                       Page 217
                                                                                           HPlg/08/05 and HEHS/08/02
          Page 218




This page is intentionally left blank
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
          Page 222




This page is intentionally left blank
                                     Page 223                Agenda Item 10


                                                                          ‘A’ ITEM

                                                      REPORT TO
                                                       CABINET
                                                    TO BE HELD ON
                                                   22 JANUARY 2008

                                         Key Decision               Yes

                                         Forward Plan Ref No       N/A


Corporate Priority                       Cabinet Portfolio          Cllr D
Building Prosperous Communities          Holder                     Bastiman
and Improving the Council



REPORT OF: Strategic Director of Operations – SDO/08/01

WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: THE NORTH YORKSHIRE BUILDING CONTROL
PARTNERSHIP


RECOMMENDATIONS:

It is recommended that;

 (a)    Cabinet note progress being made towards the Council’s Building
        Standards Consultancy joining the North Yorkshire Building Control
        Partnership on 1 April 2008.

 (b)    Two Members are nominated to represent the Council on the North
        Yorkshire Building Control Partnership Board.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:

To ensure the sustainability of the Council’s Building Control Service and to
facilitate partnership working leading to service efficiencies, budget savings and an
improved quality of service to the public.
                                 Page 224




HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:

The key risks are:

•     Existing key personnel could leave their post prior to 1 April rendering
      service delivery very difficult in the final weeks of SBC service.

•     That adjustment to the IT systems will be delayed, affecting the 1 April 2008
      handover.



1.    INTRODUCTION

1.1   On 16 October 2007 Cabinet approved and recommended to Full Council:

      (a)   joining the North Yorkshire Building Control Partnership (NYBC) from
            1April 2008;

      (b)   entry into a contract with the District Councils of Selby, Ryedale and
            Hambleton for the Council’s Building Control Service to be managed
            in future by Ryedale District Council;

      (c)   the following financial commitments:
            (i) the joining fee of £30,000, which is an investment, to be funded
                  from the Service Investment Reserve;
            (ii) a revenue growth bid of £13,000 to cover the cost of additional
                  IT maintenance;
            (iii) £37,750 from the IT systems capital allocation for the upgrading
                  of the IT infrastructure of the Council to increase the capacity of
                  the system to be accessed externally e.g. for mobile working
                  and future partnership working; and
            (iv) £25,000 to be met from the Pension Reserve to cover the
                  redundancy and term pension costs of the Building Control
                  Manager with annual repayments to the reserve repaying the
                  initial outlay in three years.

      (d)   a further report to be made in late 2007/2008 on the outcome of final
            negotiations prior to joining the partnership; and

      (e)   commence formal consideration with the workforce and trade union.

      This was approved by Full Council on 29 October 2007.
                                    Page 225




2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN

2.1   The report in October explained how an effective Building Control Service
      is required to ensure that the Council meets its statutory duties and how
      the service contributes towards:

      Aim 1: Developing Safer and Stronger Communities
      Aim 3: Creating Healthy and Vibrant Communities
      Aim 4: Creating Quality Environments
      Aim 5: Improving the Council

      The report explained that joining the partnership would create a more
      efficient, effective and sustainable Building Control Service.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   The report to Cabinet on 18 October covered:

      •      The Sustainability of Scarborough Borough Council Building
             Control
      •      The Structure of the Partnership
      •      Efficiency and Effectiveness

3.2   North Yorkshire Building Control Partnership Steering Group

      3.2.1 Following approval by Council a project board was set up
            comprised of representatives from Senior Management, Finance,
            Human Resources, IT, Legal, NYBC and Building Control Staff.
            This group has been working to resolve financial, Human resource,
            IT, legal, and operational issues in order for the transfer to take
            place on 1 April 2008.

3.3   Finance

      3.3.1 The financial position is on target, and is as originally estimated and
            reported to Cabinet on 16 October.

3.4   Human Resources

      3.4.1 Actions necessary by Human Resources are on target and the
            consultations that are required in accordance with employment
            legislation and in particular the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection
            of Employment) Regulations 2006 have taken place and all
            appropriate letters and notices have been issued. Staff
            employment details have been exchanged. A question and answer
                                 Page 226




              session has been held with the workforce covering transfer
              concerns, ie job security, pension provision, job roles, etc and this
              has been received well by the workforce. Further discussions are
              being held with individual members of staff about their future
              positions and where appropriate statutory notice has been issued
              giving notice of redundancy.

      3.4.2 Discussions are continuing with individual members of staff about
            their future positions.

      3.4.3 Meetings and discussions between HR representatives and NYBC
            are continuing to ensure that all necessary actions are taken in
            order to facilitate the transfer of staff and other necessary steps on
            1 April 2008.

3.5   Information Technology

      3.5.1 Progress with alterations and upgrades to IT systems to facilitate
            partnership working is on target to be operational by 1 April 2008.
            Necessary solutions have been procured and work is ongoing.

3.6   Legal

      3.6.1 Discussions are progressing satisfactorily with the legal agreement
            and associated matters.

3.7   Operational Matters

      3.7.1 Meetings are continuing between SBC and NYBC Officers to align
            working procedures, set quality and operational standards, amend
            documents and plan geographical work areas and the location of
            staff and resources.

      3.7.2 All members of staff have met the NYBC Manager and have visited
            the Easingwold HQ to speak to existing staff about working
            procedures and to observe how the operation works.

      3.7.3 Planning the delivery of the service has shown that the Council’s
            operations will integrate well with the existing partnership. All
            operational matters are on target for commencing on 1 April 2008.

      3.7.2 Customer enquiries will be dealt with from the central office and
            where face-to-face meetings are required surveyors will meet
            customers on site.
                                     Page 227




3.8    Governance

       3.8.1 The Partnership is governed by a Board that consists of 2
             Councillors from each authority plus a senior officer, as advisor,
             from each authority. The Partnership Manager reports to the Board
             which meets as required, but no less frequently than once per
             annum.

       3.8.2 As a result of joining the partnership the Council will be required to
             nominate 2 Members as representatives on the Board together with
             a Senior Officer as advisor.

3.9    Quality of Service

       3.9.1 The existing Partnership has demonstrated that high levels of
             service can be provided at low cost. It has been noted that the
             partnership is currently efficient and when expanded will be capable
             of providing a service that is both effective and efficient.

       3.9.2 The partnership currently provides services that are considered
             excellent by its customers and intends to work within a new
             nationally recommended standard of service code with a
             performance measurement system that is to operate from 1 April
             2008. The quality of service provided will, at least, match that
             previously experienced by the Council’s users.

       3.9.3 Existing and regular users of the SBC service have been advised of
             the proposed changes and no negative feedback has been
             received.

3.10   Shadow Board Meeting

       3.10.1 Cabinet Portfolio Holder Councillor D Bastiman, together with the
              Strategic Director of Operations and Mr D Todd a Senior Building
              Control Surveyor, attended a meeting of the Shadow Board at the
              NYBC HQ in Easingwold on 14 December. Future development
              and opportunities for the service were discussed. The service is
              clearly dynamic and intends to be pro-active in meeting challenges
              and future development opportunities.

4.     CONSULTATION
4.1    Consultations have been ongoing through the Steering Group. Existing
       users and all members of staff affected have been advised of the proposal
       and the progress made.
                                Page 228




5.    ASSESSMENT

5.1   Integration is being managed by the NYBC Partnership Steering Group
      and progress is on target for a 1 April 2008 commencement.

6.    IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Legal Implications

      To put the arrangements finally into effect it will be necessary for the legal
      agreement to be completed and signed.

6.2   Other Implications

      The planning, environmental, equality and diversity implications have been
      considered and I am satisfied that there is no identified implication of this
      decision.

7.    ACTION PLAN

7.1   Agree to join in principle                                   16 October 2007
      Legal and financial agreements to be resolved in detail      January 2007
      Detailed arrangements completed                              February 2008
      Formal transfer                                              1 April 2008




David Archer
Strategic Director of Operations

Author:             Gordon Somerville
Telephone No:       01723 232424
Fax No:             01723 503826
E-mail address:     gordon.somerville@scarborough.gov.uk

Background Papers: None
                                                   Project Risk Matrix

No   Date          Issue/Risk          Consequences if      Likeli-   Impact      Mitigation      Responsi   Mitigated   Mitigated
                                      allowed to happen     hood                                    bility    Likeli-     Impact
                                                                                                              hood
1    10/0   IT systems not           Alternative working   Very low   Minor    Some short         AT         Very low Low
     1/08   operational by 1 April   arrangements                              term altered
            2007                     required                                  working
                                                                               arrangements
                                                                               possible eg.
                                                                               Staff continuing
                                                                               to access
                                                                               information etc
                                                                               from office




                                                                                                                                     Page 229
                                                                               instead of
                                                                               home base
2    10/0   Contractual issues       Partnership could     Very low   Mediu    Legal have         LD         Very low Low
     1/08   cannot be resolved       be delayed or not                 m       discussed
                                     go ahead                                  issues and
                                                                               resolved most
                                                                               issues
3    10/0   Revised budgets reveal   Possible higher       Very low   minor    Budget             NE         Very low Low
     1/08   unexpected financial     costs                                     monitoring
            problems
4    10/0   Human resource issues    Legal and staff        Very      Major    Consultations      RK         Very low Low
     1/08   not resolved. EG staff   personal issues.       Low                and provision
            TUPE Transfers,          Disruptions.                              of information
            redundancy,              Disputes.                                 taken place
            redeployment. Unions
            take action.
No   Date         Issue/Risk            Consequences if         Likeli-   Impact     Mitigation     Responsi   Mitigated   Mitigated
                                       allowed to happen        hood                                  bility    Likeli-     Impact
                                                                                                                hood
5    10/0   NYBC do not receive       Joining delayed          Very low   Low      Information      RY         Very low Low
     1/08   details, resources or                                                  exchange
            information from SBC                                                   regularly
6    19/1   Key members of staff      SBC would find it         Likely    Mediu    SBC keeping      GS/RY/RK Not likely Minor
     1/07   find alternative          difficult to deliver                 m       staff fully
            employment/leave prior    service in                                   advised of
            to 1 April.               intervening period                           progress. Give
                                      and have difficulty in                       assurances on
                                      preparing for                                redeployment




                                                                                                                                       Page 230
                                      handover.                                    ASAP.
                                                                                   NYBC
                                                                                   assistance
                                                                                   available.

                        Likelihood of event occurring:
                        A        Very Low
                        B        Not Likely
                        C        Likely
                        D        Very Likely
                        E        Almost Certain

                        Impact on the project objectives:
                        1        Low
                        2        Minor
                        3        Medium
                        4        Major
                        5        Disaster
                                      Page 231                Agenda Item 11

                                                                        ‘A’ ITEM

                                                      REPORT TO
                                                       CABINET
                                                    TO BE HELD ON
                                                   22 JANUARY 2008

                                         Key Decision              NO

                                        Forward Plan Ref No       N/A

                                                                  Councillor
Corporate Priority                      Cabinet Portfolio         Andrew
                                        Holder                    Backhouse
Creating Quality Environments                                     Cabinet
                                                                  Member for
                                                                  Environment
                                                                  and Transport

REPORT OF: HEAD OF STREET SCENE SERVICES HSS/08/001
WARDS AFFECTED: Castle and Weaponness

SUBJECT: PROPOSED REPLACEMENT CHRISTMAS LIGHTING
AT WESTBOROUGH PRECINCT, SCARBOROUGH, DUE TO THE
PROPOSED “BATHING BELLE” STATUE BEING INSTALLED AND
THE REPLACEMENT OF STREET LIGHTING AT AQUARIUM TOP,
SCARBOROUGH


RECOMMENDATION (S):
i)     Cabinet agree to not utilising the remaining £36k in the budget provided for
       the longstanding Town Lighting Scheme to externally illuminate the
       Scarborough Town Hall building.

ii)    Cabinet authorise the virement of £26k from the remaining £36k in the
       budget for the Town Lighting Scheme into a new budget for Christmas
       Lighting changes at Westborough, Scarborough.

iii)   Cabinet authorise the virement of £10k from the remaining £36k in the
       budget for the Town Hall Lighting Scheme into a new budget for
       improvements to street lighting at Aquarium Top, Scarborough with North
       Yorkshire County Council contributing £7k from their street lighting column
       renewals capital maintenance budget.




                                                                          HSS/08/001
                                   Page 232


iv)    Cabinet authorises the final approval of the proposed changes to the
       Christmas Lighting at Westborough to be made by the Cabinet Member for
       Environment and Transport.


REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
 i)    The remaining budget of £36k is not sufficient to enable an external lighting
       scheme to be delivered.

 ii)   A pole placed in the plinth upon which the proposed new Bathing Belle
       statue is to be sited supports the existing Christmas lighting display at
       Westborough, close to Vernon Road. The width of the highway in this area
       is too great to allow the existing lighting arrangement to be installed
       unsupported.

iii)   The existing street lighting columns at Aquarium Top are in a poor condition
       and need to be replaced. This is an opportunity to provide installations that
       will compliment the vast improvements that are close to completion in the
       surrounding area.

iv)    Final designs for the type of Christmas lighting in the area cannot be
       provided at the present time.


HIGHLIGHTED RISKS: It will not be possible to install the Christmas Lighting
display in what is a key area of the Scarborough town centre if the necessary
changes required, following the installation of the Bathing Belle statue, are not
carried out.


1.     INTRODUCTION
1.1.   A programme of works associated with the lighting of key features or buildings
       across the town such as the Spa and Valley Bridges, the Library, the Castle
       Walls and the Toll House was carried out during the late 1990’s and early
       2000’s.

