Agenda, decisions and minutes

That the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 12 February 2024 be confirmed and signed as an accurate record of the proceedings, and that the outstanding actions be noted.

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor Alex Sanderson noted she had to leave the meeting after presenting and voting on the first three reports on the agenda.

If a Councillor has a disclosable pecuniary interest in a particular item, whether or not it is entered in the Authority’s register of interests, or any other significant interest which they consider should be declared in the public interest, they should declare the existence and, unless it is a sensitive interest as defined in the Member Code of Conduct, the nature of the interest at the commencement of the consideration of that item or as soon as it becomes apparent.

At meetings where members of the public are allowed to be in attendance and speak, any Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest or other significant interest may also make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter.  The Councillor must then withdraw immediately from the meeting before the matter is discussed and any vote taken.

Where Members of the public are not allowed to be in attendance and speak, then the Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration. Councillors who have declared other significant interests should also withdraw from the meeting if they consider their continued participation in the matter would not be reasonable in the circumstances and may give rise to a perception of a conflict of interest.

Councillors are not obliged to withdraw from the meeting where a dispensation to that effect has been obtained from the Standards Committee.

1.         Schools Block Budget 2024/25 Financial Year:

a.    To approve the Local Authority formula for allocating resources to Hammersmith & Fulham schools for 2024/25 as set out in Appendix 1, the Authority Proforma Tool (APT) for setting school budgets.

b.    To approve the National Funding Formula (NFF) transitional funding formula factor rates (as set out in Appendix 1) as the basis for calculating the 2024/25 schools funding formula, together with a 0.5% per pupil Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) protection for individual schools versus 2023/24 levels with respect to pupil led funding.

c.    To approve the transfer of £1.177m (1.0% of the total schools' block allocation) from the schools' block to the high needs block in the 2024/25 financial year. This is to support high needs education expenditure for special educational needs in Hammersmith and Fulham.  This is subject to Ministerial agreement from the Department of Education.

d.    To approve de-delegation budgets of £0.622m for maintained mainstream schools only which was agreed by Schools Forum on 16 January 2024.

e.    To approve the education functions budgets of £0.307m for maintained mainstream schools only, which was agreed by Schools Forum on 16 January 2024.

2.         Central Services Schools Block Budget 2024/25.

a.    To approve the proposed budget allocation for Central Services Schools Block DSG totalling £2.106m.

Councillor Aliya Afzal-Khan asked what services comprised the historic commitment to Central Services Schools Block (CSSB) and how they would be impacted by the CSSB allocation for 2024/25. She also asked how the High Needs Block expenditure would be spent to directly benefit young people and children with special education needs.

Councillor Alex Sanderson, Cabinet Member for Children and Education, replied that she would respond to both her questions in writing.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CABINET MEMBERS:

1.         Schools Block Budget 2024/25 Financial Year:

a.    To approve the Local Authority formula for allocating resources to Hammersmith & Fulham schools for 2024/25 as set out in Appendix 1, the Authority Proforma Tool (APT) for setting school budgets.

b.    To approve the National Funding Formula (NFF) transitional funding formula factor rates (as set out in Appendix 1) as the basis for calculating the 2024/25 schools funding formula, together with a 0.5% per pupil Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) protection for individual schools versus 2023/24 levels with respect to pupil led funding.

c.    To approve the transfer of £1.177m (1.0% of the total schools' block allocation) from the schools' block to the high needs block in the 2024/25 financial year. This is to support high needs education expenditure for special educational needs in Hammersmith and Fulham.  This is subject to Ministerial agreement from the Department of Education.

d.    To approve de-delegation budgets of £0.622m for maintained mainstream schools only which was agreed by Schools Forum on 16 January 2024.

e.    To approve the education functions budgets of £0.307m for maintained mainstream schools only, which was agreed by Schools Forum on 16 January 2024.

2.         Central Services Schools Block Budget 2024/25.

a.    To approve the proposed budget allocation for Central Services Schools Block DSG totalling £2.106m.

