Contact your Parish Council

 

 

 

The Council as a Business?

 

Municipal Year 2011/12

 

 

Evidence Pack

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of Meetings

2 August 2011

The Council as a Business? Review

The Chairman welcomed Alison Broom, Chief Executive, Steve Goulette, Assistant Director Environment & Regulatory Services and David Edwards, Director of Change, Planning and the Environment. 

The Committee was taken through a presentation which focused on the council’s business planning, the medium term financial strategy, how cost centres were managed, services which generate or could capture income and commercial services.  Mrs Broom advised that when identifying new areas that could trade and demand an income it was essential to prioritise and allow a period of planning and experimentation before planning too ambitiously as this would impact on the council’s baseline budget. The Chief Executive identified particular projects in the Council’s current business that were being addressed, these included the review of fees and charges, the local setting of planning application fees and the future governance of the Hazlitt Theatre.  Human Resources was highlighted to the Committee as an area providing commercial opportunity with their experience and implementation of the Midland system. Mrs Broom explained that the current methodology used for identifying new opportunities began with the categorisation of all Council services as to whether they could be delivered in-house, shared or through partnership  and trade.  Research to establish experience and good practice would follow this along with consideration being given to the impact of competition with local employers or service providers.  The Chief Executive advised that part of this process was establishing whether the Council should be abstracting from business that already exists or offering something new. The final area addressed in the presentation was the Council’s finance information project, the aim of which was to deliver ‘an enhanced recharge and budget management culture across the council supported by efficient processes.’  It was explained that this would result in an improved budget management culture; the three main work streams of the project would be budget monitoring, recharges and the account code structure. A completion date of April 2012 was given.

Members questioned the Chief Executive on the Leader of the Council’s outlook for the authority the previous year which was to describe the Council’s future as

 

 

 

that of a commissioning body. Mrs Broom explained that the Council had limitations, there were statutory instruments in place and case law was used to help exemplify all decisions[AW1]  made. This put the authority in a position where, for example, the cost of market pitches could only be enough to cover costs.  With regards to commissioning and commercial activity, Mrs Broom explained that both types of activity required different skills to those usually applied to regulatory services; a shift in attitude and approach would be required by the Council, Members and the public. Members questioned whether a commissioning route would impact on the Council’s ability to generate an income.  Mrs Broom explained that with the advent of Localism and the government’s White Paper on Public Services there would be diversity in the way in which services were delivered.  The Chief Executive told Members that one activity did not prevent the other but the Council did have to be very clear on what it was doing.

Members raised questions on the general power of competency in relation to the Public Services White Paper and the action the Council was taking in relation to this.  Mrs Broom explained that the Local Government Act 2000 had introduced wellbeing powers but the legal environment had remained unchanged. In order to exploit these powers and to give them foundation the Council had used the Sustainable Community Strategy.  The Chief Executive informed Members that the Council did not need the general power of competency to be responsive to the needs of the community and once the vision and ambition of the organisation was set, a way would be found to achieve this. 

The Committee’s questioning moved on to the Council’s assets and areas that could provide an income. Members were interested in determining the executive’s outlook on hiring out parks such as Mote Park for events and charging for venues such as the newly vacant Town Hall. Mrs Broom told Members that event management was something the Council had limited experience of other than Shakespeare and Proms in the Park.  The Committee was told that this would be an area that their research could add value.

Some Members of the Committee raised questions surrounding parking and enforcement activity. Members were assured that parking enforcement was to ensure compliance and not to raise an income.  Mr Goulette informed Members that the annual review into parking charges was taking place.  It was agreed that Councillor Barned would undertaken research in this area and report back to the Committee.

Members raised concerns regarding the public’s perception of the council operating as a business and felt that there was a difference between being a

 

 

 

business and being businesslike; with the latter being where emphasis should be placed.  Members and Officers were in agreement that a businesslike culture should be fundamental to the council’s approach.

Mr Edwards, Director of Change Planning and the Environment told the Committee that resources were required to adapt and change to provide services that residents want.  The Director felt that there were opportunities to move forward and provide good value for money and the resilience could be found within partnership arrangements.  The Committee was informed that the first shared service had been borne out of another authority’s need for expertise.  The resilience of partnership arrangements was said to be the key to service delivery.  Members questioned the issue of ownership when entering into partnership arrangements and the importance of this in order to maintain excellence.  Officers informed Members that this was addressed at the formative stages of any partnership arrangement.  Mrs Broom told Members that there was often a contrast in the cultures of authorities coming together to form partnership arrangements, she informed the Committee that cultural interfacing was important.  Members questioned the partnership model suggesting that the arrangement was structured to reduce cost to each of the partners and would therefore reduce the scope for income generation.  Mrs Broom explained that the current shared services; Legal, HR and Revenues and Benefits were ‘transactional activities’ and the economies of scale were there.

Members asked the Officers to identify areas that had potential to develop commercially, the waste strategy was said to be an area that offered opportunities as well as planning fees, HR and Revenues and Benefits. Mr Goulette identified the Crematorium and the Leisure Centre as two areas already generating an income and providing a local need.  Mrs Broom highlighted consultancy and advice as areas to address, planning pre application advice helped eliminate legal challenges, saving money and time.

The Committee queried the way in which the organisation evaluated and sought to improve itself with ‘value for money’ no longer in existence.  The Chief Executive informed Members that the authority was keen to be put forward for peer reviews and was open minded in this area.

Members praised the recent budget strategy training that has been arranged with Paul Riley and noted its value to the Committee as part of its ongoing responsibilities as the overarching Overview and Scrutiny Committee as well as its relevance to the review topic and the benefit of an increased understanding of this.  The Committee felt that their engagement with the budget strategy at its most formative level would be of most benefit to them.  Members felt that this could be achieved by appointing a smaller working group who would take on additional involvement and report back to the Committee as a whole.  

4 October 2011

The Council as a Business? Review

The Chairman welcomed John Taylor, Chair of the Economic Development and Regeneration Local Strategic Partnership Sub Group, Victoria Wallace, Chief Executive at Leeds Castle, Elaine Collins from the Marden Business Forum and the Network of Rural Business Forums, Councillor Chris Garland, Leader of the Council and Managing Director of Atia Financial Bookkeeping and Councillor David Burton, Managing Director of Burtons Medical Equipment Ltd.

The debate began with by questioning how the Council was regarded as a Business and the consideration that there was a difference between entrepreneurial spirit and a business like approach. Members agreeing with the panel of witnesses that they were two very different concepts and that how you run a business was ‘business-like’. The Committee felt that Councils were being actively encouraged to run their organisations like businesses but felt they should not be in direct competition with local private businesses.

Councillor Burton spoke of the difference between business like and entrepreneurial.  He referenced a Machiavellian definition used by the Leader of the Council which defined an entrepreneur as someone who knew the difference between opportunity and profit and charged for it.