1.2.   There remains in the Capital Programme a budget allocation of £36k for Town
       Lighting works and the outstanding approved scheme is to externally
       illuminate the Town Hall building at St Nicholas Street, Scarborough.
       Estimates for this scheme have been obtained in the past and they exceeded
       the available budget by a significant amount. The full scheme, to illuminate
       the Town Hall front and the side of the building was estimated at £90k.

1.3.   Revised estimates to illuminate just the entrance and main façade of the
       building were obtained and these amounted to £39k. There is not sufficient
       money available to allow this work to proceed and Officers feel that such a
       small scheme would do little justice to the building.



                                                                          HSS/08/001
                                        Page 233


1.4.   Cabinet will be aware of the pending installation of the Bathing Belle statue on
       the plinth in Westborough close to the Brunswick Centre. This plinth was
       always intended to be used for the siting of a statue or sculpture of some sort
       and the Civic Society along with others have worked hard at securing the
       funds needed for this to happen.

1.5.   The Christmas lighting display in this area is fixed to catenary wires that are
       attached to building frontages on both sides of Westborough. The wires are
       supported by a pole placed in the centre of the plinth to reduce the span
       across this wide part of the pedestrian precinct area.

1.6.   The span across Westborough at this location is too great for the catenary
       wires to be left unsupported so once the Bathing Belle statue is in place the
       Christmas lighting arrangement as it is now cannot be installed.

1.7.   The improvements to and around the Rotunda are well advanced. There was
       insufficient money in the Rotunda scheme budget to meet the cost of
       improving the street lighting installations at Aquarium Top. The existing
       columns are close to the end of their life and are in need of replacement. This
       is an opportunity to provide installations that will add further value to what is
       already happening in the surrounding area and to extend the period lighting
       scheme installed at Foreshore Road some years ago.

1.8.   Street lighting installations in Scarborough are the responsibility of the
       highway authority, North Yorkshire County Council, but are maintained by the
       Borough Council under the terms of the Agency Agreement. The highway
       authority will fund the cost of replacing a lighting installation, if its condition
       requires, but only to level needed to meet highway requirements. If the
       Borough council wishes to improve the installations at Aquarium Top to be
       both decorative and functional, it must fund the additional costs incurred.

2.     CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1.   The provision of decorative lighting such as Christmas lighting in the town
       centre and period lighting at Aquarium Top contributes to four of the five key
       aims. These are:-

       Aim 1 -   Developing Safe and Stronger Communities.
       Aim 2 -   Building Prosperous Communities.
       Aim 3 -   Creating Healthy and Vibrant Communities.
       Aim 4 -   Creating Quality Environments.

3.     BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1.   The remaining budget allocation for Town Lighting is not sufficient to allow the
       scheme to illuminate the Town Hall building to proceed.

3.2.   The Civic Society has commissioned the fabrication of the Bathing Belle
       statue. It is likely to be placed on the plinth in Westborough, close to the
       Brunswick Centre, early in 2008.


                                                                             HSS/08/001
                                    Page 234



3.3.   The siting of the statue will prevent the installation of the Christmas lighting
       display in this area, as it will not be possible to install the pole used to support
       the catenary wires at the centre of the span.

3.4.   The span across Westborough is too great to install the catenary wires
       without the use of such a supporting pole.

3.5.   The existing arrangement is difficult to install and maintain and it represents
       significant health and safety risks in doing so.

3.6.   The street lighting installations at Aquarium Top are standard columns with
       standard bracket arms and lanterns attached.

4.     CONSULTATION
4.1.   Limited consultation with representatives of the Civic Society has taken place
       and they have indicated they would be reluctant to accept any minor
       alterations to the current lighting installations, such as the repositioning of the
       supporting pole adjacent to the plinth, as it will create a negative effect for the
       proposed Bathing Belle statue.

5.     ASSESSMENT
5.1    The remaining budget within the longstanding Town Lighting Capital Scheme
       is not sufficient to allow the remaining approved scheme, to light the outside
       of the Scarborough Town Hall building, to be carried out.

5.2    The need to upgrade the existing street lighting installations at Aquarium Top
       can be achieved by removing and replacing the three columns in the central
       reservation. The new installations will include period style lanterns similar in
       design to those installed in Foreshore Road some years ago.

5.3    In addition to the three columns in Aquarium Top, Officers consider replacing
       two ‘standard’ street lighting installations at the south end of Foreshore Road
       and one ‘standard’ installation as you enter the Spa Approach Road would
       further enhance the area.

5.4    Five of the six street lighting installations proposed for replacement and
       upgrading are currently cast fluted steel columns that are in a poor condition
       particularly through rusting at their base. These columns are close to the end
       of their life and need to be replaced for safety purposes. North Yorkshire
       County Council are responsible for funding street lighting maintenance and
       will, therefore, contribute to this proposed enhancement to a sum equivalent
       to replacing a ‘standard’ installation. The sixth column needs to be replaced
       with one of greater diameter to accommodate the more decorative period
       lanterns, as the existing column is not sufficient, structurally, to accept the
       increased weight or load. A plan indicating the six columns concerned is
       attached at Appendix B.



                                                                              HSS/08/001
                                       Page 235


5.5   The cost of upgrading these six street light installations is estimated to be
      £17k. North Yorkshire County Council will contribute from the street lighting
      budgets a sum of £7k.

5.6   A revised Christmas lighting installation can, Officers believe, be designed
      around the location of the five existing street lighting installations as indicated
      on the plan at Appendix C. The likely design would involve the replacement of
      the five columns with ones of a greater height. Decorative or period lanterns
      similar to those used elsewhere in the precinct would be attached and the
      taller columns would allow the attachment of “banner” type Christmas lighting
      designs, which are safer and easier to install then those that extend over the
      width of the precinct.

5.7   An added benefit of installing taller columns in this area might be to use them
      to hang ‘event’ banners from for the ten months of the year when Christmas
      lighting is not in use. This suggested use, which may require planning
      consent, will be included in the Report to the Cabinet Member for
      Environment and Transport, if appropriate. Another possible benefit of taller
      columns in this area might be the ability to attach lighting solely for the
      purpose of illuminating the Bathing Belle statue; an idea that the Civic Society
      was keen to pursue during the initial consultation discussions. Again, this
      possible use will be included in the future Report to the Cabinet Member for
      Environment and Transport.

5.8   There is clearly a need for some detailed design before the work is carried out
      together with further consultation within the Civic Society and other interested
      parties. Officers believe, however, that an attractive setting, not only at
      Christmas but all year round, can be achieved with the remaining £26k of the
      Town Lighting budget if the proposals for Aquarium Top are approved.

6.    IMPLICATIONS
      (a)    Policy
6.1   There are no policy implications resulting directly from this report, as the
      event’ banner suggestion will be the subject of a future report, if appropriate.

      (b)   Legal
6.2   There are no legal issues that arise at this time.

      (c)    Financial
6.3   The proposed upgrade of the street lighting installations at Aquarium Top and
      the proposed replacements/improvements to the Christmas lighting in
      Westborough as a result of the installation of the Bathing Belle sculpture can
      be achieved within the £35k sum available from the Town Lighting Scheme,
      with an additional £7K contribution from North Yorkshire County Council
      towards the cost of replacing five street lights at Aquarium Top.

      (d)    Risk
6.4   The risks associated with the proposals for Aquarium Top and Westborough
      are set out in the risk matrix at appendix A.


                                                                            HSS/08/001
                                   Page 236



      (e)    Environmental and Sustainable Development
6.5   Any design of new Christmas Lighting installations will be centred upon the
      use of LED lamps which are both energy efficient and low maintenance.

      (f)      Health and Safety
6.6   Increasing Health and Safety requirements are making it more and more
      difficult to install and maintain lighting displays that extend across the width of
      the highway. The use of banner type displays will enable the work to be
      carried out more safely both for the installer and the general public.




Bernard Goulding
Head of Street Scene Services
Author: Nigel Wintringham
Telephone No: 01723 383160
Fax No: 01723 365340
E-mail address: nigel.wintringham@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:
None

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT NIGEL WINTRINGHAM
ON 01723 383160 e-mail nigel.wintringham@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                                            HSS/08/001
                                                                                                               APPENDIX A

                Risk Matrix for Westborough Christmas Lighting and Aquarium top Street Lighting

   Issue/Risk          Consequences if          Likelihood      Impact       Mitigation         Mitigated    Mitigated Impact
                          allowed to                                                            Likelihood
                            happen
Unable to install     Negative public        Likely          High        Design and           Unlikely       Low
existing              reaction and                                       prepare
Christmas             negative press                                     necessary
Lighting display      coverage during                                    changes to
in Westborough        the festive                                        accommodate
close to Vernon       period.                                            revised lighting
Road when                                                                display




                                                                                                                                Page 237
Bathing Belle is
in place
Design new            Health and             Likely          Medium      Deign new            Unlikely       Low
lighting display to   Safety                                             installation using
cross the             requirements                                       banner type
highway in same       make it difficult to                               displays
way as existing       install
Leave existing        Lighting detracts      Likely          Medium      Design and           Unlikely       Low
street lighting at    from recent                                        install new period
Aquarium Top as       improvement                                        street lighting
it is now             works to the                                       installations
                      surrounding area




                                                                                                                 HSS/08/001
             Page 238
HSS/08/001
             Page 239
HSS/08/001
             Page 240
HSS/08/001
                                     Page 241               Agenda Item 12

                                               REPORT TO CABINET
                                                 TO BE HELD ON
                                                   22 JANUARY 2008


                                       Key Decision             Yes

                                       Forward Plan Ref No      N/A


Corporate Priority:                    Cabinet Portfolio         Cllr David
                                       Holder                    Chambers
Improving the Council



REPORT OF:            HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES -
                      HLDS/08/02
WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS
  (A) A FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT FOR SCANNING
  (B) A FRAMEWORK CONTRACT FOR VIDEO CONFERENCING
  (C) A CONTRACT FOR THE PROVISION OF WIDER AREA
      NETWORK FUNCTIONALITY


RECOMMENDATION (S):
That Cabinet provide authority to: -
   (i)   procure a Framework Agreement for Scanning paper documents into
         electronic format;
   (ii)  procure a Framework Agreement for video conferencing equipment,
         installation and maintenance;
   (iii) subject to the agreement of suitable terms, enter into an agreement with
         Nynet Ltd for the provision of Wider Area Network services to the
         Council.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
To facilitate implementation of enhanced electronic government, Electronic
Document Management and sustainability within the Authority.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
N/a




                                                                        HLDS/08/02
                                  Page 242


1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   As was reported to Cabinet on December 2007 The Council set up a Project
      Team to look into EDRM in late 2006. This team has produced an Information
      Management Strategy and undertaken a pilot within Environmental Health to
      test the principles of this Strategy. The outcome from the pilot was that in
      order to meet legislation/regulations for information management a corporate
      EDRM was required to manage access rights, security, indexing, and
      retention of documents and records.

1.2   The Council also agreed to a value for money bid by the Head of Legal and
      Democratic Services to procure video conferencing solution to assist the
      Council to promote sustainability and achieve cost savings by reducing travel
      to meetings by both Council officers and consultants.

1.3   To facilitate this approach the Council need to have in place a framework
      contract providing for the conversion of existing paper records to electronic
      format as and when required and a framework contract to call off video
      conferencing equipment to meet its needs.

1.4   In addition the Council needs to enter into contract with Nynet Ltd for the
      provision of its Broadband requirements through a Wider Area Network. This
      will facilitate higher speed broadband across the entire Borough and assist
      the Council

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   This proposal contributes to the aim of “Improving the Council”, and
      specifically to the top priority of “improving performance of our services and
      ensuring they provide value for money”.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   The Council have previously let a single stand alone contract for scanning
      documents as part of the EDRM pilot. To continue the process of scanning
      records, however, there needs to be in place a continuing contract to enable
      the Council to call off its requirements for scanning as and when necessary to
      avoid the need to tender a contract on each occasion when scanning is
      required. This report seeks authority to tender such a contract.

3.2   In relation to video conferencing, as Members will be aware the Borough of
      Scarborough is spread over a wide geographical area from Staithes in the
      north, to Filey in the South, to Danby on the North Yorkshire Moors. This
      presents challenges for establishing a close working relationship with the
      Community.

3.3   At the County level this problem is exacerbated as North Yorkshire has a
      geographical spread that almost touches the West as well as the East Coast
      of England. Scarborough Borough Council is looking to develop enhanced
      two tier working with Councils within the family in accordance with


                                                                          HLDS/08/02
                                      Page 243


       Government objectives. However, as the region is geographically remote,
       meetings between officers and members of the different Councils presently
       involve significant travel time.

3.4    In addition, where contractors are engaged by the authority for major projects
       they tend to be located in offices at some distance from the Scarborough
       Borough.

3.5    North Yorkshire's geography and local economy have discouraged
       commercial operators from providing advanced broadband services in many
       rural parts of the region. As a consequence, North Yorkshire County Council
       (NYCC) obtained EU approval and funding to create an advanced broadband
       network in North Yorkshire.

3.6    In approving the arrangements for contracting, EU Competition Commissioner
       Neelie Kroes commented: "This advanced network for the public sector can
       be used by all commercial operators. It will help the economic development of
       North Yorkshire by allowing citizens, businesses and government bodies to
       reap the full benefits of advanced broadband connectivity. The project is fully
       in line with the Commission's policy to promote broadband in under-served
       areas".

3.7    A contract for the provision of a next generation broadband open access
       wholesale infrastructure in the North Yorkshire sub-region was awarded to BT
       plc. The resulting contract documentation expressly allows for the provision
       of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) over the infrastructure for use by Public
       Sector Customers which include all the public sector bodies in North
       Yorkshire.

3.8    The management of the network is undertaken by a private company
       established by North Yorkshire County Council named Nynet Ltd.