That Cabinet approves the decision for the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to become a Partner of the national Care Leaver Covenant.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CABINET MEMBERS:

That Cabinet approves the decision for the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to become a Partner of the national Care Leaver Covenant.

In fulfilling our aspirations and support for care leavers, we are seeking Cabinet support to enable the Council to implement the recommendations of the Pan London Housing Compact. To achieve this, officers are recommending that Cabinet:

1.    Adopts the guiding principle that care leavers up to the age of 25 should, if possible, be found as being in ‘priority need’ under homelessness legislation;

2.    Adopts the guiding principle that, if possible, no care leaver up to the age of 25 should be found ‘intentionally homeless’.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CABINET MEMBERS:

In fulfilling our aspirations and support for care leavers, we are seeking Cabinet support to enable the Council to implement the recommendations of the Pan London Housing Compact. To achieve this, officers are recommending that Cabinet:

1.    Adopts the guiding principle that care leavers up to the age of 25 should, if possible, be found as being in ‘priority need’ under homelessness legislation;

2.    Adopts the guiding principle that, if possible, no care leaver up to the age of 25 should be found ‘intentionally homeless’.

1.         That Cabinet notes and carefully considers the feedback received for the South Fulham (West) Clean Air Neighbourhood trial carried out from the time the experimental traffic management order detailed in the body of this report was made on 14th December 2022 (“ the Trial”)  in addition to the independent polling analysis (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2), alongside the data collected as part of the trial.

2.         That Cabinet approves the consulting and publication of the proposal to make  a permanent traffic management order for the South Fulham (West) Clean Air Neighbourhood project (as detailed in the section Permanent Order based on the Trial ) and delegates authority to the Strategic Director of Environment in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Public Realm to consider the responses received and make and publish the making of the permanent order  along with any necessary associated highway works subject to the outcome of the statutory consultation process.

3.         That Cabinet approves the publication of an experimental traffic order to implement further vehicle restrictions in Clancarty Road and Settrington Road (as detailed in the section New Experimental Order identified during the Trial) along with any necessary associated highway works.

4.         That Cabinet gives authority to the Strategic Director of Environment in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Public Realm to take all necessary steps to affect the decisions in recommendations 2 and 3.

Councillor Sharon Holder, Cabinet Member for Public Realm, introduced the report highlighting that the South Fulham (West) Clean Air Neighbourhood trial had been developed with residents and aimed to promote healthy living by protecting people from toxic air which could lead to serious health conditions. The trial intended to reduce congestion and pollution and used smart number plate technology to discourage out-of-borough motorists, who were not shopping in the area or visiting friends and family, from using residential streets as cut-throughs.

Cabinet received eleven valid deputations for this item. With the Leader’s permission each representative was permitted to address Cabinet for 5 minutes. The main points highlighted by each deputation were:

1. David Tarsh

• He said he was against the Clean Air Neighbourhood (CAN) scheme being made permanent as he believed the supporting information on the report was misleading.
• He said the Council’s data showed that air quality in South Fulham was not a problem even before the trial.
• He said the scheme did not have public support, had divided the local community, endangered businesses, and harmed people’s livelihoods.
• He believed the Opinium survey was not transparent on their questions.
• He believed streets should be free for everyone to use. By reducing traffic in certain streets it also reduced customers and pushed traffic elsewhere.

2. Caroline Shuffrey

• She said that visitors exemptions were issued using RingGo, which was not fit for purpose and had negatively impacted the community. She felt this issue had to be resolved before implementing the scheme.
• She said she had spent many hours explaining to residents how to use RingGo and helping them to appeal when fines had been issued. She said residents found the process very stressful and inefficient, and put off some people from using the system entirely. As the Cabinet report highlighted, only 300 visitor permits were issued each month, in an area covering a large number of residents.
• She stated that comparisons of all data 22 vs 23 (not just RingGo data) had no sensible meaning and could not be used to indicate success of the trial due to the high number of Coronavirus cases in 2022.
• She said that visitors without a permit coming from the West could not turn right along New Kings Road and were forced to divert their journey, increasing it considerably.
• She said that private hire vehicles wound not enter the trial area to drop-off or pick-up passengers to avoid fines, forcing women to walk home at night.
• She was in favour of a coordinated attempt to reduce traffic but that would need improvement to public transport and Government support.
• She had started a petition requesting consultation on the South Fulham CAN scheme that had raised over 12,100 signatories, showing many people were against the scheme.