He felt Car Parking was an area that as an entrepreneur it would be easy to make a profit from but for the council it would be at odds with its role which was more about social engineering than exploiting its assets for profit. Councillor Burton described his own experiences from a business perspective where he had experienced the public sector competing with the private sector.  He spoke of the manner in which the public sector had undercut the private sector by offering a premium service that was not costed to include the overheads such as in house finance departments and rental costs.  This led to the misconception that they were making a profit, when in fact they were operating at a loss. 

Mr Taylor provided a similar example to the Committee where the public sector had taken over the running of patient transport only to find out six months later that it was no longer financial viable.  The original provider refused to come back as their trust had been broken.  Mr Taylor emphasised that trust was paramount in business. Mrs Collins suggested good practices in this area such as the approach taken by the private sector with IT providers. She told the Committee that this was a service that was market tested annually and could be taken back fairly through a tendering process at any stage.

It was felt that Maidstone Borough Council had been entrepreneurial in the past with the development of Fremlin’s Walk in the Town Centre and in hosting the Radio 1 Big Weekend which were two large projects brought to fruition by the authority. Ms Wallace stated that the Council were already acting in an entrepreneurial manner in running the Leisure Centre, the Hazlitt Theatre and various events.  She made particular reference to Proms in the Park which was a free event. It was felt that by not charging for events the Council could be seen to be putting itself in competition with the private sector and behaving in a non business like manner, charging would demonstrate a belief in what was on offer.

Members discussed the possibilities of local authorities generating an income with advantages for both sectors referring to power stations and telephone boxes that were once areas developed by the public sector and provided a benefit to the private sector.  With reference to this they highlighted the future infrastructure of rail and road as areas that could be developed by the public sector to aid the private sector. It was felt that there were services provided by the Council that would not be of interest to the Private Sector.  The Leader responded by explaining that he was not critical of this outlook referencing the High Street Regeneration as a capital project that would create a better environment for Maidstone.  He felt that when there were capital funds available to invest in projects then this was an important area for the Council but it was not something that should be looked to on an annual basis. Members discussed niche services that the Council already offered such as street naming. 

Ms Wallace explained that her business was essentially a charity with a trading arm and clearly defining each area of the business was vital.  She explained that every part of the business at Leeds castle generated a small surplus income but if an area was not and it was something that they wanted to provide then it would be cross subsidised.  This was done in order to achieve the outcomes of the business. She told Members that there were ‘grey areas’ but the council needed to be very clear about who it was in each of its services.  She stressed the importance of this way of thinking.  Mrs Collins agreed with this and suggested that the Council would benefit from an outside influence who could evaluate what the council could offer from a business perspective.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Chris Garland, explained the current position of the Council, informing the Committee and the panel of witnesses on the way in which the Council had taken a business like approach by sharing back office functions such as Revenues and Benefits, with Swale and Tunbridge Wells as part of the Mid Kent Improvement Partnership (MKIP) which had achieved the desired economies of scale.  He spoke of the partnership’s aspirations to sell their services to other authorities. Councillor Garland told Members he was concerned about taking money out of an already struggling economy if the council were to seek to generate an income.  He felt that encroaching on the private sector would be detrimental to a stagnant economy. Councillor Garland advised that a business like approach through shared services had already provided half a million pounds of savings and the business improvement unit at the council would work to continue to reduce processes and create efficiencies.  The council were focused on this and thee was more to do. 

Members felt that the council needed to be the most efficient body possible and discussed the way in which the law was changing which would enable the Council to choose to be a business as well as the argument for outsourcing its services. They highlighted the Localism bill and the power of general competence which could change the way of the council provided some services. They felt that there were important lessons to be learnt citing examples given by the panel of their negative experiences with other public sector organisations. The Committee agreed with regards to Capital Projects like the High Street Regeneration you had to spend money to attract businesses. They also highlighted the use of Environmental Enforcement Officers who issued Penalty Charge Notices for litter dropping as an efficient service that was now paying for itself.

Councillor Burton informed the Committee he would not consider the prospect of outsourcing within his own business and would prefer to keep a service and run it himself for a profit.  He advised trying harder and being more frugal.  He said he considered outsourcing to be the soft option that could possibly cost more.  He said this was an area where he would like to see entrepreneurial spirit. Ms Wallace explained that the catering at Leeds Castle generated £2 million but they were only recouping £30,000 profit annually.  This was managed by an external provider and Leeds Castle received £600,000 of the profit providing a certainty in income without the risk.  She told Members if they were confident that they could provide the best service than they should.

The panel highlighted the Town Hall, now empty and needing a use, something the Committee were exploring as part of the ‘Council as a Business?’ Review.  The Leader informed the panel that this was being explored and possibilities could include the Private Sector being brought in to provide a service, with possibilities including a Coffee Shop.

The Panel were asked if they could each give one example of what Maidstone Borough Council could do to help businesses to flourish and suggested: as little as possible, only what is statutory, mandatory and necessary; to work with Kent County Council to provide Broadband in rural areas; to stick to planning deadlines; to provide broadband in other areas too; and to be simpler to deal with, processes can be obstructive. The panel were in agreement with each other on the suggestions they made. Councillor Dennis Collins told the Committee that the three most important elements of business were value for money, reliability and trust.

The Chairman invited John Foster, Economic Development manager at the Council to give his thoughts in summary of the debate.  He told the Committee that it had been an interesting debate to listen to.  He spoke of the way in which his team communicated with the business world through the Chamber of Commerce.  Mr Foster informed the Members that policies and strategies put in place by the Council did not impact negatively on the business community because rural economies forums were used as sounding board.  Mr Taylor expressed the opinion of the business community in relation to the current economic climate, informing the Committee that there was an appreciation that times were hard but that the best services provided by the council in the most efficient manner would help businesses move forward.

1 November 2011

The Budget Strategy

 

The Chairman introduced Paul Riley, Head of Finance and Customer Service. 

Mr Riley took the Committee through the most likely forecast for the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy (appendix B).  The Cabinet had made their decision on the Budget Strategy on 14 September 2011. The forecast showed the Committee the Council’s current position and the next 5 years.

The first calculation ‘Available Finance’ showed the revenue support grant received from government, the loss incurred and the collection fund adjustment for Council Tax.  Members were informed that the revenue support grant would be confirmed in January 2012 and that a 2.5% rise in council tax was included in the projection each year.  The Officer explained that a correlation was made with the Consumer Price Index (CPI), and reflected rises in fuel and other utilities with the cost totalling £410,000 for 2012/13.  Under the various headings, Inflation Increase, Contractual Commitments, National Initiatives, Local Priorities and Minor Initiatives, Various Priorities and Council Assets, incomes and losses were accounted for.  Single Voter Registration scheduled for 2014 /15 was incorporated into the outgoing costs for 2014/15.

Mr Riley made reference to the £1.1 million deficit forecast as a result of the changes to Council Tax Benefit and collections.  He explained that from a financial perspective this shortfall would be shared with the other precepts for whom Maidstone collected on behalf of including the Police, Fire and Parishes.  The government suggestion for 12 monthly payments for Council Tax rather than 10 was highlighted to the Committee as this would prevent reinvestment, although it was explained that payments could be changed to the 1^st of the month.