3.9    Nynet Ltd is a company regulated by North Yorkshire County Council
       pursuant to the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and falls to be
       considered as a controlled company under the framework within the Act.

3.10   NYCC own all shares in the company and hold through John Marsden, Cllr
       Watson and John Moore (as Treasurer) three directorships on the Board with
       two executive officers appointed Chief Executive of Nynet (David Cullen) and
       Chief Financial Officer and Company Secretary (Scott Walters)

3.11   Accordingly NYCC will report on the company within its accounts and
       to all intents and purposes the Borough Council can regard the company
       as if it were the NYCC.

3.12   The funds that provide the majority of the funds for the company to
       establish the Wider Area Network infrastructure have been provided
       by Yorkshire Forward (YF)and European Regional Development Fund (EFDF)
       through direct agreements with Nynet. However, NYCC are identified as the
       accountable body under those funding agreements, accordingly were Nynet to


                                                                         HLDS/08/02
                                  Page 244


       default upon the outputs identified in those agreements, it would be to NYCC
       that ERDF/YF would look to recover the provided grant funding. This
       provides the requisite constraint to ensure that NYCC would not be able to
       dispose of the company without breaching the agreements and laying itself
       open to repayment of funds received from YF/ERDF.

3.13   Nynet Ltd are establishing as a subsidiary company, known at present as
       Nynet2, which will apply for charitable status, and to which all profits
       generated by the company will be paid. The objects of that company will
       include the use of available monies received for Community IT Related
       Projects (subject to the Charity Commissioners accepting that the proposed
       objects of the new company are charitable).

3.14   On this basis Scarborough Borough Council can enter into an agreement
       with Nynet confident that no issue will be taken re the procurement of
       services from Nynet, in that it is in essence a public/public agreement.
       The EU Commission have indicated that such agreement would be within the
       contemplation of Article 87 of the treaty.

3.15   North Yorkshire County Council have procured video conferencing technology
       to facilitate meetings between remote parts of their own organisation and use
       of the equipment is in its infancy.

3.16   The Borough Council can use video conferencing technology to allow
       meetings to take place with Whitby and Filey and colleagues from the County
       and other District Councils over Voice over Internet Protocol electronic media
       at no cost through the combination of Nynet system and video conferencing.

3.17   A specification for a video conferencing framework has been prepared to
       provide a high quality solution to facilitate implementation of video
       conferencing technology alongside the Nynet wider area network solution.

4.     CONSULTATION
4.1    Consultation regarding the requirements and specification for the system is
       ongoing with the stakeholders.

5.     ASSESSMENT
5.1    Work by the EDRM Project Team, the pilot EDRM project with Environmental
       Health and in developing and Information Management Strategy have all
       helped to support the position that the Council needs to procure a corporate
       EDRM system to provide management and governance of its information.

5.2    It is recognised that as an organisation we need to have better knowledge and
       control of our information. The limited information audits thus far undertaken
       have identified areas that need to be reviewed, e.g. control over key
       information, audit of all our information sources and the risks associated with
       each, priority for back scanning, etc. Ultimately, all key information sources



                                                                         HLDS/08/02
                                       Page 245


      should be kept electronically, be directly available electronically to all who
      need to access them and be backed-up to guard against loss.

5.3   Perhaps the most graphic example of the need for better information
      management came from the EDRM pilot project where the entire
      Environmental Health paper filing system was sent off-site for back scanning.
      Prior to it going off site it was decided to undertake a review of the paper files,
      which at that time equated to 500 boxes. After removing all the duplicate
      documents, documents that should have been removed and disposed of
      some time ago and documents that just did not need to be there, the final
      number of boxes sent for scanning was 147, a 70% reduction. This is not un-
      expected as literature shows that most ‘un-managed’ filing systems contain at
      least 60% of information that should not be there.

5.4   The same is true of our expanding electronic libraries, with IT having to
      frequently expand file storage to keep up with demand. The problem with
      electronic files is in many ways potentially more serious than for paper
      systems, as it so much easier to duplicate electronic files and end up storing
      the same document many times over in many different locations.

5.5   An EDRM system will bring order, control and governance to our information
      management. It will ensure one copy of each document is kept once and in
      one place, can be directly accessed by all who need to do so, can identify
      which is the latest version, can show who has accessed documents, or
      amended them, apply retention/disposal rules, flag up documents that have
      reached disposal dates and much more.

6.    IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Policy
      No direct implications, though changes in working practices may have policy
      implications later in the project.

6.2   Financial
      The costs related to video conferencing technology are met through the Invest
      to Save funding

      The costs of scanning and entry into a contract with Nynet Ltd can be met
      through provision within existing budgets. The Nynet contract is at a cost of
      £170,615 over five years.

6.3   Legal
      Scarborough Borough Council can enter into an agreement with Nynet
      confident that no issue will be taken in relation to the procurement of services
      from Nynet, in that it is in essence a public/public agreement. The EU
      Commission have indicated that such agreement would be within the
      contemplation of Article 87 of the Treaty.




                                                                            HLDS/08/02
                               Page 246


      The proposed framework agreements for scanning and video conferencing
      will be tendered through a restricted list procedure.




Ian Anderson
Head of Legal and Democratic Services


Author: Ian Anderson
Telephone No: 01723 232348
Fax No: 0870 2384159
E-mail address: ian.anderson@scarborough.gov.uk


Background Papers:
None


IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT Paul Hill ON 01723 232304
e-mail paul.hill@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                                HLDS/08/02
                                                            Risk Matrix

Issue/Risk      Consequences if allowed to Likelihood              Impact    Mitigation                   Mitigated     Mitigated
                happen                                                                                    Likelihood    Impact
The EDRM is not • Continue with current       Almost                         •   Implement EDRM
implemented        inefficient processes      Certain                Major       system, follow project    Not Likely      Low
                                                                                 plan and Information
                       •   Difficult to share                                    Management Strategy
                           information, share services
                           or have mobile working

                       •   Continue reliance on paper
                           systems




                                                                                                                                    Page 247
                       •   Continue to not meet
                           information governance
                           legislation/best practice

                       •   Information security
                           remains poor
Information            •   Information continues to be   Almost              •   Implement Information
Management                 looked after in a             Certain     Major       Management Strategy       Not Likely      Low
Strategy    is   not       decentralised and                                 •   Establish an
accepted                   inconsistent manner                                   Information Manager
                       •   No improvement in our
                           information handling
                       •   EDRM becomes
                           unstructured and less
                           effective.
The implementation •       The Council will not          Likely     Medium   •   Follow Project            Not Likely     Minor
of the proposed new        maximise the full potential                           Management


                                                                                                                    HLDS/08/02
Issue/Risk            Consequences if allowed to Likelihood        Impact    Mitigation                      Mitigated      Mitigated
                      happen                                                                                 Likelihood     Impact
EDRM system does         benefits (savings and                                   principles
not     deliver   the    transformation) from                                •   Consult with all
expected                 purchasing the new EDRM                                 specialist services
efficiencies/enhance     system.                                                 and stakeholders
d working practices.                                                         •   Develop detailed
                                                                                 functional & technical
                                                                                 specification
                                                                             •   Develop detailed
                                                                                 project plan

The cost of a new •      Not able to implement the        Likely    Medium   •   The budget estimate         Not likely      Low




                                                                                                                                        Page 248
system exceeds the       system                                                  is realistic and
estimate.          •     Do able to meet                                         includes integration
                         transformational goals                                  costs to one key back
                     •   Difficult to re-engineer front                          office system.
                         to back office processes.                           •   Gain experience with
                                                                                 first integration to roll
                                                                                 out future ones with
                                                                                 minimum consultant
                                                                                 support

Resistance        to •   Resistance to change from        Likely     Major   •   CEP needs                   Likely          Medium
change                   services                                                implementation of
management which •       Not fully use functionality of                          projects like EDRM
blocks front to back     new system                                              that facilitate
office               •   Not have sufficient capacity                            transformation
transformation.          to implement change.                                •   Involve all
                                                                                 stakeholders.




                                                                                                                          HLDS/08/02
                                      Page 249               Agenda Item 13

                                           REPORT TO PROJECTS AND
                                                PARTNERSHIPS
                                           OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
                                                  COMMITTEE
                                                TO BE HELD ON
                                               21 JANUARY 2008
                                                     AND
                                                   CABINET
                                                TO BE HELD ON
                                               22 JANUARY 2008

                                        Key Decision              Yes

                                        Forward Plan Ref No      N/A

Corporate Priority – Creating           Cabinet Portfolio         Councillor
Healthy and Vibrant Communities         Holder                    Derek
                                                                  Bastiman

REPORT OF:          HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES -
                    HLDS/08/03
WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: CREATIVE INDUSTRIES TRUST LTD


RECOMMENDATION (S):
That Cabinet agree to enter into the agreements for the management of the
Creative Industries Centre as follows:
     (a) a Services Agreement with the Trust providing for grant assistance of up
          to £195,209 over the period 2007-2009 but providing for a share of any
          profits achieved by the company;
     (b) a Service Level Agreement setting out service s the Council will continue
          to make available to the Trust, and the terms upon which those services
          will be made available;
     (c) the lease of Wood End on the basis of rental of a peppercorn;
     (d) an adaptations agreement with the Trust to fund adaptations required by
          tenants to the building to meet specific needs, supported by collateral
          warranties from those tenants.


REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
To effect the decision of the Council of 27 February 2006 to develop the Creative
Industries Centre.


                                                                        HLDS/08/03
                                  Page 250



HIGHLIGHTED RISKS: Low Tenant take up undermining the Trust

1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   On 26 July 2005 the Council received a report from the Head of Regeneration
      Services (number HRgn05/30) recommending a feasibility study for the
      development of a Creative Industries Centre in Scarborough.

1.2   On 27 September 2005 Cabinet received a further report from the Head of
      Regeneration Services (number HRgn 05/40) incorporating the outcome of
      the feasibility study and recommending the pursuit of external funding to
      develop the Woodend Museum as a Creative Industries Centre.

1.3   On 20 December 2005 Cabinet received a further report from the Head of
      Legal Services (HLS05/93) recommending an application to the Planning and
      Development Committee for the appropriation of the Woodend Museum for
      public purposes, namely the creation of the Creative Industries Centre under
      s122 of the Local Government Act 1922. That application was subsequently
      made to the Planning and Development Committee and granted.

1.4   On 21 February 2006 Cabinet and on 27 February 2006 Council received a
      report from the Head of Financial Services (HFS06/12) which advised Cabinet
      and Council that the applications for external funding had been successful
      and set out the full business case for the development of a Creative Industries
      Centre. The recommendations made in the report and subsequently
      recommended to and approved by Council included:

      1. Agreement to funding for the Consultants who were preparing the
         construction project documentation for tender (£568,000)
      2. Agreement to the appointment of a building contractor at an anticipated
         cost of circa £3.83 m.
      3. Agreement to acceptance of external funding of £1.8m from ERDF and
         £2.2m from Yorkshire Forward
      4. Agreement to inclusion of the project in the Council’s capital programme at
         a revised project estimate of £4.8m
      5. Agreement to the principal of establishing a new Trust to manage the
         Centre on behalf of the Council
      6. Identifying the revenue implications associated with establishing the
         Centre as follows:
             a. 2006/7 - £41,000
             b. 2007/8 - £120,000
             c. 2008/9 - £80,000

1.5   The capital budget included £400,000 for the IT infrastructure, internal
      furnishings, internal staff costs and contingency in addition to the £4.4m
      provided for the construction related costs (including consultancy).



                                                                          HLDS/08/03
                                        Page 251


       Capital Costs
1.6    Following the tendering of all works packages for the construction, on 9 July
       2007 Council received a report from the Strategic Director of Corporate
       Services (SDCS/07/38) recommending a transfer from the Capital
       Contingency reserve of £300,000 to provide for the actual tendered costs for
       construction of phase 1 of the Creative Industries Centre of £4.85m (including
       consultants fees), the consequence was an increase in the capital budget to
       £5.1m and use of the entire contingency provided in the original capital
       budget.

1.7    A subsequent report to Cabinet on 20 November 2007 (HEngH/07/69)
       indicated that as a consequence of compensation events which have given
       rise to variations to the contract price the Council and the contractor are in the
       process of negotiating a final figure for the construction costs which will be
       reported for approval to Members in due course.

       Revenue Costs
1.8    The February 2006 report to Cabinet indicated that the financial model applied
       in developing the business plan suggested that additional revenue costs of
       £310,000 were likely to fall upon the Council between 2006 and 2012 arising
       out of the project.

1.9    Within this sum it was anticipated that revenue support to fund a Trust deficit
       would be required from the Council in the years 2006-20 as follows:

       2006/7 - £40,502
       2007/8 - £102,471
       2008/9 - £52,236
       2009/10 – to be reviewed
       Total -  £195,209

1.10   However, the projection anticipated that the Centre would be open from the
       third quarter of 2007. In practice the Centre is likely to open from the first
       quarter of 2008. The consequence of this is that the funding requirement thus
       far has been:

       2006/7 - £12,700
       2007/8 - £57,000

       It is anticipated however, set up costs currently being incurred and
       outstanding salary payments, will give rise to expenditure within the current
       year not be far short of the £102,471 anticipated for 2007/8.

1.11   Lettings for the building are however, positive and it is expected that the total
       revenue support identified within the original report of £216,954 will be close
       to the support required by way of a grant.

1.12   The grant support for the Trust requires formalising and approval is sought
       through this report for entry into a Services Agreement with the Trust. The


                                                                            HLDS/08/03
                                   Page 252


       agreement will provide that Trust receives grant assistance in the sums up to
       the identified sum of £216,954 in the years 2007-10.

