Agenda item

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

5.1         James Lee, Director of Communities, Partnerships and Leisure introduced the report and the following points were noted:

·         The operation and impact of Local Assemblies had recently been reviewed and principles developed for a revised approach that would focus on wider community development.

·         The review was set against the context of a significant budget cut from April 2022. This would include a reduction in staffing and the discontinuation of the current budget for meetings and engagement. However, ward based funding would continue through the allocation of Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy (NCIL) funding.

·         The options to revamp Local Assemblies recognise, and build on, the strengths and benefits of the current approach; but address areas for improvement, particularly around engagement with a wider and more representative resident-base.

·         The emerging Council-wide work on improving the resident experience and developing an overarching Digital Strategy would inform and support the approach taken in relation to Local Assemblies.

·         Key elements of the proposed approach included (a) retention of the ward based structure, including named support officers; (b) retention of formal assembly meetings, although largely delivered online utilising community support; and (c) coordination of local community networks of activity.

·         As part of the greater coordination of wider activity, advantage would be taken of other existing structures like the Police’s Safer Neighbourhood Teams Ward Panels. It was hoped that this would result in a more holistic and cost-effective approach.

·         The importance of retaining some face to face activity was recognised and this could be delivered in partnership with local community groups and organisations.

·         There would be an ‘annual report’ for each ward highlighting specific local concerns for action by relevant partners and highlighting successes from the previous year.

·         The role of elected members would be crucial in terms of curating conversations and ensuring local issues are brought to the fore.

·         It was recognised that residents must feel empowered and not put upon by the new arrangements, there must be a positive transfer of responsibility / expectation; and the council would need to be ready to respond to issues and concerns raised at assemblies in a timely fashion.

·         It would also be important to avoid local community networks from feeling that the council was co-opting work the community was doing.

5.2      In the discussion that followed the following points were raised by Members and responded to by officers:

·           There were pros and cons to online meetings, they offered flexibility and could increase participation but they ran the risk of alienating those that were digitally excluded.

The move to a strongly digital based platform would take digital exclusion into account and a blended model with some face-to-face activity would be retained. Even without the cuts necessitating such a move, the pandemic had highlighted the strength of local community leadership and harnessing this would have key benefits. Most people involved in the local assemblies previously were not digitally excluded and it was recognised that it had always been a challenge to reach all communities via the programme and ensure diverse participation. It was therefore important that the new approach worked hard to reach more people and a small element of the advertising budget would be retained to assist with this. There would be a need to use popular means of communication as ‘notes through doors’ were not as effective as some social media and face to face communication channels.

·           The report listed the groups that might be involved in the new approach, but this did not include groups representing all protected characteristics or the Voluntary and Community Sector.

This was an oversight, they would all be included as they were all core to the new approach.

·           It was not clear when the next round of NCIL funding would be allocated, knowing this would assist with the pacing of spend.

A decision on when the next round would be allocated had not yet been taken but the current allocation was utilising NCIL allocated to the council up to 2020. The 2024/5 financial year would be a sensible estimate as this would allow a further four years of NCIL funding to be allocated.

·           It would be useful if Members could have an information pack on NCIL funding so they could talk to and engage local communities.

Officers were hopeful that the NCIL guidance currently being worked on, and anticipated to be ready by the end of week, would cover this function. If anything further was required this could be provided. There would also be opportunities for people wishing to lead bids to liaise with, and be supported by, officers at funding workshops.

·           Would it be possible to have at least one formal, in-person Local Assembly meeting each year? Although the programme management approach might work in some wards, those wards without natural community leaders might struggle and not have the capacity present within the community to arrange in-person or even online meetings. The level of officer support available at a ward level would be important in these circumstances. The approach seemed to ask a lot of volunteers. A template or ‘how to’ guide for assembly meetings that could be provided to people might assist. The desire for face to face activity must be balanced against the capacity of team in the face of significant budget cuts. However, officer capacity would be flexible and could be flexed towards those wards that most needed it, meaning that if there were particular reasons why a face to face meeting was required then these could be considered in planning resource allocation through the year.

Officers would work in partnership with the community and also take advantage of existing structures like the Police’s Safer Neighbourhood Teams Ward Panels. Member concern at streamlining and linking up with the police was acknowledged but incorporating ward assemblies and crime panels into a larger community meeting might help both bodies reach a wider audience and save resources.

5.3      As part of the discussion it was also noted that:

·           The move to recognise communities of identity as well as geographically based communities was welcomed by Members.

·           The bidding process for the allocation of borough wide NCIL had concluded and applications were currently being reviewed. Over 100 had been received, suggesting that the fund would be between four and five times over-subscribed. The assessment and recommendations would be presented to Mayor and Cabinet in November.

·           In theory, NCIL funding could be used to support meetings/activities of a Local Assembly itself as the funding can be used for Community Development activities such as this.

·           It was now proposed to remove one of the proposed stages in NCIL allocation. The original intention had been for the projects that were put forward to be uploaded to ‘commonplace’ so people could comment on them and this could be fed back to the assemblies. However, it was recognised that well mobilised groups could dominate this stage, and the value of retaining this stage was uncertain. The removal of this stage would mean that the assessment of projects and their fair presentation to Local Assemblies would be crucial.

5.4      The Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Social Care noted that the budget cuts would result in the loss of two officers from the team supporting Local Assemblies, which was regrettable, although each ward would still have a named officer. It should also be noted that councillors were all community leaders with the right knowledge, skills and expertise to arrange face to face meetings themselves, if desired. Local Assemblies would continue to be well advertised through a number of different channels and existing webpages could be developed further.

5.5       RESOLVED: That the report be noted.