Another Financial consideration highlighted was in relation to Welfare Reform, discussed under the previous item on the agenda, and the ‘transitional costs’ faced as Universal Credit was introduced. The loss of grant combined with the retention of staff as the scheme was phased in until 2017 would have a negative impact on the council’s financial affairs.

The Officer informed Members that there was £700,000 to £800,000 of savings still to find for 2012/13.  He explained that Senior Officers would be aligning their decision making process with the council’s priorities and the strategic plan rather than taking a ‘salami slice’ approach.  Mr Riley highlighted areas where future changes to Council Tax and Benefits could affect services currently provided such as the Gateway and the Contact Centre.

The retention of Business Rates was explained to the Committee.  It was explained that there would be a focus on incentivised business growth but that disproportionate success in this area would be levied which could impact negatively on Maidstone with only 10% being retained by MBC and the rest to go to Kent County Council (KCC). Concern was raised that Kent as a two tier authority had not been taken into account, and Maidstone’s structure had not been considered.  The effect of this would mean that more money would leave Maidstone for other areas in Kent. Mr Riley informed Members that he hoped the consultation process taking place would reveal that there were still two tier authorities in place like Maidstone and not just unitary authorities to consider.

The Capital Programme was discussed.  Members were informed that the Hazlitt Theatre’s heating had been replaced and there was funding set aside to assist the Museum.

Mr Riley moved affairs on to the future including the council’s Core Strategy and the Infrastructure Delivery plan that would follow He explained that a great deal of funding was needed to deliver the core strategy and he informed the Committee that changes to capital funding would include section 106 agreements and the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).  This was something that MBC would not have to give to KCC until they reached an agreement with KCC on changes they required to their infrastructure.  It was discussed that the Leader of the Council, Councillor Garland, had confirmed that the general principle would be to work with KCC on infrastructure and agreement would most likely take place once the Infrastructure Delivery Plan was in place from the Core Strategy which would demonstrate where needs were to be met.

Members were informed that a project was underway to address fees and charges.  This would look across the whole council and provide comprehensive analysis of where there would be an ability to make an income.

Finally, Leader of the Council, Councillor Garland, updated the Committee on three main areas that he felt required further consideration.  Members were informed that Cabinet would have to reconsider a saving that had been identified. The proposal would be not to reduce the funding for Concurrent Functions for 2012/13 (the grant scheme for Parishes in the borough) which would result in a need to find an additional £100,000 in savings. Councillor Garland informed the Committee that Parishes Members had been informed that in principle an agreement had been reached by the Cabinet Member for an interim period of 12 months which would result in the grant being maintained at its current level.  He told Members that he was in support of this.

The last area discussed was the Council Tax Grant and the government proposal to keep council tax at 0% and replace it with a grant of 2.5%.  Councillor Garland told the Committee that this would result in a loss of £375,000 year on year for the Council with a continued loss of £7m in total due to the accumulative loss of interest.  Members considered whether Council tax should be frozen following the governments lead of a 0% rise against a 2.5% year on year increase which would result in a approximately £5 a year for a band D Council Tax payer.  The Committee felt that it would be beneficially to investigate the opinions of other local authorities on the matter.

10 January 2012

The Budget Strategy

The Chairman introduced Paul Riley, Head of Finance and Customer Services, Councillor Chris Garland, Leader of the Council, Alison Broom, Chief Executive, Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager and Georgia Hawkes, Head of Business Improvement.

Mr Riley introduced the Budget Strategy.  He informed Members that the two reports had been taken to Cabinet since he last attended Scrutiny; The Budget Strategy 2012/13 onwards and the Budget Strategy 2012/13 Fees and Charges which covered the changes to the budget to date.  On 8 November 2011 the Council informed of the Revenue Support Grant they would be receiving in 2012/12. The details confirmed the assumed figure of £5.7 million detailed in the Budget Strategy.

It was explained that the report included updates on the changes to date to the strategic revenue projections and savings proposals to achieve a balanced budget. In relation to strategic revenue projections changes included the proposal that the three temporary posts in Economic Development should be made permanent in order to achieve growth in tourism, a priority for Maidstone. Changes to savings proposals included bringing forward savings that had been identified for 2013/14 in Democratic Services and Overview and Scrutiny as they had been achieved early.

Members were informed that the Budget Strategy for the medium term included an assumed 2.5% Council Tax increase in its projections. In 2011/12 the Council had taken a four year grant in place of a rise in Council Tax.  It was explained that the grant on offer from Government for 2012/13 was a one year, one off grant of £339,000 and there was no ongoing financial recompense being offered by Government after that year.  In accepting the grant the Council would be accepting a freeze on Council Tax for 10 years.  In 2013/14 and thereafter the Council would have to find additional savings of £339,000. Mr Riley highlighted that the Budget Strategy Savings Proposals forecast in the Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2013/14 was calculated without taking into account the impact of the grant freeze and were in excess of £600,000 of savings to find.  In 2013/14 without a Council Tax rise and without the grant the Council would have to find over £1million in savings with only £305,830 identified so far.

Members were informed that the if the Council were to refuse the grant from Government and opt to raise Council Tax by 2.5% this would equate to a 0.38% rise to a band D Council Tax bill or £5.56 for the year.

The Committee questioned Maidstone’s Band D average Council Tax bill in comparison to other authorities in Kent.  They were informed that it was the 2^nd highest in Kent.  It was clarified by Officers that Maidstone received more in Council Tax than Government Grant. Members considered the position of other Kent Authorities and were informed that Gravesham Borough Council would not be accepting the Council Tax freeze grant.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Garland, told the Committee that in 2012/13 he expected the Council to benefit financially from proposed changes to Business Rates and that Cabinet would be recommending that Maidstone Borough Council accept the Council Tax freeze grant. He estimated that residents would save approximately £70 on their Council Tax over the next ten years as a result of Cabinet’s decision.

The Committee considered the options and felt it was difficult to make a calculation in terms of savings to the resident or the deficit faced by the Council.  A Member was concerned that the authority could find itself in position that would be difficult to recover from as a result of accepting the freeze grant. The Committee were sympathetic to the 2.5% rise but felt that the debate should go on to full Council.

The Committee considered ways in which further savings could be found or income generated. Suggestions included:

• Abolishing the Park and Ride service in Maidstone;
• A reduction in elected Members;
• Income generated by departments such as Building Control and Development Control from fees and charges; and
• The commercial viability of the crematorium.

 

 

 

 

The Chief Executive informed Members that work had begun on looking at the size and shape of the organisation. With regards to the Park and Ride she identified that the structure of car parking charges in Maidstone as the issue, confirming that the current charging structure did not enhance the Park and Ride service. In response to the suggestion that the number of elected Members could be reduced, it was clarified that recent consideration had been given to this option when the Council had the opportunity to take part in the Boundary review but this had not been pursued.

It was explained that Building Control could not make a profit and had to break even over a three year period.  With regards to Development Control it was explained that Government Legislation which would decentralise responsibility for setting planning application fees to the local planning authority had not yet come into effect.  The Council had done a great deal of work on benchmarking in this area in preparation for this change.