       Services
1.13   In addition the Council will make services available to the Trust through a
       Service Level Agreement, in exchange for payment. The agreement will also
       provide for the Council to recharge the Trust for those elements within the
       original budget cost where costs fall upon the Council and provision will be
       made under the lease for a share of any surplus revenue from 2010 being
       provided to the Council as rent for the building. The costs to be charged to
       the Trust are for the telecommunications contract with Nynet and insurance
       for the building. The insurance for the building will be charged at the
       projected figure within the budget of £7000/annum. The Nynet charge will be
       the actual cost, which is close to the budget sum of £18,000 per annum.
       Services will also be available at cost for garden maintenance, financial
       management and legal services.

1.14   Finally authority is sought for an agreement with the Trust in relation to any
       adaptations that are required to the construction of the interior of the building
       as a consequence of tenant requirements. Such agreements will incorporate
       a collateral warranty direct from the proposed tenant to the Council providing
       recourse for the Council directly against a tenant if required.

2.     CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1    This report is relevant to the objective of creating healthy and vibrant
       communities.

3.     BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1    The Agreements seek to put into Legal effect the proposals that were agreed
       by Council on 27 February 2006.

3.2    The Services Agreement will provide grant assistance for the Trust up to the
       sum of £216,954 in relation to the Trust’s management of the building. It is not
       anticipated that the Trust will be profitable until 2010. However, thereafter, a
       share of the profits is expected to be received under the agreement.

3.3    The Service Level Agreement will set out the services that the Council will
       provide to the Trust and the consequent charges at actual or projected cost.

3.4    The lease of Woodend to the Trust is proposed to be for a duration of 30
       years on a rental of a peppercorn.

3.5    Subsequent to the original proposal to redevelop the building funding became
       available to create an extension wing for the building. At this stage only part
       of the building will be leased to the Trust. The remaining wing will be leased
       to the Trust following completion of construction.



                                                                            HLDS/08/03
                                       Page 253


3.6   The adaptations agreement provides the terms upon which the Council will
      agree to make adaptations to the building to meet tenant requirements in
      exchange for payments arising therefrom.

3.7   Given that the agreements remain essentially in accord with the intentions of
      Council in February 2006 no new issues arise from this report other than the
      requirement for formal approval of the proposed agreements.

4.    CONSULTATION

4.1   The proposal for creation of the Creative Industries Trust has been the subject
      of extensive consideration and consultation with the public by the Council
      since 2005.

5.    ASSESSMENT

5.1   The proposed agreements record the parties’ intentions which already have
      the approval of Council.

6.    IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Policy
      There are no policy implications to this report.

6.2   Legal
      The Legal implications are set out within the body of this report and have
      been detailed in earlier reports. The agreements provide the framework for
      the relationship between the Council and the Trust over the next thirty years in
      which period the Trust will manage Woodend.

6.3   Financial Implications
6.3.1 The Financial Implications were set out in the report which was considered by
      Council on 27 February 2006 referred to in this report.

6.4   Property Implications
6.4.1 The Wood End building will be leased to the Creative Industries Trust for a
      period of 30 years on terms that provide that a section of the building is sub-
      leased to the Scarborough Museums Trust.




Ian Anderson
Head of Legal and Democratic Services
Author: Ian Anderson, Legal and Democratic Services
Telephone No: 01723 232348
Fax No: 08702 384159
E-mail address: Ian.Anderson@scarborough.gov.uk

                                                                          HLDS/08/03
                                  Page 254



Background Papers:
The Agreements referred to in this report

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT Ian Anderson, on 01723
232348 or email ian.anderson@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                      HLDS/08/03
    Risk Matrix

                                                                                                                           Mitigated
Issue/Risk                  Consequences if              Likelihood   Impact   Mitigation                   Mitigated
                                                                                                                           Impact
                            allowed to happen                                                               Likelihood
Delays in construction      Request for recovery of      Likely       High     Consequential costs          Not Likely      High
                            EU funding                                         under Construction
                                                                               Contract to Contractor
                            Loss of potential tenants

Low tenant take up          Insufficient rental          Likely       High     Strong marketing the         Not Likely      Medium
                            revenue to support                                 Trust
                            business plan                                      Quality lead tenants
                                                                               Cutting edge technology
                                                                               Flagship building




                                                                                                                                       Page 255
                                                                               Initial grant support from
                                                                               the Council to 2010

Creative Industries Trust   Transfer of the Service to   Not likely   High     Terms of the                 Not likely      Medium
becomes insolvent           an alternate body or                               Lease/Services
                            return to the Council;                             Agreement to provide for
                                                                               this eventuality




                                                                                                                         HLDS/08/03
          Page 256




This page is intentionally left blank
                                      Page 257                Agenda Item 14

                                             REPORT TO PLANNING AND
                                          DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO BE
                                           HELD ON 10 JANUARY 2008 AND

                                                CABINET TO BE HELD ON
                                                   22 JANUARY 2008

                                         Key Decision             NO

                                         Forward Plan Ref No


Corporate Ensuring affordable            Cabinet Portfolio        Cllr Bastiman
Priority  and decent homes;              Holder



REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES - HPlg/08/01

WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: SCARBOROUGH BOROUGH LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
FRAMEWORK HOUSING ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DOCUMENT ISSUES AND OPTIONS (PROPOSED CONSULTATION
ON ADDITIONAL HOUSING SITES SUBMITTED)

RECOMMENDATION(S):
Subject to any changes agreed by Members:

1.    The document(s) entitled “Housing Allocations DPD – Issues and Options
      (Additional Sites)” be published for consultation, seeking views on those
      sites put forward by landowners.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):

The Scarborough Borough Local Development Framework will consist of a number
of documents that will eventually replace the Borough Local Plan (adopted in 1999).
The Housing Allocations DPD will identify specific sites for residential development.
A key element of the process of adopting an LDF is to ensure that the issues and
options are thoroughly considered and subjected to extensive consultation with
stakeholders and the public.




                                                                          HPlg/08/01
                                   Page 258


HIGHLIGHTED RISKS
Consultation is central to the evolution of the LDF, and early consultation is
essential to enable the identification of, and seeks views on, ‘issues and options’
faced by the Borough. Experience with the examination of LDF documents in other
parts of the country has shown that failure to explore a full range of issues and
options and consult properly on them can lead to the LDF being found to be
unsound.


1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   Members will be aware that a recent consultation exercise was undertaken on
      the Core Strategy (housing elements) and the Housing Allocations DPD.
      Whilst the usual practice is to allow a 6 week period for comment, this was
      extended owing to the level of interest shown by the public and to allow
      additional exhibitions and presentations to be arranged. During this
      consultation, officers have staged 24 events and public attendance has been
      in the region of 2000. This represents an excellent level of public
      engagement and has provided a significant amount of information and opinion
      that is currently being analysed and will inform the evolution of the LDF.
      Whilst the majority of the public and interested parties have provided
      comments on either the Core Strategy principles or housing sites proposed in
      the Housing Allocations DPD, the exercise has also teased out a
      considerable number of additional sites from landowners.

1.2   In accordance with statutory procedures, these additional sites must be made
      available for public inspection for a further period of 6 weeks prior to the Local
      Planning Authority drawing up its list of preferred sites. It is proposed to
      publish these additional sites as soon as possible. An up to date list of
      additional sites will be e-mailed to Members prior to the Committee and
      copies of documents with detailed plans will be made available in the
      Members Room and sent to Members at the commencement of the
      consultation period.

1.3   To enable officers to concentrate on policy development, it is not proposed to
      do any further exhibitions in relation to the additional sites. Exhibitions will be
      planned for the upcoming consultations on the Preferred Options stage of the
      Core Strategy (Spring/Summer 2008)and the Preferred Options of the
      Housing Allocations DPD (late 2008).

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   The Housing Allocations DPD will have a significant impact upon the delivery
      of Community Plan objectives in relation to housing, in particular 3c – “More
      Accessible and Affordable Housing”, and Corporate Plan aims, in particular
      “Creating Healthy and Vibrant Communities”.




                                                                             HPlg/08/01
                                      Page 259


3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   The issues for Members’ consideration are:

      •      Future Housing Provision in the Borough – The contents of the
             Housing Allocations DPD (Consultation document on further
             submitted sites)
      •      The Consultation Process
      •      Next Steps

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   The previous Core Strategy and Housing Allocations DPD was considered by
      Heads of Service and Corporate Management Team and took account of
      earlier consultation on the LDF. This is simply an additional list of sites
      submitted for consideration, but will be fully consulted upon to statutory
      bodies and members of the public / interested parties.

5.    ASSESSMENT
5.1   Future Housing Provision in the Borough – The contents of the Housing
      Allocations DPD (Consultation document on further submitted sites)

5.1.1 These additional sites identified during the recent consultation exercise are to
      be made available for public comment. As with the previous consultation, it is
      stressed that at this stage, no decisions have been made as to the suitability
      of any of these sites. They are published for information and to allow initial
      comment. All sites identified will be assessed using an agreed methodology
      and those eventually selected will be subject to further consultation at the
      “Preferred Options” stage.

5.2   The Consultation Process

5.2.1 The consultation will be for a period of 6 weeks, to commence in February/
      March 2008. The consultation will be aimed at stakeholders and members of
      the public, including individuals who have commented on the previously
      released housing sites. The sites will be made available on the Council’s
      website and will once again utilise the ‘Limehouse’ consultation system. The
      main message to send out, as with the previous consultation exercise is that
      at this stage the Local Planning Authority is not proposing or supporting any
      specific sites for development. The purpose of this consultation is to seek
      views on the specific sites that have been suggested so far.

5.2.2 Consultation responses will form an important part of the decision making
      process.




                                                                           HPlg/08/01
                                  Page 260


5.3   Next Steps

5.3.1 Following consideration of this report by Planning & Development Committee
      and Cabinet, the document will be published for consultation and the broad
      process outlined in 5.3 will be pursued. Due to staffing departures, a re-
      assessment of the LDF timetable (as set out in the Local Development
      Scheme) will be necessary. The revised timetable is likely to be along the
      lines of the following.

       Core Strategy Preferred Options (including              February/March 2008
       proposed distribution and broad location of housing)
       to P&D, Cabinet and Full Council.

       Consultation on Core Strategy Preferred Options         April / May 2008

       Submission of Core Strategy                             September/October
                                                               2008
       Housing Allocation Preferred Options (including         November/
       specific sites for housing) to P&D, Cabinet and Full    December 2008
       Council

       Consultation on Housing Allocations Preferred           January/February
       Options                                                 2009

6.    IMPLICATIONS
      (a)   Policy

6.1   The issues in this report provide a mechanism for updating the Council’s
      planning policies in respect of the delivery of housing.

      (b) Financial

6.2   The Forward Planning budget takes into account the commitments and
      resource implications of producing the Housing Allocations DPD.

      (c)    Legal

6.3   The Town and Country Planning Act places a duty on local planning
      authorities to produce and adopt an LDF as replacement to the current
      Borough Local Plan.

      (d)    Environmental and Sustainable Development

6.4   Sustainability issues will be fully addressed at the next stage of the process
      with the production of a sustainability appraisal.




                                                                           HPlg/08/01
                                      Page 261


      (e)    Staffing

6.5   The programme of work identified is based on the level of staff prior to the
      retirement of the Forward Planning Manager. As the post was filled internally
      the section is currently a member of staff short and failure to replace the
      vacant post would have implications on the ability to meet the timetable. The
      section has been short since early November and this has already had an
      effect on the production of the LDF.

      (f)    Others

6.6   The report has no direct implications on the following:

      Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Health and Safety Issues, Co-operation with
      Health Authorities, the Human Rights Act and Equality and Diversity Issues

7.    ACTION PLAN
7.1   The following actions are identified:

      Objective                                       Target

      1. P&D considers Report                         January 2008
      2. Cabinet approves Report                      February 2008
      3. Consultation Period                          March/April 2008




G Somerville
Head of Planning Service

Author: Steve Wilson – Forward Planning …………………………
Telephone No: 01723 383510
Fax No: 01723 503826
E-mail address: steve.wilson@scarborough.gov.uk

Background Papers:
None




18 December 2007




                                                                         HPlg/08/01
             Page 262
HPlg/08/01
                                                 Appendix 1 - Risk Matrix

Issue / Risk         Consequence if allowed      Likelihood Impact   Mitigation                  Mitigated     Mitigated
                     to happen                                                                   likelihood    impact
Consultation         Unable to progress          Not Likely   High   Proceed with consultation   Not Likely    Low
document is not      Housing Allocations DPD
approved
                     Programme for delivery of   Likely       High   Proceed with consultation   Not Likely    Low
                     LDF documents agreed
                     with Govt is not met.
Issues and options   LDF could be found to be    Likely       High   Proceed with consultation   Not likely    Low
are not fully        unsound at Examination,
explored and         requiring preparation to
consulted upon.      start again.