3. Neil McCarroll

• He said he was the owner of a local business and was concerned about the negative effect on all businesses due to the implementation of CAN around Wandsworth Bridge Road.
• He said that his area was first introduced to the scheme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

§  To approve the parking related initiatives set out as follows:

§  Business Visitor Parking Permit – section 1

§  Motorcycle Parking Permit – section 2

§  All day Trader Parking Permit – section 3

§  Cycle Hub Permit – section 4

§  EV charging for residents – section 5

§  Prescribed loading and places – section 6

§  To delegate the implementation of those initiatives to the Strategic Director of Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Public Realm.

Cabinet received one valid deputation for this item. With the Leader’s permission Natalie Lindsay, the representative, was permitted to address Cabinet for 5 minutes. The main points highlighted were:

·         She said cars contributed to air pollution, poor health in the population, and climate change - and were dangerous to other users of the public realm.

·         She noted that the Council applied public space storage principals for the cycle storage hubs, but not for all vehicles. Parking a bicycle was 6 times more expensive than parking a SUV.

·         She believed targeting new charges at the heaviest-emitting vehicles would be the most effective and equitable policy approach.

·         She urged the Council to implement a radical emissions-based charging model on top of a fully comprehensive space allocation payment schedule.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CABINET MEMBERS:

§  To approve the parking related initiatives set out as follows:

§  Business Visitor Parking Permit – section 1

§  Motorcycle Parking Permit – section 2

§  All day Trader Parking Permit – section 3

§  Cycle Hub Permit – section 4

§  EV charging for residents – section 5

§  Prescribed loading and places – section 6

§  To delegate the implementation of those initiatives to the Strategic Director of Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Public Realm.

1.    To note that Appendix 2 is not for publication on the basis that it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

2.    the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

3.    To authorise the termination of the contracts (LOT 1 and LOT 2) for responsive repairs (housing) with Morgan Sindall Property Services LTD on 31 August 2024 subject to the finalisation of approved terms between the parties, the negotiation of which is delegated to the Strategic Director of Finance in consultation with the Assistant Director of Legal Services and the Assistant Director of Repairs.

4.    To approve the procurement strategy to undertake a mini competition via the ‘Responsive Maintenance and Void Property Works’ part of the ‘National Housing Management Forum’ Framework. This contract will be for a period of 36 months. We will incept the contract on 1 September 2024.

5.    To approve that the Strategic Director of Finance, in consultation with the Assistant Director of Legal Services and the Assistant Director of Repairs be authorised to enter into agreements as necessary to bring the decisions in this report into effect.

Councillor Adronie Alford praised the Council for terminating the contract with a company that had caused many problems in the community.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CABINET MEMBERS:

1.    To note that Appendix 2 is not for publication on the basis that it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

2.    To authorise the termination of the contracts (LOT 1 and LOT 2) for responsive repairs (housing) with Morgan Sindall Property Services LTD on 31 August 2024 subject to the finalisation of approved terms between the parties, the negotiation of which is delegated to the Strategic Director of Finance in consultation with the Assistant Director of Legal Services and the Assistant Director of Repairs.

3.    To approve the procurement strategy to undertake a mini competition via the ‘Responsive Maintenance and Void Property Works’ part of the ‘National Housing Management Forum’ Framework. This contract will be for a period of 36 months. We will incept the contract on 1 September 2024.

4.    To approve that the Strategic Director of Finance, in consultation with the Assistant Director of Legal Services and the Assistant Director of Repairs be authorised to enter into agreements as necessary to bring the decisions in this report into effect.

The Key Decision List was noted.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 - ACCESS TO INFORMATION

Proposed resolution:

Under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, that the public and press be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of an item of business, on the grounds that it contains the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the said Act, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption currently outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.      

There was no discussion of exempt elements.