Finally, with regards to the Crematorium, the Chief Executive explained that on the basis of its performance this year the Crematorium had exceeded its targets and there was a recent agreement to change the Crematorium’s commercial viability in auxiliary areas such as with memorials.  She explained that the surplus profit made benefitted other council services and it would continue to do this. Some Members raised questions about the state of repair of buildings on the Crematorium site. They were informed that the buildings on the road frontage had been disposed on and the chapel had been closed due to its current state.  The Committee were advised that they were at liberty to recommend an alternative course of action such as including the repair of the chapel in the Capital Programme. It was confirmed that relation to commercial activity the Crematorium and Bereavement Services was an area that had already been identified by the Council. Housing was also being looked at in depth with a visit to Wokingham Borough Council planned.

The Leader of the Council felt that the savings and income generation would be achieved by a combination of measures with the Council ceasing to provide certain services and moving into partnerships with other authorities via the Mid Kent Improvement Partnership in order to generate an income.

Some Members felt that there was an opportunity to build on the successes of the environmental enforcement team’s litter enforcement expanding a self funding service to other areas of the borough. The Leader of the Council informed members that the Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Mrs Ring, was investigating this at present. It was agreed that this was an area that should be explored more fully. 

A Member felt there would be benefit in looking at parking enforcement and in particular non-compliance with residents parking across the borough to ensure that there was a fair and consistent approach taken. Officers agreed that this was something that could be investigated and adjustments could be made to service delivery but in terms of the budget for parking enforcement this could not be increased.

Officers informed Members of the Council’s policy on setting fees and charges detailed in the budget strategy report on fees and charges. This informed the range of issues considered by Officers in considering fees and charges and areas of income generation of which £140,000 had been identified.  Members observed that proposed increases were in areas where they could be sustained.

A Member of the Committee highlighted that Maidstone Borough Council was not enforcing mooring charges along the river and were informed that these were enforced at certain times of the year when it was considered financially viable to do so.  Members felt that this was an area that could be explored further and an opportunity could be being missed in promoting Maidstone via boating and tourism organisations as a place to come and moor boats free of charge.

Mr Riley moved on to the Council’s Capital Programme and other areas of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. He explained that the New homes Bonus would be used in lieu of assets for the Council’s Capital Programme.  This was due to one property remaining unsold and a key proposal within the budget strategy was to delay the sale of this asset in order to get the best price.

The Infrastructure Delivery Plan was discussed and the Community Infrastructure Levy which would replace Section 106 agreements.

The Capital Programme for 2015/16 remained blank and would be informed with the information from the Infrastructure Delivery Plan which would provide the details of the infrastructure required to deliver the Core Strategy.

Finally Mr Riley explained the recent consultation with residents to establish which statutory services were important.  Residents had been asked to consider levels of customer services provided in areas such as the Gateway and in relation to Officer response times by email and letter.  It was explained that the information gathered would be used to inform work being undertaken on a customer programme and was not being used to make immediate savings. Members were informed that if changes were to be made to achieve savings to customer service the intention would be to direct the saving to another ‘channel’ and increase its resources.  Mr Riley gave the example of the website and work being carried out to utilise it as a customer services tool.

With reference to the consultation some Members sought clarification on the way in which responses was gathered from residents and were informed that a day had been spent at the Gateway and a further two days in the Mall. There were concerns that the results were overly simplistic and not fully representative of the residents of Maidstone. They were told that the responses had been kept separate.  The Committee were informed that the respondents would be mapped by postcode to help evaluate the responses.

Ms Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, explained that a recent Overview and Scrutiny review had also helped identify that the Gateway was poorly used during its extended opening hours on a Thursday evening and a Saturday morning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Public Sector Income Generation Conference – Seizing Opportunities

Wednesday 12^th October 2011 at The Barbican, London

Attendees: Cllr Fay Gooch, Orla Sweeney and Ellie Kershaw

Highlights of interest to MBC

Speakers
Chair opening address: Colin Cram, Former Chief Executive, North West Centre of Excellence, ,and Director, Marc 1 Ltd	·         Efficiency & Reform is at the top of the Government’s agenda What will Councils look like in 20 years time? ·         Extreme: councils becoming businesses Virtual Councils: just letting contracts; just commissioning services. ·         Councils in competition with each other: higher risks come with that. No Audit Commission to raise the red flag; no safeguards. ·         Greater Manchester is a unit of councils joining together to take the opportunity and to provide an economic unit
Keynote Address: Alison Scott, Assistant Director, Local Government Finance & Policy, CIPFA	·         Local Government will survive ·         Depressing: effects of cuts; impact on services Yet Social Care and care for the most vulnerable is increasing. Optimistic: The reaction is resource reduction: Councils are adapting ·         Balance risks and reward ·         New opportunities: shared services; biggest gains by working on commonalities and building on experience. ·         Building on small gains is better, more appropriate. Mutually work with the 3rd sector. We can be commercial yet still manage non-commercial services – it’s our strength! ·         Focus on gradual gain: messy if done too quickly or too radically
Guest Speakers: Paula Lucci, Head of Research, New Local Government Network Cllr Peter Fleming – Leader, Sevenoaks District council, Chairman of the Local Government Group Improvement Programme Board	·         Value for money: smarter use of assets ·         Can’t be all things to all men: focus on strengths with a ‘we can do it’ attitude. ·         Share assets rather than relying on Council tax. ·         We’re good at partnerships: partnership is about trust, wanting to be there, built up over a long time.   ·         We’re good at listening, at finding ways round things ·         Companies like Serco etc are driven by cost, not by value. Residents want value for money, not lowest cost. Don’t sell what the public really values (eg forests!) ·         Possible tension between what businesses want and what councils need to do, but we’re not always in competition e.g. Community Wardens are sponsored by business.
Case Studies	Strategic Estates Partnerships – how they could benefit local authorities: ·         First joint venture of its kind in the NHS:  ‘Red Rose Corporate Services’ with ‘Lancashire Care’ ·         Must invest time and energy getting into bed with the right people. ·         Good Asset management encourages re-investment. ·         You don’t need to own assets to deliver the services ·         Selling = short term gain ·         Rationalisation = medium term gain ·         Joint venture = longer term ·         It’s not PFI – PFI aren’t always aligned with their parties Note MBC decided against going down this route some while ago as our asset base not sufficiently large / suitable) ·         Be clear what you are trying to achieve
	Increasing Revenues, Saving Money: Improving Debt Collection ·         The public and private sector are actually one economy – we share customers. The key difference is that the public sector can’t choose who it lends to. Key similarities are how to collect more money more cheaply. ·         Important to differentiate between the can’t pay (extreme financial hardship) and won’t pay (extreme lack of intent to pay) ·         Need clean and correct details. The more information you have, the easier to trace. ·         32% pay Council Tax late. 19% forget to pay: Send texts! ·         Technology is working faster than the law. Our kids are the customers of tomorrow therefore we must use IT
David Lee, Council Leader, Wokingham Borough Council	Wokingham was the worse funded authority in the country. ·         They wanted /needed to be self financing, so set up subsidised companies. ·         Objective was to do things more effectively, not to make savings or cut services, and to commission services. The delivery model was the one that was most efficient, whether commissioning services in house or externally ·         They set up a trading company to enable people to buy the services. It’s outside Local Authority legislation therefore they were able to make a profit. ·         They are Teckal exempt (public procurement legislation) ·         Wokingham Housing Ltd Wokingham Enterprises Ltd etc
Peter Cosmetatos, Director of Policy (Finance), British Property Federation	·         Leads policy on Finance and EU legislation ·         The Private Sector: look at their expertise and our expertise. They are not the enemy. ·         Look at common ground to promote agendas. ·         Be clear what you want to achieve ·         Think carefully to get the most attractive bids and outcomes
Paul Obrien, Chief Executive, Association for Public Service Excellence	·         There are practical things a local authority can do e.g. opportunities for renewable energy. Start with solar PV. Economic advantages not nut environmental ·         Examples of  municipal entrepreneurs: o    Vehicle maintenance, MOTs o    Tree inspections o    Asset management ·         The Localism Bill – what’s it all about? Crack on with what you think is right.