                                                                                                                           Page 263
                                                                                                              HPlg/08/01
             Page 264
HPlg/08/01
                           2nd Round of Sites Submitted for Housing Development (By Parish)


  Parish   Site Ref                     Site                                 Submitted by                   Status

Reighton    01/08     Land North of The Dotterel Inn, Reighton   Aaron Smith (Agent)                 Consultation 2nd round

            01/09     Land at Sands Road and Butts Hill          Ian Pick Associates Ltd.            Consultation 2nd round

            01/10     Land at Church Farm, Church Hill           Smiths Gore (Agent)                 Consultation 2nd round
Hunmanby
            02/13     Crescent Grange Farm, Royal Oak            Mr & Mrs A Garside (Owner)          Consultation 2nd round
                      Land rear at Manor Gardens/Sheepdyke
            02/14                                                P. & A. Sanderson (Owner)           Consultation 2nd round
                      Lane, Hunmanby




                                                                                                                              Page 265
            02/15     Land at 24 Northgate, Hunmanby             K. Baldry (Owner)                   Consultation 2nd round

            02/16     Land at 14 Sands Lane, Hunmanby            MS Architects                       Consultation 2nd round

            02/17     Land off Burlyn Road, Hunmanby             Pinkney Grunwells Lawyers (Agent)   Consultation 2nd round

            02/18     Land at Windmill Farm, Malton Road         D. Hickling (Agent)                 Consultation 2nd round

            02/19     The Paddocks, Sands Lane, Hunmanby         P. Beanland (McBeath Property)      Consultation 2nd round
                      Land to the North East of Outgaits Lane,
            02/20                                                P. M. Mawer (Agent)                 Consultation 2nd round
                      opposite No. 51-59
                      Land to the North East of Outgaits Lane,
            02/21                                                P. M. Mawer (Agent)                 Consultation 2nd round
                      opposite No. 69-71




                                                                                                                 HPlg/08/01
   Parish    Site Ref                      Site                                   Submitted by             Status

              02/22     Land rear of 57-67 Northgate                 W Barker                       Consultation 2nd round

              02/23     Land rear of 69-95 Northgate                 W Barker                       Consultation 2nd round
Filey
              03 /04    Land opposite of East Lea Farm               Edwardson Associates (Agent)   Consultation 2nd round
Folkton /
              04/04     Land at Filey Road/Main Street, Folkton      Mr & Mrs Green (Owner)         Consultation 2nd round
Flixton
              04/05     Land at Back Lane/Limekiln Lane, Flixton     Mrs P Porritt                  Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                             Page 266
              04/06     Land to the East of Limekiln Lane, Flixton   C Braviner                     Consultation 2nd round
                        Land adjacent to Drewton Cottage, West
Muston        05/02                                                  Mr A & Mrs T L Lavender        Consultation 2nd round
                        End, Muston
                        Land to rear of 1-8 Carr Lane / between
              05/03                                                  Mr C F & Mrs R Winter          Consultation 2nd round
                        Carr Lane and A165, Muston
              05/04     Land at Sandpit Farm, King Hill              Cranswicks (Agent)             Consultation 2nd round

              05/05     Mount Pleasant, King Hill                    Cranswicks (Agent)             Consultation 2nd round

              05/06     Land rear of White Horse Cottage             Mr Geoffrey Carline            Consultation 2nd round
                        Land at Filey Road/Rear of Manor View
Lebberston    07/02                                                  Michael P Doyle                Consultation 2nd round
                        Road
Cayton
              08/09     Land at West Garth / Station Road            Barton Willmore (Agent)        Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                HPlg/08/01
  Parish     Site Ref                             Site                              Submitted by                     Status
                               Eldin Hall Holiday Park, Osgodby Lane,
               08/10                                                    J & M Stroughair Ltd.(Agent)          Consultation 2nd round
                               Cayton (Formerly The Old Waterworks)
               08/11           Land to North of Alma farm, Mill Lane    Edwardson Associates (Agent)          Consultation 2nd round

               08/12           Land to North of Glebe Farm, Mill Lane   Edwardson Associates (Agent)          Consultation 2nd round
                               Land to South of Cayton Low Road / East
               08/13           of Scarborough Business Park and land to White Young Green (Agent)             Consultation 2nd round
           partial in Seamer
                               the East of Carr House Lane
                               Land to the South of Seafield Avenue and
               08/14                                                    Edwardson Associates (Agent)          Consultation 2nd round
                               South of A165
               08/15           Land adjacent No.157 Main Street         Alan Campbell                         Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                                       Page 267
               08/16           Land at Killerby Old Hall, Main Street   Alan Campbell                         Consultation 2nd round
                               Land to the South and East of Cayton Bay
               08/17                                                    Edwardson Associates (Agent)          Consultation 2nd round
                               Holiday Village, Mill Lane, Cayton
                               Land at South Mead Farm and adjoining
               08/18                                                    Beanland Illingworth (Agent)          Consultation 2nd round
                               land, Carr House Lane, Cayton
Seamer                         Land adjacent Riverside Garage, Main
               09/12                                                    John Blaymires (Agent)                Consultation 2nd round
                               Street
               09/13           Land at Main Street/Ratten Row           John Welsh (Seamer Parish Council)    Consultation 2nd round
                               Land to the North of Scarborough Road
               09/14           between Seamer and Crossgates,           Mr and Mrs Ingham (Owner)             Consultation 2nd round
                               Seamer
                               Land off Beacon Road at Seamer Moor
               09/15                                                    Ian Pick (Ian Pick Associates Ltd.)   Consultation 2nd round
                               Lane/Scarborough Road/Ayton Road



                                                                                                                          HPlg/08/01
   Parish     Site Ref                      Site                                  Submitted by                      Status
                         Land to the South of “Deans Garden
               09/16                                                  Boothby’s (Scarborough) Ltd.           Consultation 2nd round
                         Centre”, Seamer Road
                                                                      H M Bartholomew (Agent)
               09/17     Land at Main Street/Ratten Row, Seamer                                              Consultation 2nd round
                         Land adjacent 30 Main Street, Seamer
               09/18                                                  Francis Johnson and Partners (Agent)   Consultation 2nd round
Scarborough
               10/20     Land at Holbeck Hill                         Mrs T. A. Hull                         Consultation 2nd round
                         Land West of Seamer Road, running            Mr D. Sherry
               10/21                                                                                         Consultation 2nd round
                         through to Stepney Hill                      Mr G D Barnsdall
                         Land at Racecourse Road / Stepney Hill,




                                                                                                                                      Page 268
               10/22                                                  Mr & Mrs Woodhead                      Consultation 2nd round
                         adjacent to Pinewood
                         Land West of Oliver’s Heights/off Edgehill
               10/23                                                  Mr C J England                         Consultation 2nd round
                         Road
                         Falsgrave Service Reservoir, Springhill
               10/24                                                  Matthew Naylor (Yorkshire Water)       Consultation 2nd round
                         Lane
                         Osgodby Service Reservoir, off Reservoir
               10/25                                                  Matthew Naylor (Yorkshire Water)       Consultation 2nd round
                         Lane
Irton                    Land at Ayton Road adjacent to
               11/03                                                  B Denton (Agent)                       Consultation 2nd round
                         Mobberley, Irton
                         Land South-West of Pearson Garth, off
West Ayton     13/04                                                  B Denton (Agent)                       Consultation 2nd round
                         Farside Road
                         Land West of Morley Drive, off Farside
               13/05                                                  Russell Bradley                        Consultation 2nd round
                         Road
Snainton                 Land adjacent to “Greenacres”, High
               17/09                                                  B. Denton (Agent)                      Consultation 2nd round
                         Street, Snainton




                                                                                                                         HPlg/08/01
   Parish   Site Ref                       Site                                 Submitted by                    Status
                       Land between 14 High Street and Beech         Paul Beanland (McBeath Property,
             17/10                                                                                       Consultation 2nd round
                       Lane                                          Agent)
             17/11     Land off Cliff Lane to rear of Fire Station   Mr and Mrs M. Maw                   Consultation 2nd round

             17/12     Land adjacent No. 36 Station Road             Milly Greaves                       Consultation 2nd round
Newby /
             18/08     Uplands playing field, Hay Lane, Scalby       M.C. Hamilton (Owner)               Consultation 2nd round
Scalby
                       Land at Scalby Road/Rear of Northfield
             18/09                                                   Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Way, Scalby
                       Land at Cross Lane Hospital, Cross Lane,      M. Jones (Agent – Sanderson
             18/10                                                                                       Consultation 2nd round
                       Newby                                         Weatherall)




                                                                                                                                  Page 269
                                                                     Katie Fluhrer (Agent – Erinaceous
             18/11     Land off Lancaster Way, Scalby                                                    Consultation 2nd round
                                                                     Planning)
             18/12     Land at Barmoor Lane/North Street             Simon Ward (Agent)                  Consultation 2nd round

             18/13     Land at Highfield Cottage                     Simon Ward (Agent)                  Consultation 2nd round
Eastfield
             56/05     Land North of Middle Deepdale                 England & Lyle                      Consultation 2nd round
Burniston
             20/14     Land to rear of 41 and 43 High Street         Simon Ward (Agent)                  Consultation 2nd round

             20/15     Land to rear of Burniston Farm                Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round

             20/16     Land at Beck Farm, Burniston                  Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                     HPlg/08/01
  Parish    Site Ref                      Site                               Submitted by                    Status

             20/17     Land opposite “Farbeck”, Rocks Lane        Mr & Mrs G T Barnes                 Consultation 2nd round
                       Land at rear of 44/45 High Street,
Cloughton    24/07                                                Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Cloughton
             24/08     Land at Old School, Mill Lane              Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round

             24/09     Land at Quarry Bank                        Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Land adjacent to Blacksmith’s Arms, High
             24/10                                                Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Street
                       Village Hall; Land at rear of Reading




                                                                                                                               Page 270
             24/11                                                Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Room, High Street
             24/12     Croft Farm, High Street                    Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round

             24/13     Land at rear of Red Lion, High Street      Jo Wright (Agent, Smiths Gore)      Consultation 2nd round
                       Land South of Cloughton Beeches Care       Cloughton Beeches Ltd. J P Lawson
             24/14                                                                                    Consultation 2nd round
                       Home, 2 Station Lane                       (director)
                       Land adjacent to The Old Mill House and
             24/15                                                M & N Taylor (Owner)                Consultation 2nd round
                       at Cloughton Bridge, Mill Lane
             24/16     Land at 18 Station Lane                    M. K. Trousdale                     Consultation 2nd round
Whitby
             35/21     Land at Larpool Lane, Whitby               K & E Robinson (Owner)              Consultation 2nd round

             35/22     Land off Love Lane, Whitby                 Mr M Shackleton                     Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                  HPlg/08/01
Parish   Site Ref                     Site                                 Submitted by            Status
                    Land known as ‘Upper Baulbyes’ off
          35/23                                              Barrat York                    Consultation 2nd round
                    Shackleton Close
          35/24     Land at Prospect Farm, Mayfield Road     Mr Roy Jay                     Consultation 2nd round

          35/25     Land West of Stakesby Road               Malcolm Tempest Ltd. (Agent)   Consultation 2nd round
                    Land at Sneaton Castle Farm, Castle
          35/26     Road running through to Guisborough      Malcolm Tempest Ltd. (Agent)   Consultation 2nd round
                    Road
          35/27     Land adjacent to No. 2 Larpool Drive     H. B. Burnett                  Consultation 2nd round

          35/28     Land at Green Lane Nursery, Green Lane   PHD Partnership (Agent)        Consultation 2nd round




                                                                                                                     Page 271
                                                                                                        HPlg/08/01
          Page 272




This page is intentionally left blank
                                        Page 273             Agenda Item 15


                                                REPORT TO CABINET

                                                   TO BE HELD ON

                                                  22 JANUARY 2008

                                         Key Decision          NO

                                         Forward Plan Ref No


Corporate Priority:                      Cabinet Portfolio     Cllr D J
                                         Holder                Bastiman
Contributes to all 5 Corporate
Priorities

REPORT OF: HEAD OF REGENERATION SERVICES HRgn/08/01
WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: EMPLOYER NEEDS SURVEY – ACCEPTANCE OF
EXTERNAL FUNDING


RECOMMENDATION (S):
That the Council accepts grants of £15,000 and £5,000 respectively from Yorkshire
Forward and the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to fund the Employer Needs
Survey.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
To enable the survey to be delivered.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
No risks identified


1.     INTRODUCTION

1.1    Members received a report on progress in relation to the Sub Regional
       Investment Plan at their meeting on the 18 December 2007 (HRgn/07/40).
       That report included reference to one of the key projects under Issue
                                  Page 274


      Specification 1; Scarborough Employment Programme (SEP) which will aimed
      at tackling worklessness in Scarborough Town.

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   This project will contribute most directly to Aim 2; Building Prosperous
      Communities. Tackling worklessness has also been identified as a key
      objective in the Community Plan.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   The SEP will be a “return to work” programme aimed at tackling worklessness
      in Scarborough town. This programme will include “supply side” interventions;
      providing intensive support to Job Seekers Allowance and Incapacity Benefit
      claimants to better prepare them for the labour market, and “demand side”
      interventions; support to assist local employers to employ local people. A draft
      Business Plan has been prepared and discussions are ongoing with Yorkshire
      Forward. However, in order to evidence base the Business Plan and to
      analyse gaps in local delivery of support to businesses, Shared Intelligence
      Consultancy have been appointed to deliver an Employer Needs Survey. This
      will provide recommendations on the types of support systems which
      businesses would like to see the public sector put in place to support local
      recruitment. It will also analyse the impact of economic migrants in the local
      economy. £15,000 has been secured from Yorkshire Forward and £5,000
      from the LSC to fund this study.

3.2   It is recommended Cabinet agree acceptance of this funding.

4.    CONSULTATION

4.1   The development of the Sub Regional Investment Plan, including this specific
      project has been subject to extensive consultation with public, private and
      voluntary sector partners.

5.    ASSESSMENT

5.1    The delivery of the Employer Needs Survey is fundamental to providing a
      clear understanding of the needs of local employers which can provide the
      basis of the application to Yorkshire Forward for funding.

6.    IMPLICATIONS

6.1   Policy
      This project is one of the key elements of the bid for SRIP funding and is
      consistent with the Councils Economic Development Strategy: “Towards 2020
      – The Renaissance of the Yorkshire Coast”
                                    Page 275


6.2   Financial
      This proposal is to accept grant aid of £15,000 from Yorkshire Forward and
      £5,000 from the LSC.

