Minutes:
Councillor Murray asked the following question in accordance with Standing Order No. 8.
“In terms of the Gypsy and Travellers Site in Runcorn a decision made by the Executive Board Sub-Committee and affirmed by Full Council December 2008 following a “Call In” stated (Quote) “That a charge of £11.00 per adult household be set initially for a period of six months and a further report be brought to the Sub-Committee to review income against costs in the light of operational experience” (Un-quote)
Since this decision was made and the site has been operational it appears that financial expenditure has been greater than income with the result that the Site is not operating on a “cost neutral” basis as Officers projected but; is operating at a loss. The allegation of loss is based upon past Council financial forecasts on the sites projected income and expenditure levels and, observations that overall occupancy levels on the site are not reaching expected levels.
In light of clear indications that this site has greater financial expenditure than income; will the Chairman of the Executive Board Sub-Committee whose Sub-Committee initiated this decision as outlined adopt a proactive and sound business best practice approach and immediately – rather than waiting for six months – call for this report to fully identify/address the sites financial failings and, in addition, develop a new financial business model for this Site that will ensure that its operational costs will not exceed its income thereby enabling it to operate on a cost neutral basis as was originally envisaged without detrimentally affecting existing Police Powers”.
In response Councillor Wharton advised the Council that “Councillors Murray and Findon met with the Chief Executive on Friday, 3rd April, 2009. The Chief Executive reiterated the position as determined by Council at was meeting in December, 2008 - when Council reaffirmed the decision of the Executive Board Sub of the 16th October 2008
At this meeting the Chief Executive also provided information to Councillor Murray and Councillor Findon advising the Traveller Transit Site had not been fully occupied since its opening.
Further, the Chief Executive advised that any scrutiny or determination of whether the site was delivering value for money would be premature, at the present time, as all relevant information was not yet available.
The Chief Executive reminded Councillors Murray and Findon that the purpose of the site was to offer accommodation to Travellers in transit and/or camped illegally. To achieve this it must operate a vacancy rate and this was always envisaged from the outset. (see – paragraph 3.3 of the report of the 16th October 2008 to Executive Board Sub Committee)
Further there was no reference in the report of the 16th October 2008 to the site being cost neutral as was suggested by Cllr Murray in his question.
The Transit Site had provided accommodation for Travellers in transit as the occupancy rate figures provided demonstrates.
The Chief Executive further advised Councillors Murray and Findon that since the opening of the site the Police had also had cause to remove two illegal encampments from the Borough. This would not have been possible had the Transit Site been fully occupied.
Having regard to previous experience, significant financial savings would be achieved and additional costs avoided as a result of the Police action - which I reiterate was only possible due to the availability of the Transit Site. (paragraph 5.1 of the report of the 16th October 2008 estimated such saving over a 12 month period as in the region of £117.000).
Councillors Murray and Findon declared themselves satisfied with the information provided by the Chief Executive at the meeting.
Subsequent to this meeting Councillor Murray made a further specific request in writing on Friday 17th April to the Chief Executive for written information about site occupancy,
Information on occupancy was provided to Councillor Murray by e-mail by the Chief Executive on Monday 20th April - this information showed occupancy was steadily increasing as Travellers become more aware of the availability of the Transit Site. At present occupancy had increased even further to 70%.
There were very sensible reasons why 6 months was considered by Council to be a reasonable period for the review of the Transit Site. Any intervention before this time runs the risk of any review being based on incomplete information thereby providing an incomplete, distorted, inaccurate and prejudiced picture of the site operation.
It would be foolhardy and completely inappropriate for any member to seek to force a review or comment on the use of the Transit Site until the 6 months period comes to an end. Unless of course they have some other motive for their intervention!
I am aware that Councillor.
I would strongly urge Councillor Murray to exercise great caution in how he interprets and/or uses this information. This is a sensitive and complex matter and requires great care and diplomacy in its handling.
I can confirm the Urban Renewal PPB will receive the promised review at its meeting on 16th June – exactly 6 months to the day from the Council meeting requesting such a review”.