Visit to Maidstone Prison Print Shop

26 October 2011

Attended by:

Councillor Fay Gooch

Councillor David Pickett

Councillor Stephen Paine

Councillor Michael Yates

Councillor Mike Hogg

Orla Sweeney (Overview and Scrutiny Officer)

• Print Shop – Made up of a number of workshops
• Employs 105 inmates
• Established in 1909
• Manager Paul Cadman is required to give an annual capacity forecast which has now risen to in excessive of £1 Million. 
• Process begins with the job sheet being received from head office.
• Paul Cadman as manager orders the supplies for next day delivery (no stock kept)
• Graphic design is the next stage – undertaken by the in house graphic design team – once agreed by the customer
• A job sheet acts as a tracking system
• At time of visit there were 38 printing jobs in progress
• Every stage of the process is part of the training programme.
• An aluminium plate is created for the art work, the design etched into the sheet with lasers.  4 are needed for each (to make up the colour)
• Printers for the Print Shop are centrally funded
• Savings are achieved by the Prison Services because printing work was previously contracted out.  This is now produced in-house and the process facilitates training for the inmates.  60% reduction in cost.
• The majority of the work undertaken is for the Prison and Magistrates Courts
• Kenneth Clark MP, Secretary of State for Justice– working Prison Model was referenced
• Job Tracking/Performance/Monitoring form was designed in house
• The type of paper used is dependant on the customer’s specifications.
• Various contacts are in place for supplies (varying specifications).
• Print facility needs to run continuously so lunch is brought into the facility
• The Print Rooms waste is tracked and there is a culture of reuse.
• In relation to the staff – all instructors are forma Print background and inmates skills are utilised from proof reading skills to engineers and repairs
• Qualifications are offered – NOCN (national Open College Network) Graphic Design Level 3, equivalent to A-Level.  In some areas there was progression on to Level 4.
• The Prison Service has Print Units all over the country
• Maidstone can complete large jobs (5,000) using printers capable of producing 10-11,000 copies per hour (up to 16,000)
• It was highlighted that the Print Unit could operate continuously and there would be no shortage of volunteers but a balance was needed with the finishing process - unlimited printing could cause a bottle neck at the finishing stages.
• Mr Cadman explained that there was a monitoring process as part of each job sheet which included quality control and accountability.
• It was highlighted to Members that the Unit were conscious of the private sector and did not want to impact on private businesses

 

 

 

• It was explained that jobs were priced by head office who priced jobs, careful not to undercut the private sector. Due to labour costs the unit had the ability to undercut every other organisation. Savings were achieved through paper costs (holding no stock and using a variety of suppliers).
• Big Clients included: Banner, Rank Zerox and Timpsons, HMSC, Insight Magazine for the Ministry of Justice and NHS.
• The unit was kept clean by a permanent cleaner
• Inmates were paid £8.10 weekly wage
• The Unit operates in line with the prisons Decency Strategy –‘ more respect, better environment.’
• A simple recycling set up was noted. It reflected the ingrained ethos of reuse and recycling across the prison (in house recycling facility also).  Black bins were used for litter, Green for clean waste paper and Red for Chemical waste.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Compiled Calls for Evidence

The following survey was designed by the Committee using software package Survey Monkey and circulated to Staff and Councillors as an anonymous questionnaire. It was later used as part of a press release in the Kent Messenger and on the Council’s Facebook page.

Responses from Staff, Councillors and the public

Responses to Survey

. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

Providing a scribe service that would enhance ideas that a resident wanted to put down, i.e. when he/she wanted to air a grievance with either a paper or with a outside body (excluding legal matters.

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

Us IT to help people starting up computer access.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Consider using MBS vehicles to help movement of awkward items

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

we are developing the potential for providing personal travel planning advice.

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

we are developing the potential for providing travel planning advice for small businesses.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

The Council could set up a work hub facility for small businesses either on the first floor gateway area or in the 6th floor which I understand is being looked at being got rid of. Instead of gettign rid of it, it could be made availabel to small businesses to sue as a work hub and printing facilites retained for thier use (at a fee of course). This would benefit local small business the council.

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

How about getting our IT department to develop a free smartphone application, working with the Visit Maidstone team, to say 'What's on in Maidstone'. This could be done in conjunction with the KM's 'What's On' as well as Downs Mail's 'What's On' service which is currently printed in their newspapers. They could pay a small fee to get their services online, and we could fund the service (and make a small margin) from selling adverts to pubs, hotels etc. People can add their own events to allow pubs to advertise band nights, for example, but anyone wanting to advertise an event could pay a small fee, e.g. £2, to stop abuse of the service (e.g. people advertising house parties etc!). Hopefully this means the app looks after itself, rather than needing a member of staff to run it. Apps are supposed to be very easy to make in this day and age, so there is probably someone on the IT team who can do it - or who knows someone who can do it. This ties up with the Communication and Leisure and Culture strategies. It could be modelled on the 'Time out' website for London. If nothing else, it'll get some good press for the council - especially if it is done with the papers as partners. Can be used to highlight events at the Theatre and Leisure centre, to help drive up revenue there.

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

As above

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Make it clearer how community groups can hire out facilities, e.g. parks, for events. Could the council loan out equipment to manage grounds to RSLs and even private households and businesses?

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

I'm required to fill in this box to proceed. My suggestion relates to box two. But, while I'm here how about premium number residential telephone IT Helpdesk servce

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

Hosted email, file and possibly web services.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Not my area. Sorry

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

The Councils Property Section used to offer a design and construction service to other public bodies and built several village halls in the surrounding villages. We stopped making a profit when the service broken up and the council housing went.

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

I am the Council's Conservation Architect, working on listed buildings and Scheduled Ancient monuments. Not a common skill set.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Easy - listen to the legal and property professional’s advice and stop interfering.