6.3   Legal
      Cabinet approval is required to enter into a funding agreement with Yorkshire
      Forward and the LSC. This project is a short term piece of consultancy to
      prepare a Business Plan for submission to Yorkshire Forward. No legal issues
      have been identified.




Ray Williamson
Head of Regeneration Services
Author: David Kelly, Economic Development Officer, Regeneration Services
Telephone No: 01723 232321
Fax No: 0870 238 4159
E-mail address:david.kelly@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:
None

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT DAVID KELLY ON 01723
232321 or email at David.kelly@scarborough.gov.uk
          Page 276




This page is intentionally left blank
                                     Page 277               Agenda Item 18

                                               REPORT TO CABINET

                                                  TO BE HELD ON
                                                 22 JANUARY 2008

                                        Key Decision             YES

                                       Forward Plan Ref No       N/A


Corporate Priority:                    Cabinet Portfolio         Cllr A
                                       Holder                    Backhouse
Improving Transport



REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENGINEERING AND HARBOUR
SERVICES - HEngH/08/03

WARDS AFFECTED: ALL

SUBJECT: IMPLICATIONS OF THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT
2004 ON PARKING ENFORCEMENT

RECOMMENDATION (S):
It is recommended that:-

(a)   This report be received;

(b)   This Council approves the introduction of penalty charges complying with
      Band 2 of the recommended charges set out in the Civil Enforcement of
      Parking Contraventions (Guidelines on levels of Charges) (England) Order
      2007.

(c)   The regulatory requirements in terms of application of surplus income and
      CEO’s duties be noted.

(d)   The Members Parking Group investigate and report back on the use of
      discretion in the issue of penalty charges.

(e)   The parking accounts be structured so as to clearly separate the on-street
      and off-street income and expenditure.

(f)   An annual report in accordance with the requirements set out in the statutory
      guidance be submitted to Cabinet no later than September in each year.




                                                                       HEngH/08/03
                                 Page 278


REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
To ensure compliance with legislation.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
Failure to amend processes and apply new legislation will render the parking
service ineffective.

1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   The Traffic Management Act 2004 covers a range of transport related
      functions. The requirements of the Act are being implemented in stages.
      Earlier stages covered new powers for the national Highways Agency, a
      general duty on highway authorities to co-ordinate and promote free
      movement of traffic over their road networks, and additional powers to better
      regulate the work of statutory undertakers.

1.2   The next stage commencing on 1 April 2008 makes new provisions in relation
      to “civil” enforcement of traffic contraventions (i.e. enforcement by local
      authorities instead of by the Police). The new powers provide a single
      framework in England to co-ordinate enforcement of parking, certain traffic
      offences and bus lane usage. The powers are introduced by regulations, and
      these have now been published. This report advises Members on the impact
      of the new legislation.

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1     The parking function relates to the following Corporate Objectives:

        Objective 5:      To develop tourism and improve opportunities for leisure
        Objective 7:      To help deliver an integrated transport system

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   Most traffic and parking orders are created under powers set out in the Road
      Traffic Regulation Act 1984. For authorities operating under decriminalisation
      (such as Scarborough) those powers are altered using provisions in the 1991
      Road Traffic Act, implemented in each authority’s case by designation order
      issued by the Secretary of State. The procedures and processes followed by
      such authorities have been based on application of the wording of the Acts or
      on Government guidance.

3.2   The new Regulations, under the Traffic Management Act 2004, Part 6,
      supersede the provisions contained in the Road Traffic Act 1991 and
      formalise the way in which decriminalised authorities must operate.

3.3   The Regulations take effect from 31 March 2008 and comprise a number of
      statutory instruments:



                                                                       HEngH/08/03
                                       Page 279


      •      General Regulations covering penalty charges, vehicle immobilisation,
             enforcement process and financial provisions.
      •      Representation and Appeal Regulations setting out procedure for
             making representations and appeals.
      •      Levels of Charge Order giving choice of penalty charge level to local
             authorities and defining new groups of contravention related to charge
             level.
      •      Uniforms Regulations requiring parking enforcement to be carried out
             only by officers in specified dress.
      •      Devices Regulations mainly related to camera enforcement.

3.4   In addition, the Department for Transport has issued new statutory guidance
      on all aspects of civil enforcement of parking.

3.5   Copies of all these documents are available for inspection by Members if they
      so wish. There are a number of key issues within the new regulations, which
      require Members consideration. These are identified below.

3.6   Penalty Charges

3.6.1 At present the Council applies a standard penalty charge of £60, reducing to
      £30 if paid within 14 days. The new regulations create a two tier system of
      penalties. For more serious contraventions, i.e. ones that could cause
      congestion, potential danger to other road users, significant delay etc, a
      definition of “higher level contravention” is indicated. Other contraventions are
      “lower level”. The Charges Guidelines Order offers two charge bands for use
      by authorities:

      Band 1 has £60 for the high level and £40 for low level
      Band 2 has £70 for high level and £50 for low level

      The usual discounts/increases apply to each band. The County Council has
      already indicated a preference for the Band 2 charges and Members are
      asked to support this approach. Whichever band is used, it has to be applied
      to both on and off street parking.

3.7   Financial Requirements

3.7.1 The statutory guidance clarifies the position in relation to use of surpluses
      arising from on-street enforcement, and to the application of penalty charge
      income. Whilst the Government accepts that revenue levels need to be
      forecast, raising income is not the objective of civil parking enforcement and
      authorities should not set target incomes for penalty charges. Equally, any
      penalty charge income, whether obtained on or off-street, may be used only
      for the purposes set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

3.8   New Types of Contravention

3.8.1 The new powers include enforcement of a number of moving traffic offences
      in the London area. It is anticipated these powers will be extended in the near
      future to cover the rest of the country. For some of these contraventions,

                                                                         HEngH/08/03
                                   Page 280


       camera enforcement is more appropriate and efficient. The regulations
       specify the devices to be used and the evidence gathering process. Much of
       this is already in place in Scarborough’s CCTV system and it will be able to
       apply the new powers when they are rolled-out across the country subject to
       any necessary approval from the Secretary of State. The CCTV system is
       already used for identifying traffic signal and traffic delay issues and the new
       powers will further integrate the CCTV centre with traffic and parking
       management, allowing some of its running costs to be recovered from the
       County Council.

3.8.2 Offences such as double parking and parking at dropped crossings at
      footways will also be dealt with by the Council after 1 April.

3.9    Duties of Attendants

3.9.1 The statutory guidance defines the role of civil enforcement officers (CEOs).
      It reminds authorities that such officers are the public face of parking
      enforcement and that the manner in which they perform their duties is crucial
      to the success and public perception of an authority’s parking operations. The
      duties of CEOs are described in the guidance. These are as follows:

       •      Enforcement.
       •      Inspection and reporting of defects in parking signs and equipment.
       •      Issue of warning/information leaflets.
       •      Providing witness statements and appearing before an adjudicator.
       •      Informing Police of criminal traffic activity.
       •      Report abandoned vehicles.
       •      Report vehicles with no valid tax disc.
       •      On-street enforcement surveys.
       •      Manage on-street parking places e.g. suspensions, coning and
              builders skips.

3.9.2 The guidance stresses that CEOs should not carry out any other enforcement
      duties, and that parking income may be used for payment of CEOs only when
      they are carrying out parking enforcement. The Government has previously
      confirmed this point. Recently a suggestion was made that Scarborough’s
      attendants could be utilised for other enforcement work within the Council.
      This is not recommended, and to attempt to do so could put the Council in
      breach of the regulations and the Act.

3.10   Exercise of Discretion

3.10.1 Under the regulations, CEOs have no discretion when carrying out
       enforcement. Exercise of discretion must be provided by parking
       management. The Government suggests that authorities set out situations
       when a CEO should not issue a penalty, for example when a driver returns to
       his vehicle before the CEO has completed service of the penalty charge
       notice. The guidance also indicates that Elected Members should review
       policy on parking representations particularly in the area of discretion.
       However, the Government state firmly that Elected Members and


                                                                          HEngH/08/03
                                       Page 281


       unauthorised staff must not under any circumstances play any part in deciding
       the outcome of individual cases. (The Council’s Standing Orders have
       recently been amended to specify which officers have authority to cancel a
       penalty charge).

3.10.2 It is recommended that the issue be discussed by the Car Parking Review
       Group in the first instance and in due course be the subject of a further report
       to Members.

3.11   Financial

3.11.1 The income and expenditure of authorities in connection with on-street
       parking fees, and with both on-street and off-street enforcement, are
       governed by Section 55 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. This means
       that all income and expenditure from enforcement activity (i.e. the issue of,
       and income from, penalty charges) in respect of off-street parking is covered
       by Section 55. Where an authority makes a surplus on its on-street parking
       fees, and from its on and off-street enforcement, the authority must by law use
       such surpluses only for the purposes set out in the Act i.e. transport-related
       purposes.

3.11.2 In Scarborough’s case, the projected income from on-street penalties is
       £248,000 and from off-street penalties is £132,000. This income must only be
       applied to uses specified in the Act, the primary use being resourcing of the
       service. As the costs of running the off-street service are greater than the
       income from off-street penalty charges, this requirement is already met.
       However, it will be important to ensure that the off-street income does not
       become part of the County Council’s share of the overall Section 55 income.
       This is being addressed in the new parking agency agreement with the
       County Council. It is recommended that there are separate accounts
       structures for on-street and for off-street parking, and that income,
       expenditure and other charges that are relevant are shown separately for
       each function.

3.11.3 There are other costs associated with compliance with the new regulations.
       These relate to stationery changes, software upgrades, amending traffic
       orders, hand-held computers, training etc. These costs will be met from
       parking income as required by the Act, and will be reported to Members in
       due course as set out below.

3.12   Reporting

3.12.1 The guidance indicates that authorities should produce an annual report on
       enforcement activities within six months of the end of each financial year. The
       report must include the following:

       •      The total income and expenditure on the parking accounts kept under
              Section 55 of the 1984 Act, as amended by the new regulations.
       •      A breakdown of income by source.
       •      Total surplus/deficit on the accounts.
       •      Action taken on surpluses/deficits.

                                                                          HEngH/08/03
                                       Page 282


           •      Details of how any surplus has been or is to be spent and any benefits
                  arising.
           •      Number of high level penalties issued.
           •      Number of low level penalties issued.
           •      Numbers of penalties paid in full and at discount.
           •      Numbers of penalties attracting representations.
           •      Numbers of penalties cancelled due to representation.
           •      Numbers of penalties written off.
           •      If applicable, numbers of vehicles immobilised or removed.
           •      Performance against quality targets.

3.12.2 As was alluded to in the report to Cabinet on 18 December 2007 (reference
       HEngH/07/71 and SDCS/07/91), the Council already receives an annual
       report on parking which usually includes recommendations for setting tariffs
       for future years. It is recommended this process continue, but a further report
       meeting the requirements above (i.e. enforcement related) be submitted
       earlier in the year. This would allow compliance with the statutory
       requirements whilst providing more time for a better assessment to be made
       of future parking income using data from the most recent seasonal activity.

4.         ASSESSMENT
4.1        Most of the issues contained in the new regulations and statutory guidance
           are requirements which have to be met, leaving little discretion to Members.
           The principal decision required is to set the levels of higher and lower penalty
           charge. In doing so, Members need to be mindful that, whichever band is
           chosen, it is likely it will result in lower income. This is because the most
           common contraventions locally happen to fit the description of ‘lower-level’
           penalties, and because a significant number of cases are settled with a
           discount. Current discounts are £30 per penalty, in future even with Band 2
           charges the discounted low-level penalty will be £25.

4.2        The County Council has already informally indicated a preference for use of
           Band 2 charges. It is recommended these be applied to both on and off-street
           penalties in the Borough. For the avoidance of doubt, Band 2 would be
           applied as follows:

High-level        Low-level     High-level    Low-level     High-level           Low-level
 penalty           penalty      discounted    discounted    penalty for          penalty for
                                 penalty       penalty      unpaid charge        unpaid charge
     £70            £50            £35          £25           £105                  £75

For comparison, the equivalent existing charges are:

High-level        Low-level     High-level    Low-level     High-level           Low-level
 penalty           penalty      discounted    discounted    penalty for          penalty for
                                 penalty       penalty      unpaid charge        unpaid charge
     £60            £60            £30          £30           £90                   £90




                                                                             HEngH/08/03
                                      Page 283


5.    IMPLICATIONS
      (a)    Policy

5.1   There are no changes in Council policy arising from proposals in this report.

      (b)    Financial

5.2   The financial requirements are set out in regulations and must be complied
      with.

      (c)    Risk

5.3   See Appendix to this report.

      (d)    Legal

5.4   The changes described in this report are required by law.

      (e)    Other

5.5   I have considered whether the following implications arise from this report and
      am satisfied that there are no adverse implications that will arise from this
      decision: Staffing, Planning, Crime and Disorder, Health and Safety,
      Environmental and Equalities and Diversity.