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

After school clubs (Assumes spare capacity, which is unlikely)

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

Event/conference organisation (Again, assumes spare capacity, which is unlikely)

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Increase planning and building control fees to fully recover the cost of providing the service +10% (assuming we have the powers). Introduce road pricing/tolls/single user car pricing

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

See Q3 below

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

See Q3 below

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

http://sd.defra.gov.uk/2011/01/sustainable-business-model-a-seven-point-plan/ http://sd.defra.gov.uk/2011/03/six-steps-to-significant-change/

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

COPYING AND SCANNING SERVICES

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

I AM A GRADUATE IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES AND HAVE EXPERIENCE IN MARKETING ETC I HAVE SUBMITTED IDEAS FOR THE BRIGHT SPARKS AND RECEIVED AN AWARD FOR MY IDEA.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

UTILISE ALL THE EMPTY SPACE IN THE GATEWAY ESCALATOR AREA FOR EVENTS ETC ADVERTISING.

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

1. On site (at Maidstone House) childminding service for Council staff and any 'left over' spaces could be offered to the public maybe in conjunction with the Department for Works and Pensions helping long term unemployed with childcare when they go back into work. 2. MBC to offer a floristry service to the public esp to cater for Births, Deaths and Marriages. As an example, Glasgow City Council have run this service very successfully for nurmerous years now. 3. Start a running group(s) for Council staff and the Public. Different groups available to cater for all fitness levels. The memberships could be set up through Mote Park Leisure Centre and paid for on a quarterly basis. 4. Car parking - have a scheme where residents/businesses can purchase permits for Council owned car parks on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis.

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

1. Offer printing services to local companies. 2. Offer the 'Weight for It' scheme, currently available to MBC staff only, to members of the public and carry out the sessions in the evening and charge for this 10 week 'course'.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

1. Utilise the space at the ground floor of the gateway building (under the stairs and escalators) by offering pitches to local small businesses

 

 

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

Parks

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

Events

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Search for a large event organiser and let Mote Park for big festival event such as the Radio 1 big weekend

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

-

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

Fire risk assessments - all commercial premises by law need to have a fire risk assessment. Project Management - we could sell this as a service to KCC, local housing associations. Building surveying - we have the expertise to undertake condition surveys. Clerk of works - we could undertake this for local developers or housing associations.

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

I noticed that the park and ride at willington street was closed on a sunday. Why not have a bootfair there? There is a boot fair at sutton road, where they charged £10 per pitch and there must have been circa 100 pitches. Entry was £3 and there must have been at keast 200 people there across the day. The boot fair could be advertised on the councils website and via posters at the carpark and also in mote park which is very popular. If the event is held once a month, you may make £15K per year? Another site could be mote park? If the high speed train is permanant at maidstone west and is a success, couldnt 13 tonbridge road be turned in a car park?

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

?

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

?

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

Charge 20p to use MBC public toilets

 

1. What can you offer the residents of Maidstone? Can you think of a 'paid for' service that yours or another department could offer?

unknown

2. What niche service could you offer the public and/or private sector?

unknown

3. How could Maidstone Borough Council manage their land and/or resources in a manner that could generate an income? (or in a manner that is more efficient?)

utlise buildings like the town hall as a farmers market on a sunday or to show artwork of local up and coming artists, wedding receptions, proms etc

Emailed responses to calls for evidence received

The ground floor underneath the Gateway that is currently unoccupied could be used as a baby crèche/ nursery, primarily for staff to use, and then depending on numbers could be opened up to KCC staff potentially.

Reasons for keeping it for staff:

Should there be any problems, the parent is close by to pick the baby up.

It would save on traffic congestion as they’d be travelling to work anyway.

It would help with flexi time, as it would coincide with time for travelling to work regardless.

Should the parent wish, they can spend lunch with their child.

It would be comparably cheaper than private nurseries.

It would be run by qualified child minders, so the council would be offering employment.

How about joining up the Maidstone borough council electronic news letter with the Maidstone town mail this will then have more news.

Joint cooperation with the town centre initiative and the council seems to be the right way forward.

• Getting rid of the parking tickets and having it done electronic. So you just pay your money, plug your reg number into the machine and then the warden can just plug the reg number into a machine to determine whether you’ve paid or not. Would save money on paper and constantly having to restock the machines in all the car parks
• Or can the above be a text service, similar to those in London?
• Getting the waste collection people to help deliver things that have to go to all households – as the visit every home throughout the week anyway. for example teaming up with elections etc.
• If the depot has refuse lorry facilities can it be opened up as a car wash?
• Turning the town hall into an exhibition space

How about getting our IT department to develop a free smartphone application, working with the Visit Maidstone team, to say 'What's on in Maidstone'. This could be done in conjunction with the KM's 'What's On' as well as Downs Mail's 'What's On' service which is currently printed in their newspapers. They could pay a small fee to get their services online, and we could fund the service (and make a small margin) from selling adverts to pubs, hotels etc. People can add their own events to allow pubs to advertise band nights, for example, but anyone wanting to advertise an event could pay a small fee, e.g. £2, to stop abuse of the service (e.g. people advertising house parties etc!). Hopefully this means the app looks after itself, rather than needing a member of staff to run it. Apps are supposed to be very easy to make in this day and age, so there is probably someone on the IT team who can do it - or who knows someone who can do it. This ties up with the Communication and Leisure and Culture strategies. It could be modelled on the 'Time out' website for London. If nothing else, it'll get some good press for the council - especially if it is done with the papers as partners. Can be used to highlight events at the Theatre and Leisure centre, to help drive up revenue there.

We should look first at the cost effectiveness of the income we currently collect. Stray dog fees is one that comes to mind where we write off significant numbers of small amounts that incur the full cost of administration. Also, though it is sensitive, litter fines that are progressed to legal action are expensive too.

If we can find a cost effective way of charging for small fees and fines we should elect to charge all statutory fees that we can.

Share our procurement or legal sections with outside organisations and develop a business section that can take on other businesses interests, prove  that we are looking forward in our objectives. and strive to ensure excellence and a business to be proud of .

Take on training and develop a training facility section that can train sections and personnel for anyone in local government or outside organisations.

Develop the reach the summit to outside businesses and monitor their performance to ensure value for money.

Just had another thought for revenue raising.... Next year the Environment Agency are introducing a compulsory 'boat MOT' called the BSS (Boat Safety Scheme). I believe there are only 5 people on the River Medway who are qualified to carry out these BSS certificates. What about the council sending someone off to a training course and then providing BSS checks too? There might be some capacity in the depot staff perhaps (or maybe not, I don't know). That way the council provides a service to boat owners, but we also work to improve safety on the river (there have been a couple of boat deaths within Maidstone this year due to non-compliance with boat safety standards).

I hope that you don’t mind me emailing you with my idea.

I noticed in last week’s Kent Messenger that people are annoyed that KCC have been cutting down trees and not replacing them all, and now say that it’s up to individual councils to replace them. I’ve also seen in this week’s KM that you are collecting ideas for money-generating schemes for the Council.

This idea wouldn’t make money - unless the Council would like to collect trees etc and then sell them, which I’m sure would also be workable - but it would save the Council having to spend money on new plants.