6.    ACTION PLAN
6.1   Implement required changes by 31 March 2008.




J Riby
Head of Engineering and Harbour Services

Author:               Bruce Bedford
Telephone No:         01723 232452
Fax No:               08701913997
E-mail address:       bruce.bedford@scarborough.gov.uk

Background Papers:
Please give details of all publicly accessible (non private) background papers
applicable to the report.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT BRUCE BEDFORD ON
01723 232452 e-mail bruce.bedford@scarborough.gov.uk

11 January 2008

                                                                        HEngH/08/03
              Page 284
HEngH/08/03
                                                             Risk Matrix

                                                                                                                      Mitigated
      Issue/Risk              Consequences if           Likelihood   Impact         Mitigation          Mitigated
                                                                                                                       Impact
                             allowed to happen                                                         Likelihood

New penalty charges not   Parking enforcement            Very low    Major    Approve new charges       Very low        Low
approved                  illegal from April 1st 2008


Band 1 preferred          Charges in agency area        Not likely   Major    Approve Band 2 charges     Likely         Low
                          inconsistent across the
                          Borough




                                                                                                                                  Page 285
                                                                                                                  HEngH/08/03
          Page 286




This page is intentionally left blank
                                      Page 287                Agenda Item 19


                                                      REPORT TO
                                                       CABINET
                                                    TO BE HELD ON
                                                   22 JANUARY 2008

                                         Key Decision                No

                                        Forward Plan Ref         I
                                        No
                                                                 Cllr David Jeffels
Corporate Priority                      Cabinet Portfolio        and
Aim 2 –                                 Holder                   Cllr Jane
Building Prosperous Communities                                  Mortimer
Aim 4 –
Creating quality environments
Aim 5 –
Improving the Council

REPORT OF: Head of Property Services - HPrp/08/03 and
           Head of Marketing and Communications Services –
           HMCS/08/01

WARDS AFFECTED: Whitby and Northern Area Wards

SUBJECT:                   WHITBY TOURIST INFORMATION CENTRE

RECOMMENDATION (S):
Cabinet is recommended:

(a)   to approve for consultation the adaptation of Whitby Tourist Information
      Centre at Dock End into a combined Tourist Information and Customer First
      Centre for Whitby as preferred by the Task Group established by the
      Corporate Strategy Overview and Scrutiny Committee and endorsed by
      them;

(b)   to note that the current estimated cost of the scheme is £400,000 and the
      potential capital receipt from the sale of the Skinner Street offices is
      £350,000; and

(c)   to agree that a further report be submitted to a future meeting after the
      consultation exercise has been completed.




                                                        HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                   Page 288


REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
The recommendations are being made as a result of the preferred option of the
Overview and Scrutiny Task Group established to look at the premises and options
available.

To make better use of an area of the TIC that is currently under-utilised.

To provide a much more accessible Customer First one-stop-shop facility in Whitby
for both visitors and residents.

To ensure that there is general agreement in the Whitby community to the proposal.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
Sale of Skinner Street Offices does not provide expected level of Capital receipt.

Opposition from sections of the community to the project.

Disruption to services during project.

A full risk assessment will be undertaken as part of the main project.


1.     INTRODUCTION
1.1    This report looks to seek approval in principle for the re-location of Customer
       First and associated back office staff to the Tourist Information Centre facility
       on Langbourne Road and for the sale of the Council Offices on Skinner
       Street.

1.2    The report also seeks approval in principle for an outline scheme which would
       relocate the Tourist Information Centre into the atrium extension (currently the
       visitor centre part) and adapt the other parts of the building into a new
       Customer First Centre for Whitby.

1.3    The current Customer First operation in Skinner Street is very inaccessible for
       residents especially those who have mobility problems, and the interview
       rooms and general circulation space is very restrictive. The building was
       originally purchased in 2001 and accommodated a number of officers
       including housing staff who were subsequently transferred to Yorkshire Coast
       Homes. Over the last few years the number of officers using the building as a
       base has declined and when Building Control move to the North Yorkshire
       partnership will result in even fewer officers using the building.

1.4    The Tourist Information Centre receives in excess of 500,000 visitors per
       annum requesting information on a whole range of tourism products. The
       extension was fitted with displays which are now somewhat dated, the area is
       rather dark and uninviting and does not automatically entice centre users to
       look around. As a consequence the space is under utilised and is no longer
       required for the core business of the Tourist Information Centre.


                                                          HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                     Page 289



2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   This report links to aims 2, 4 and 5 – building prosperous communities,
      creating quality environments and improving the Council.

3.    BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
3.1   On 19 December 2006 a report was submitted to Cabinet by the Head of
      Marketing and Communication Services reference (HMCS/06/08), which
      sought approval to the leasing of the Whitby TIC extension for high quality
      commercial (catering or retail) uses that complemented both the TIC
      operation and the Whitby tourism product. Approval was sought to make
      better use of an area of the TIC which was underused and contribute towards
      efficiency savings of £48,000 required by the service in 2007/2008.

3.2.1 The decision of Cabinet to approve the recommendations detailed above was
      subsequently “called in” and reviewed by the Corporate Strategy Overview
      and Scrutiny Committee on 17 January 2007. After much debate members
      resolved to refer the decision back to Cabinet with a recommendation that the
      decision be reconsidered and referred back to the Overview and Scrutiny
      Committee to undertake a more detailed review of the options prior to a final
      decision being taken.

3.2.2 Cabinet agreed with the Committee’s recommendations and referred the
      matter back to the Committee on 23 January 2007. Overview and Scrutiny at
      their meeting on 21 March appointed four Members to work with officers to
      establish parameters and review the options available. The Committee also
      resolved that up to 4 key stakeholders be co-opted to work with this Task
      Group but with no voting rights.

3.2.3 The Whitby Tourist Information Centre (TIC) Task Group was established to
      look at the current operation of the Whitby TIC extension and to determine a
      preferred and viable use for the extension, taking into consideration

      •      The resource limitations of the Council
      •      The nature of the Tourism product in Whitby
      •      The views of interested Stakeholders

3.2.4 A final report outlining the recommendations of the Task Group was then
      taken to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 14
      November recommending

      •      “A One Stop Shop” facility be established comprising of the existing
             Tourist Information Centre and a Customer First Centre but separated
             so that each service is allowed to provide its own distinct operation.
             This would include the re-location of Customer First and back office
             services presently located in Skinner Street.




                                                       HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                  Page 290


      •     The TIC be located in the most prominent part of the building with a
            new entrance to the TIC directly from Dock End and that the current
            glazing be replaced to maximise visual impact.

      •     That the Skinner Street Offices be sold and that a capital scheme be
            recommended for inclusion in the Capital Programme to be financed
            from the sale of Skinner Street.

      •     That suitable publicity of the scheme be undertaken.

      •     That a Project Board be established to include a local member
            champion.

      •     The Tourist Information Centre look to include and promote more
            locally produced goods in its retail operation.

      •     That the Project Board take forward the design presented to the
            Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 14 November 2007 and should
            seek specifically to ensure that there is opportunity for the facility to
            provide a flexible community space, subject to financial and operational
            considerations.

3.3   Planning consent for these proposals will be required.

4.    CONSULTATION
4.1   The Task Group met on a number of occasions and undertook extensive
      research, which included questionnaires and face-to-face interviews with
      visitors, residents, tourism businesses and organisations as well as with other
      key people in order to obtain the views of all interested stakeholders.

4.2   Each service area operating in Skinner Street and the Tourist Information
      Centre has been consulted with regard to office space requirements and will
      be further consulted on the project as it proceeds.

4.3   During the consultation a number of issues were raised including the need for
      a flexible community space, replacement of the dark windows at the Dock End
      frontage and re-location of the TIC into the existing extension.

5.    ASSESSMENT
5.1   A number of options have now been explored which have included leasing the
      space for commercial use, leaving the space as it is, partnership with
      transport operators and re-locating the Skinner Street operation to provide a
      one stop shop facility.

5.2   Option one – Commercial use. In order to better use the space and increase
      income to offset the costs of operating visitor services, advertising was placed
      in local media inviting expressions of interest to determine whether there was



                                                        HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                      Page 291


      commercial interest in the space. A pack outlining the space for potential
      development was produced and sent out to those people who contacted the
      Council as a result of the adverts. There were 13 businesses who expressed
      interest, the majority of whom are local to the area and almost all of the
      responses were for use as a café/catering facility. This option however was
      not favoured by the Task Group and a number of Whitby organisations.
      Letters of objection were received from the Whitby Hospitality Association,
      Whitby Town Council, the Chamber of Trade and Commerce and the Captain
      Cook Museum. The objections raised were based around the change of use
      and a view that space be retained as a community facility.

5.3   Option two – Leave as is, non commercial. For a couple of years TIC staff
      have introduced ideas to increase the use of the area and efforts have been
      made to try and introduce new initiatives such as book signings, exhibitions,
      consultation (including the Marina proposals) and extending merchandise
      ranges to bring people into the space. In the last 2 years there have been 14
      of these activities but has had limited impact on the usage. The Tourist
      Information Centre displays and units are very tired and would need to be
      replaced should the decision be to leave as is.

5.4   Option three – Partnership with transport providers. A number of Tourism
      Operators were invited to the Task Group to establish interest in shared
      services such as Arriva and the North Yorkshire Moors Railway both of whom
      have offices in the Railway/Bus Station opposite the Tourist Information
      Centre. The organisations were very interested in the potential for the TIC to
      sell tickets but neither were interested in operating joint services from one
      location.

5.5   Option four – One stop shop facility. Analysis of the consultation carried out
      by the Task Group identified four main areas where respondents felt
      enhancements could be made to the existing Tourist Information Centre
      Service

         •   Community/Visitor One Stop shop facility
         •   Displays of local community activities
         •   Internet access
         •   Displays of locally produced products

5.6   As a result of the consultation a detailed assessment of the building has been
      undertaken and an outline plan prepared (Appendix A). The assessment has
      indicated that the building has sufficient capacity for the Whitby Tourist
      Information Centre to be re-located into the Atrium part of the building,
      providing greater visibility and accessibility and the space currently occupied
      by the Tourist Information Centre be used to re-locate the Skinner Street
      Customer First operation and appropriate back office services thus providing
      a much more accessible service for both residents and visitors to Whitby.
      This is the preferred option of the Task Group however the outstanding issue
      of the provision of a flexible community space and the sale and promotion of
      locally produced goods will need to be addressed when detailed plans are
      prepared and submitted. The provisional figure estimated for this option at


                                                        HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                   Page 292


       the time of the Overview and Scrutiny consideration was indicated to be in the
       region of £300,000. A further detailed assessment now indicates the cost to
       be £400,000 with inclusion of all costs for relocation from Skinner Street.

5.7    There are two options available regarding the provision of a flexible
       community space and these are

       •      Provision of the Tourist Information Centre on an evening for
              community events/exhibitions. This will however be subject to charges
              being established as resource will be required to provide security.

       •      Designing the Customer First Centre and meeting room so that it can
              be opened up on an evening to allow community events to take place,
              once again there will be a security issue so would once again be
              subject to charges.

5.8    The Customer First manager will arrange a series of meetings with local
       producers with regard to introducing items for sale and promotion through the
       Tourist Information Centre operation.

5.9    Modest savings will be made from the existing revenue budget by
       bringing the two services together however there may be longer-term
       operational savings.

5.10   In view of the level of interest from the community it would be beneficial for
       further public consultation to be undertaken. This would be in the form of an
       exhibition at the Tourist Information Centre and Skinner Street and include
       questionnaires.

6.     IMPLICATIONS
6.1   Policy
6.1.1 There are no policy implications at this stage.

6.2   Financial
6.2.1 It is estimated that the cost of the works and relocation of staff will be in the
      region of £400,000. It is also estimated that sale of the Skinner Street
      premises should realise a sum in the order of £350,000. A formal valuation
      from a local estate agent will be obtained before the next report to Cabinet is
      considered and a final decision to proceed is made.

6.3   Legal
6.3.1 There are no legal implications.

6.4   Planning
6.4.1 Planning consent is required and a planning application will be submitted
      once approval has been given.




                                                          HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                       Page 293


6.5   Staffing, Crime and Disorder, Health and Safety, Environmental
6.5.1 All the above will be taken into account in the project plan and as part of the
      project management process.

7.    ACTION PLAN
7.1   Approval in principle from Cabinet               January 2008
      Public Consultation                              February/March 2008
      Further Cabinet consideration                    March/April 2008
      Council Approval                                 May 2008
      Planning Application                             June 2008
      Shopfitter procurement                           June 2008
      Planning Approval                                September 2008
      Detailed & Shopfitter design                     September 2008
      Marketing of Skinner Street                      September 2008
      First Phase fit out and
      move Tourist Information Centre                  January/February2009
      Re-furbish old TIC as Customer First
      Centre and Offices                               March/April 2009
      Re-locate from Skinner Street                    May 2009
      Completion of sale of Skinner Street             June 2009




Graham Price - Head of Property Services




Ruth Hyde - Head of Marketing and Communications

Author:             Janet Deacon, Customer First Manager
Telephone No:       01723 232570
Fax No:
E-mail address:     janet.deacon@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:
Cabinet Report 19 December 2006
Corporate Strategy Group O&S Committee call In 17 January 2007
Overview and Scrutiny Established Task Group 21 March 2007
Overview and Scrutiny Task Group report 14 November 2007.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT Janet Deacon
ON 01723 232570. e-mail janet.deacon@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                         HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                            Page 294
HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
                                                         RISK MATRIX

                                                                                                                      Mitigated
       Issue/Risk             Consequences if         Likelihood   Impact          Mitigation            Mitigated
                                                                                                                       Impact
                             allowed to happen                                                          Likelihood
Sale of Skinner Street     Budget Shortfall             Likely     Major    Maximise marketing           Not likely    Minor
does not realise the                                                        coverage.
required capital return
expected                                                                    Reduce scope of
                                                                            scheme.
Disruption to all the     Public                        Likely     Medium   Project co-ordination –      Not likely    Minor
Borough Council services dissatisfaction/complaints                         ensure services
in Whitby through IT                                                        maintained during various
failure and relocation of                                                   phases




                                                                                                                                  Page 295
staff.
                                                                            Ensure works are carried
                                                                            outside normal working
                                                                            hours
Lack of support from the   Adverse publicity and        Likely     Medium   Public consultation           Likely      Medium
Whitby community           local opposition
                                                                            Regular communication
                                                                            through local media

                                                                            Display proposals for
                                                                            comment and reaction
Project                    Poor publicity             Not likely   Medium   Project management           Not likely    Minor
Overspend/Overrun




                                                                                                  HPrp/08/03 and HMCS/08/01
          Page 296




This page is intentionally left blank
Page 297
          Page 298




This page is intentionally left blank
                                     Page 299               Agenda Item 20


                                                    REPORT TO
                                                     CABINET
                                                  TO BE HELD ON
                                                 22 JANUARY 2008

                                        Key Decision             NO

                                       Forward Plan Ref No      N/A

                                                               Councillor
Corporate Priority                     Cabinet       Portfolio Andrew
                                       Holder                  Backhouse
Creating Quality Environments                                  Cabinet
                                                               Member for
                                                               Environment
                                                               and Transport

JOINT REPORT OF: The Head of Environmental Health Services
HEHS/08/006 and the Head of Street Scene Services HSS/08/02
WARDS AFFECTED: All

SUBJECT: RECYCLING PROGRESS REPORT

RECOMMENDATION (S):
That Cabinet note the progress made following the introduction of kerbside
recycling across the Borough.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
The Council has a statutory recycling target of 20% to reach in 2007/08. Beyond
this the Council aims to meet the North Yorkshire Waste Management Partnership
target of 40% by 2010.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS: The risks associated with this report are included in the
risk matrix appended.

1.    INTRODUCTION
1.1   In January 2007 Council approved proposals for introducing an alternate
      weekly household waste and recycling scheme across the Borough. The
      scheme has now commenced with the first collections being on the 1 October
      2007. The scheme provides kerbside collections of recyclable materials to
      every household with clean paper, card, metal cans and all plastic bottles
      being collected. Recyclable garden waste is also collected from every home
      where such a collection is appropriate. Cabinet have requested two-monthly



                                                        HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                                  Page 300


      progress reports on the implementation of the new recycling scheme, this is
      the fifth such progress report.

2.    CORPORATE OBJECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
2.1   The Council has Government set statutory recycling targets and local targets
      in the Corporate Plan under Aim 4: Creating Quality Environments. These
      local targets are to achieve a 40% recycling rate and provide all homes with a
      kerbside recycling collection of at least two materials by 2010. In addition, Aim
      5: Improving the Council identifies Recycling as a priority service for
      improvement in relation to Key Performance Indicators.

3.    PROGRESS WITH THE NEW SCHEME
3.1   The Recycling Project Group consists of both Members and officers and
      meets on a regular basis to address and giving direction on issues faced. To
      support the group sub-groups dealing with Problem Solving, Finance,
      Operations/Procurement and Communications were established although
      these have now been disbanded. In addition, a Project Board was set up
      consisting of the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport and Senior
      Officers to oversee the work of the Group and approve any variations to the
      original project. These structures have worked well through the planning and
      implementation stage; officers and Members are now considering the most
      appropriate structures to monitor progress within the scheme and develop
      further recycling initiatives.

3.2   The first collections under the new scheme began on the 1 October 2007. All
      the risks which could have affected the start of the scheme were mitigated
      and the only significant risk remaining was completion of the installation of the
      new equipment at Seamer Carr. However, the installation, although late, has
      now been completed and materials are being processed at Seamer Carr. It is
      worth reiterating that the Borough Council was not financially penalised by the
      delayed completion of these works.

3.3   The Problem Solving Group identified the common issues and appropriate
      solutions associated with the scheme. The Recycling Support team have
      been working with the collection crews and continue to visits to householders
      who have found problems with the new scheme. Up to the end of December
      over 4,200 visits to households had been made by Recycling Support
      Officers. The number of queries regarding what materials can be recycled;
      storage and capacity issues have now reduced as the scheme has become
      more established. However the number of complaints regarding bins and
      bags set out on the wrong day and bins being left out have increased.
      Members will recall approving an Enforcement Policy in relation to the new
      scheme and from the 1 January 2008 the Recycling Support Officers have
      commenced targeted enforcement work aimed at these problems.

3.4   The Communications group focussed on ensuring that the appropriate level of
      information is being sent out to the public so that everyone is aware of the
      scheme and how it works. Communications will continue to be of key


                                                          HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                                      Page 301


      importance in this scheme and its success and has been instrumental in
      ensuring that the response from the public remains very positive.

3.5   Members will recall that Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP)
      funding was granted for communications work associated with the new
      scheme. This funding has, so far, covered the production costs of the leaflets,
      information packs and roadshows as well as the appointment of a temporary
      Recycling Communications Officer.

4     RECYCLING SUPPORT STAFF

4.1   Members will recall that the Recycling Support team was created to assist
      with the implementation of the scheme and deal with enforcement issues
      following its introduction. The team includes two Recycling Support
      Assistants both of whom are on temporary 12 month contracts. Both
      contracts will terminate early in the 2008/09 financial year. In addition, the
      WRAP funded Recycling Communications Officer post will also be terminated
      in the same period. The loss of these posts will undoubtedly have an impact
      on the level of continued support and enforcement which will be available.
      Whilst the number of requests for support has reduced, as discussed in
      paragraph 3.3 it is clear that there is an increasing need to address
      enforcement issues driven by complaints from the public and problems
      encountered by collection staff.

4.3   There may be a case for retaining the temporary staff to ensure that there is
      capacity for on-going support and enforcement. In the absence of these
      elements the experience of other local authorities is that recycling rates can
      gradually fall following the introduction of new schemes. This will impact both
      in terms of performance and finance. The Borough Council’s own experience
      in relation to the recycling pilot scheme in the Filey area clearly demonstrated
      that without support recycling rates fall and contamination levels increase.
      Conversely, there is evidence that increased support will result in increased
      recycling rates and lower contamination rates. A further report will be
      submitted in March seeking Members views on extending the contracts of
      temporary Recycling staff.

5.    FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT

5.1   To date, all capital and revenue costs remain within budget. However the
      year-end outcome of the revenue budget is very dependant on achieving the
      agreed recycling tonnage, the target for 2007/08 being 15,200 tonnes. As of
      31 December 2007 9980 tonnes have been recycled, 5000 tonnes in the first
      three months of the new scheme (1 October 2007 – 31 December 2007).
      The forecast recycling figures are discussed in the assessment section of this
      report.




                                                          HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                                   Page 302


6.    ASSESSMENT
6.1   The first collections commenced on the 1 October 2007 and few problems
      have been experienced in relation to the collection of materials under the new
      alternate weekly regime. The response of the public continues to exceed
      expectations with almost 5000 tonnes of material being recycled since the
      start of the scheme. Whilst it is difficult to give an accurate forecast due to the
      seasonal variations which affect the garden waste tonnages it is anticipated
      that the 2007/08 recycling rate will be at least 23%, our statutory target being
      20%. Using the same data it is predicted that the recycling rate in 2008/09
      will be in the order of 35%. However, what is clear from the experience of
      other authorities is the need to maintain a high level of publicity and feedback
      to the public, without which, recycling rates may fall below optimum levels.

6.2   The scheme is capable of achieving a 40% recycling rate but this will require
      a high degree of participation by the public. Again high levels of publicity,
      feedback and encouragement will be necessary to achieve this.

6.3   The new scheme is progressing well so far and members remain closely
      involved in all aspects of the project. The new scheme represents a
      significant culture shift for residents, many of whom welcome the new
      scheme. The Council will have to continue to work hard to maintain public
      understanding and support with much of the feedback about the scheme
      being very supportive and substantial numbers of residents asking for
      opportunities to recycle more.

7.    IMPLICATIONS
      (a)   Policy
7.1   There are no policy implications resulting from this report.

      (b)   Financial
7.2   Financing of the scheme remains on target.

      (c)    Risk
7.3   The risks associated with the new scheme are as set out in the risk matrix
      appended.

      (d)   Legal
7.4   There are no legal issues that arise at this time.

      (e)    Environmental and Sustainable Development
7.5   The new scheme represents a significant culture shift for residents to a more
      sustainable refuse collection and recycling regime. There are major
      environmental benefits arising from this proposal.



Andy Skelton                                     Bernard Goulding
Head of Environmental Health Services            Head of Street Scene Services


                                                           HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                                 Page 303



Author:           Steve Reynolds
Telephone No:     01723 232505
Fax No:           01723 365280
E-mail address:   steve.reynolds@scarborough.gov.uk
Background Papers:
None

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUERIES ABOUT THIS REPORT OR WISH TO INSPECT ANY
OF THE BACKGROUND PAPERS, PLEASE CONTACT STEVE REYNOLDS
ON 01723 232505 e-mail steve.reynolds@scarborough.gov.uk




                                                      HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                          Page 304
HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
                                                                                                                                       APPENDIX

                                                          Risk Matrix for Recycling Progress




     Issue/Risk            Consequences if            Likelihood            Impact         Mitigation        Mitigated Likelihood   Mitigated Impact
                          allowed to happen
Residents place         Increased costs         Likely              Medium            Ensure all residents   Not likely             Minor
materials out for       associated with ad                                            are aware of
collection on the       hoc collections.                                              collection days
wrong day                                                                             through effective
                        Bins left on streets                                          communication.




                                                                                                                                                       Page 305
                        may compromise the      Likely              Minor                                    Not likely             Minor
                        street scene.                                                 Enforcement
                                                                                      through
                        Negative publicity of                                         Enforcement Policy
                        new scheme

Increase in fly         Negative impact         Low                 Medium            Investigation and      Not likely             Minor
tipping.                upon street scene.                                            enforcement.

Contamination of        Contamination rates     Likely              Medium            Ensure all residents   Not likely             Minor
recyclate by            increase – sales                                              are aware of details
residents as a result   income falls                                                  of scheme through
of not understanding                                                                  effective
new arrangements                                                                      communication




                                                                                                                     HEHS/08/006 & HSS/08/02
          Page 306




This page is intentionally left blank
                                    Page 307              Agenda Item 21
            CABINET (GRANTS AND RELIEF) SUB-COMMITTEE

            At a meeting held on Tuesday, 18th December, 2007
                                 Present:-
         Councillors G A Backhouse, Mrs J E Mortimer and W H Tindall


1.   DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
     No declarations of interest were received.

2.   ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN
     RESOLVED that Councillor Mrs J E Mortimer be elected as Chairman of this
     meeting.
                      (Councillor Mortimer in the Chair)

3.   MINUTES
     RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 20 November 2007 be
     approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

4.   PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
     The Chairman reported that no public questions had been submitted.

5.   PARISH COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND
     The Sub-Committee considered a report by the Head of Financial Services
     (Reference HFS/07/38), which sought Members’ approval to five requests for
     funding from Parish Councils relating to specific schemes within their areas.
     RESOLVED that:-
     (i)   the report be received;
     (ii)  a grant of £1137 be made to Glaisdale Parish Council for the purchase
           of 3 replacement seats;
     (iii) a grant of £350 be made to Brompton-By-Sawdon Parish Council for
           the purchase of a replacement seat;
     (iv)  a grant of £612.33 be made to Muston Parish Council for the
           reimbursement of footway lighting electricity charges already
           expended; and
     (v)   a contribution of £500 to Folkton Parish Council towards the cost of
           new playground equipment be refused.

     Reason for decision: to assist Glaisdale, Brompton by Sawdon and Muston
     Parish Councils to perform their Model Agreement functions and to avoid
     setting a precedent in the case of Folkton Parish Council.



                                                             Chairman
          Page 308




This page is intentionally left blank
                                     DECISIONS BY INDIVIDUAL CABINET MEMBERS

     Portfolio            Report                Subject                                           Decision
                         Reference

Harbours -           HEngH/07/73      Whitby and Scarborough          That the Ports’ operational performance during the months
18 December 2007                      Harbours and Filey Coble        September to November 2007 be noted.
                                      Landing

Finance, Legal and   HFS/07/37        Approval to provide             That:-
ICT Portfolio -                       financial support to help set   (i)    the report be received; and
21 December 2007                      up a credit union across        (ii)   £10,000 in financial support to help set up a Credit Union
                                      North Yorkshire                        across North Yorkshire be approved.

Finance, Legal and   HFS/07/45        Disaster recovery contract      That:-
ICT Portfolio -                       renewal                         (i)    the report be received; and
21 December 2007                                                      (ii)   the procurement of a 3 year Disaster Recovery Contract
                                                                             be approved.

Finance, Legal and   HFS/07/46        ICT Fund report April 2007      That the report be received and the position of the ICT Fund be
                                                                                                                                               Page 309




ICT Portfolio -                       - July 2008                     noted.
21 December 2007

Finance, Legal and   HFS/07/44        Council Tax Base 2008/09        That:-
ICT Portfolio -                                                       (i)    the report be received; and
21 December 2007                                                      (ii)   the Council Tax Base for 2008/09 as 41,024.10 Band D
                                                                             equivalent properties be approved.

Finance, Legal and   HFS/07/47        Insurance Fund Annual           That the report be received and the position of the Insurance
ICT Portfolio -                       Report 2006/07 and              Fund and Insurance Renewals noted.
21 December 2007                      Insurance Portfolio
                                      Renewals




                                                                                                                              CE/08/02
                                                                                                                                          Agenda Item 22
     Portfolio            Report              Subject                                        Decision
                         Reference

Environment and       HEngH/08/02    Improvements to traffic      That approval is given for the implementation of the measures
Transport Portfolio -                signals at the junction of   included in drawing number EH/TT/LTP/SRVR/001.
11 January 2008                      Seamer Road/Valley Road,
                                     Scarborough

CE/08/02 ICM Decisions[22.1.08]
                                                                                                                                   Page 310




                                                                                                                        CE/08/02
                                                        Page 311   Agenda Item 24
By virtue of paragraph(s) 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A
of the Local Government Act 1972.




                                        Document is Restricted
              Page 320




This page is intentionally left blank

								
To top