For some time now I’ve been thinking that maybe Maidstone Borough Council might like to ask people whether they have any trees or shrubs that they might like to donate?

For example, the previous owners of the house where we now live (40 Bell Meadow, Maidstone) planted a spreading juniper tree right next to the neighbour’s boundary. It is about 10 feet high and 6 feet across, and the neighbours have had to cut it back on their side to stop it interfering with their fence and their tree, and every year I have to cut it back too. It’s totally the wrong type of plant for this type of garden, and absolutely in the wrong place! What it really needs is to be in a wide open space, such as part of the landscaping for the new Library, or maybe in Mote Park as part of its regeneration scheme, or other parks or alongside roads. Then it could grow to its heart’s content and become a magnificent specimen - there’s one at Maidstone Hospital that is really impressive.

All it would need is a couple of men with a digger and a lorry to take it from here and transport it to its new site with a big enough rootball so that (with a bit of attention such as watering for the first week or so) it would continue to grow happily in the space which nature meant it to have. We also have a laurel tree, two decorative conifers and a couple of other things that they could have as well, all for free. The times I’ve looked at them and thought - if only they could be in the right space, they’d look wonderful! But they are just not in the right place here.

I’m sure that there will be lots of people in the same position as us, living with things that they or others before them have planted in ignorance of the size to which these trees and shrubs will grow, and that will never reach their full potential unless they have the proper space in which to flourish. If you were to advertise for them you will probably receive lots of offers!

This would save the Council having to spend any money at all in purchasing new trees/shrubs for their own planting schemes, at whatever cost they would normally be, and if they can sell them to other places (such as businesses who are landscaping their surrounding land), so much the better.

It would also be a good way of recycling plants which would leave small, over-crowded front gardens and instead enhance Council and public areas, provide a haven for wildlife and also make sites instantly look more ‘established’ because the trees and shrubs would already be mature.

I hope that you think that this idea would be a workable one; please feel free to contact me if you would like further details or if the Council would like to have our juniper and any other shrubs to start with, to see whether or not the scheme would work.

Thank you for considering it.

Facebook responses

 

Hi Maidstone,

**** also commented on Maidstone Borough Council's status.

**** wrote "I'm not keen on this idea. Who would want to get married or have a reception here? No parking close by and the residents of maidstone at the bus stops having a good old beak. The town hall is nice inside if you don't mind the boards with the councillors listed in your photos. There's no opportunity for photos outside. In comparison the Archbishops palace has nice grounds, the palace itself is lovely, close convenient parking and is away from the hustle and bustle in the town, plus it sounds a bit more salubrious on the invitations. I really don't think many brides would want to be outside the town hall for any length of time with all the Maidstone chavs watching. Having said that I did see a stretch hummer outside the archbishops palace for a wedding the other week, classy!"

 

 

 

 

 

Responses from Local authorities

Tower Hamlets

Tower Hamlets Council host music events on annual basis, attracting festival goers from across the country. These include: Lovebox, the Apple Cart Festival and Underage Festival aimed at under 19s.

In their email response Tower Hamlets Events team explained:

Tower Hamlets Arts and Events does have a lot of experience and expertise in this area including major music festivals and smaller corporate events. We note with interest that more local authorities are looking at more effective ways of exploiting their assets.  I have been charged, as part of our own income generation plans, to look at how we might effectively sell our services to other boroughs, either through consultancy input or indeed actually managing their events programme for them. It is a complex business and I think there's limited benefit in a one off briefing but happy to consider this. I suggest it would require a day of visiting your parks if we are to make any sensible observations about their potential.  Ideally it would be myself and a member of my events team doing the assessment and attending the meeting in the evening. For this we would charge a fee of £1,500 all expenses included.

What you would get from this would be:

• Quick assessment of your parks, suggestions for making them more event friendly, what potential markets they would suit.
• Brief history of event development in Tower Hamlets and key issues such as managing resident relations, licencing, environmental impact
• suggested ways forward depending on scale of your ambitions
• opportunity to pick our brains.  What we offer over private sector event companies is an intimate knowledge of the issues for local authorities and how to navigate through the barriers and potential pitfalls.

Lambeth

Lambeth Council’s events team supplied the following responses to questions:

·         How did your team come together?

There was an Entertainments Team, however the council decided to bring in an events consultant to write an events strategy and as a result of this the events team was born in 2006/2007

 

·         Did someone with in-house expertise take the initiative?

Yes (as above)

 

·         Is your team made up of various areas of expertise i.e. licensing, project management, health and safety, environmental enforcement, waste and recycling etc or do you have a procedure or process in place within the organisation that brings together the various departments? Is this all provided in-house or do you outsource areas?

We all have different event organisational skills, I organise cultural events within the borough, I have colleagues who have production knowledge, concessions knowledge, commercial experience etc.  We all have different experience and expertise in event organisation.  This enables use to offer a full service to people wishing to hold an event in a Lambeth park or Open Space.  If an event organiser is planning a large event, there will need to present at the Safety Advisory Group which is made up of the relevant stakeholders, such as the police, fire service, ambulance service, licensing, food safety, emergency planning, community safety, parks etc.

 

·         What sort of events do you organise?

In house, we organise between 6 and 10 events per year, these include Lambeth Country Show, Fireworks, sustainable events, transport events etc.  We facilitate around 300 external events per annum.

 

·         Do you advertise and if so where?

Yes, local media, the Council’s website and social network sites.  Also on JCDecauxs etc.

 

·         Who do you target? (corporate organisations or community groups)

All in house events are targeted at the Lambeth community.

 

·         Brockwell Park and Clapham Common have hosted all manner of events over the years from political rallies (The anti nazi league march and music event), music festivals, country shows – events that attract people from all around the Country to firework displays and events in the community calendar – Are these wide ranging events managed by the same team/resources?  Are these events sought by your team or are you approached? Lambeth Events Team manage and facilitate all events that take place in the borough.  If an external organisation plan an event they will manage it but the events team will facilitate it.

 

 

• The Committee are very much looking at events management as a way of providing an income for the authority and utilising the borough’s assets. Are events an area that has generated significant income for Lambeth?  If so, do your team operate as a commercial arm of the Council? Does your team compete with the private sector and if so how have you become business like in your approach? By hiring out our parks and open spaces we do bring in revenue for the council.  We have a rate card which we use to advise event organisers of the fees that are relevant to their type of event.  For an example, a small community group will pay less for site hire than a large commercial company.  We do not really compete with the private sector as we offer a different service.

 

Maidstone Mela

11 September 2011

The Committee engaged with residents at Maidstone Mela. The questionnaire conducted provided the following results.  In addition to this the public made a number of additional comments and suggestions.

Property

• Adverts on bins
• Electricity generation
• Golding Homes let empty shops to organisations – virtually for free, for a nominal fee. If a charity and useful they shouldn’t be charged.  It helps maintain the building, stopping it from going to rack and ruin.
• Hazlitt – events needed
• Crematorium – needs refurbishment
• Carriage Museum could generate an income
• Reopen Toilets and pay
• Hire Out Town Hall
• Open Historic Buildings as a tourist attraction

Parks and Open Spaces

 

• In relation to charging for car parking ‘keep it free’
• Kiosks utilised for ‘fast food’
• Kiosks liked the way they are
• Youth Clubs – advertise to Youth clubs
• Only charge for parking if accessible transport and disabled parking is provided free of charge
• Invite organisations to sponsor children’s playgrounds, like roundabouts are.
• Kiosks (if empty) grants are available to help utilisation?
• Kiosks – should be sophisticated food outlets
• Kiosks – bars
• Pop concerts
• Car parking charges – not on a regular basis (only for events)
• Regards kiosks as a public service – private companies could push the price up
• Against event in Park – for walking dogs and picnics
• KCC charges
• Parks – adventure playground, children’s birthday parties at the cafe
• Markets – better in Parks?

• Kiosks selling souvenirs
• Kiosks are a bit run down
• Kiosks – seasonal – taken into consideration in contracts
• Kiosks – franchised to Costa etc. staff are unhelpful

 

 

Events

 

• Music festivals – not too regular
• Wedding venue – not parks
• Markets – too regimented – 2^nd hand stalls required to display price (Lockmeadow)
• Parishes – work with look at what they do (re wedding venues) – Barming for example (use of village halls etc)
• High Street – consider disabled access
• Lots more we could do – more joined up thinking – Lockmeadow – has only one road in...
• The Town Hall suitable as a wedding venue
• Music events wanted
• Drive in movies
• Open Air Theatre at Archbishops Palace
• Seasonal wedding venues (Parks etc)
• County Hall area needs improvement
• Not nearly enough use of sports pitches
• People will pay for parking but have to be careful – 50p?
• Specialist shows on agricultural land
• No one uses the Open Air Theatre
• Events – as long as don’t affect neighbouring residents
• Carnival
• Car Parking charges – if not too much
• People like to have their wedding and reception in the same place, at the Town hall parking would be a problem
• Love markets!
• Markets tried at Margate
• Too much completion for specialist shows

 

 

River

• Hoardings to be decorated
• Riverside bar and restaurant – at Malta Inn
• Cycle Path – ruined – needed away from the river
• Boat hire – already available at Allington
• Publicise the artist quarter – consider local artists/craftsperson – such as Charmain Beaton on Pudding Lane
• River bar closed – encourage something like Mu Mu – an all night cafe/bar.
• Under River Arches – could develop and rent.
• Mooring chagrined should be collected – long term pros and cons?
• Start up units for borough – so far only one let at equilibrium – not offering sufficient encouragement.
• Artist’s quarter – a good idea
• Should defiantly collect mooring charges
• Should have built theatre and restaurants along river
• Developing cycle path along river – bad idea
• Hotel/conference centre
• Cycle path – safety issues
• River area – highest priority
• More needed for locals
• Get rid of retail warehouses along river
• Knock down travel Lodge
• Speed boat hire
• Mooring charges –demonstrates prestige
• Missed opportunity at River – Bristol has low rise housing and a night time culture
• Tonbridge and Malling licence boats, worth considering artist quarter and riverside culture is a good concept
• Artist’s quarter needs publicising
• If River Bar closed, it was not making money?
• Boat Hire was done in 1970s

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In-house expertise

• If good enough – could be offered to start up companies
• HR and Legal services were suggested, ‘but could end up costing’
• Help start up business up at equilibrium, could encourage – not publicised.]
• HR for new businesses
• Waste –heat energy recycling – helping others improve energy efficientcy
• Performance Management and HR for strat up business and Project Management training
• A Touring Hazlitt theatre
• Market Advertising
• Hire out more (staff/property)

 

 

 

• Could result in more staff being taken on (positive) but could take business away from other. In favour of mixed sector, mixed income but as with NHS there is an effect on wait times and the public
• Printing, HR and Performance Management

Waste and recycling

• Don’t understand how food bins helps when compared to volume of black bin
• Need to change culture
• Prefer bins than bags
• More or less bins dependent on site
• Enable charities to provider the Freighter service
• ALL valuable materials – the waste we don’t use, electricity produced by the incinerator
• Freighter/Social Enterprise should have some input from staff – there was a church project that failed
• Wouldn’t back separating out valuable materials for recycling
• Too much already
• Glass Collection – suggested
• Green sacks too expensive
• Happy with current service
• Where does heat from swimming pool go?
• Charitable Freighter collection
• Would separate more valuable materials if not too complex
• Make it easier to recycle, cut costs
• Plastic Tetra Packs need recycling
• Too much packaging!
• In favour of enabling charities to collect waste
• New Waste and Recycling in Medway paper and card is separated. The value has gone down. Don’t make more complicated
• Legalities involved in offering incentives...
• In Medway and Sittingbourne the Freighter is provided by a Social Enterprise. 
• In Medway kitchen and garden waste are not separated – more efficient approach
• Offset with Council Tax

 

 

 

 

 

Existing revenue streams

• Litter enforcement and ‘people being sick’
• At an Essex Council – Bin men don’t ever collect on Mondays because of bank holidays – On Mondays bin men do maintenance works – this approach aids efficiencies.
• Litter enforcement for dog mess
• More discretion with litter enforcement – 3 strikes
• Planning advice charged at £10 per sq metre
• Crematorium – pond needs fish and benches and also a younger caretaker
• Litter Enforcement – good job
• More Drug and Alcohol support needed.
• Expand Litter Enforcement to fly tipping
• Market Crematorium elsewhere and offer services for obese
• Don’t reduce car parking!
• Car Parks – make more of them
• Litter enforcement is a good deterrent
• Season Tickets for car Parks

Other

What other ideas can you think of that would generate an income or create efficiency savings?

• Would rather pay the council for local student bus passes
• We waste a lot – high street money spent on meetings etc before ‘will we, won’t we’. Not enough joined up thinking
• Are parking attendants on a ‘quota’ – scrutinising this – the common belief that they do detracts from Maidstone
• Stop Benefits – intense questionnaires
• A Pub
• The carriage Museum
• Keep as much as we can in-house and keep empty properties occupied
• Improve public area with cafes/landscaping/art
• Interim semi-bulky collection at mid price range?
• Pay Toilets
• More advertising
• More Direct Sales
• Cemetery Memorials
• Electricity
• Internal Expertise – Hire Out
• Advertising
• Hire Out Town Hall
• Printing/Publishing
• Sale and redevelopment of Car Parks
• Energy efficiencies
• Accessibility – tackling inequalities.
• Empty buildings should be let on short term leases and taken back when needed by the public
• Public consultations are too complicated – intrusive questions – should be idiot proof.
• Art galleries for teenagers, creative stimulus.
• Music and Arts events
• Art Gallery for young people to display
• Switch cafe not open when out of school
• Hot air balloon rides in parks
• More events – make the most of space
• Better Enforcement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This report is available in alternative formats.     For further information about this service please contact the Scrutiny Section on 01622 602524.

 

The report is also available on the Council’s website:

www.maidstone.gov.uk/osc