Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Chaplin, Dawn Dale, Tony Damms and Garry Weatherall.

2.1

No items were identified where resolutions may be moved to exclude the public and press.

3.1

There were no declarations of interest.

4.1

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 25 October, 2022, were approved as a correct record.

5.1

The Committee considered a report of the Community Services Manager that advised each Local Area Committee had a £100,000 budget to address local priorities, identified within their respective Community Plans.  The report set out details of the spend in respect of the £100,000 that had been authorised by the Community Services Manager, in consultation with the LAC Chair and in accordance with the delegation granted in September 2021. 

The report highlighted current spend and recommended a further priority. This was a new priority not previously identified in the approved Community Plan and was requested as an addition following a presentation on the cost of living crisis at the meeting held 25 October, 2022. At the meeting in July 2022, a contingency budget of £20,000 was reserved for the delivery of unforeseen priorities and activities. The LAC was asked to formally agree that responding to the cost of living crisis be identified as a priority for the LAC and that the £20,000 contingency budget be reallocated to this priority.

5.2

RESOLVED: That the North East Local Area Committee: -

i)        Notes the expenditure against the £100,000 budget to address local priorities in the North East LAC in 2022/3, as detailed in the report.

ii)      Agrees that a new Cost of Living priority be added to the Community Plan, as described in the report, and that the contingency budget of £20,000 previously identified be allocated to this priority and used to fund grants for Welcoming Places, as described in the report, or other activities which address this priority. 

5.3

Reasons for Decision

5.3.1

The North East LAC was asked to note the use of funding as per previous decision on 23 September, 2021.

5.3.2

To agree the allocation of the contingency budget to fund cost of living grants that will deliver projects and activities by organisations and groups to address key priority areas identified in the North East Community Plan.

5.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

5.4.1

The £20,000 contingency fund remained unallocated to spend, other options such as using the funds to deliver lower priority actions in the eight priorities set out in the Community Plan were considered but the deliverable actions were not considered achievable within the remaining three months of 2022/23. 

5.1

The Committee considered a report of the Community Services Manager (Lindsey Hill) that advised each Local Area Committee had a £100,000 budget to address local priorities, identified within their respective Community Plans.  The report set out details of the spend in respect of the £100,000 that had been authorised by the Community Services Manager, in consultation with the LAC Chair and in accordance with the delegation granted in September 2021. 

5.2

The report highlighted current spend and recommended a further priority. This was a new priority not previously identified in the approved Community Plan and was requested as an addition following a presentation on the cost of living crisis at the meeting held 25 October, 2022. At the meeting in July 2022, a contingency budget of £20,000 was reserved for the delivery of unforeseen priorities and activities. The LAC was asked to formally agree that responding to the cost of living crisis be identified as a priority for the LAC and that the £20,000 contingency budget be reallocated to this priority.

5.3

A question was raised by a member of the public as to whether the Local Area Committee budget could be used to provide new community Christmas trees in Firth Park and Wincobank.

5.4

In response, the Chair advised that this would be funded from a separate budget. She noted the request and advised that this would be considered by Firth Park Councillors.

5.5

Councillor Talib Hussain asked for information on how to apply for grants under the new priority, and what the budget allocation was for this.

5.6

In response, Ms Hill advised that any group could apply for up to £500 for their welcoming place, and this was on a ‘first come, first served’ basis. She added that all welcoming places could advertise their details on the Voluntary Action Sheffield website.

5.7

RESOLVED: That the North East Local Area Committee: -

i)        notes the expenditure against the £100,000 budget to address local priorities in the North East Local Area Committee in 2022/3, as detailed in the report.

ii)      agrees that a new Cost of Living priority be added to the Community Plan, as described in the report, and that the contingency budget of £20,000 previously identified be allocated to this priority and used to fund grants for Welcoming Places, as described in the report, or other activities which address this priority. 

5.8

Reasons for Decision

5.8.1

The North East Local Area Committee was asked to note the use of funding as per the previous decision on 23 September, 2021.

5.8.2

To agree the allocation of the contingency budget to fund cost of living grants that would deliver projects and activities by organisations and groups to address key priority areas identified in the North East Community Plan.

5.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

5.4.1

The £20,000 contingency fund remained unallocated to spend, other options such as using the funds to deliver lower priority actions in the eight priorities set out in the Community Plan were considered but the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1

Teresa Hogan-Watt, Ward Team Leader (Housing service) shared a presentation on ‘Safer Neighbourhood Services: How we work together to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour in the North East’.

6.2

Also present for this item were Sophie Tunnard, Safer Neighbourhood Coordinator (Community Safety Team, Sheffield City Council), Sergeant Scott Sarson, (South Yorkshire Police), Billie-Jo Harris, Resolution Officer (Antisocial Behaviour Team, Sheffield City Council) and Simon Fysh, Sustainable Communities Officer Team Leader (Antisocial Behaviour Team, Sheffield City Council).

6.3

Ms Hogan-Watt outlined a problem that had occurred at Palgrave Road which started out as low-level anti-social behaviour but had gradually escalated into a complex situation. A vacant house had been boarded up, and subsequently block paving had been stolen from the front garden, and someone was found to be living in a shed in the garden. Neighbourhood Officers had attended in an attempt to move the person on and had advised him to present as homeless. Community Safety Officers were also involved, and as they worked shifts, were able to patrol the area. Copper piping was found in the shed and, when confronted, the occupant became aggressive and was removed by police officers. He subsequently returned and set up a tent in the garden of the property, and would not accept help in relocating. It was later discovered that he was removing bricks to gain entry to the house and by doing this had been able to strip the house of its boiler and radiators. He had transported materials at night and had burned waste in the garden during the day. Ms Hogan-Watt stated that initially residents had felt too scared to contact support teams, and some had left their homes due to harassment and damage to their properties. However, she confirmed that they gradually became engaged with officers and began to report issues and work together in order to gain intelligence.

6.4

Sophie Tunnard advised that her role as a Safer Neighbourhood Coordinator was to coordinate multi-agency problem solving. She explained that she was based at Ecclesfield Police station and had a close working relationship with other partner agencies. She had gathered information from partners and residents to understand the complexity of the problem and the individuals involved, to allow her to identify the issues to be tackled. She noted that the situation was having an impact on the lives of those living in the community, and a long-term solution was needed which was not achievable by any one sole agency. Local intelligence and information gathering had helped the team to understand the personal circumstances of the individual involved, and whether there might be other factors that were driving his behaviour. She advised that a referral was made to the Changing Futures Team to address any support that might be needed, and a joint action plan was then devised.

6.5

Sergeant Scott Sarson advised that it had quickly become apparent that partnership working was needed. There were other unoccupied properties in this area, and this had led to incidents  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1

The Local Area Committee and members of the public were invited to browse the information stalls situated around the room which contained information relating to the different priorities of the North Local Area Committee Community Plan. This lasted for approximately 40 minutes.

8.1

Megan Ohri, Partnerhip Manager at Southey and Owlerton Area Regeneration (SOAR) attended for this item. She advised that SOAR was a community anchor organisation based at Parson Cross that worked across north east Sheffield. She explained that a consultation across north east Sheffield had gone live online today that aimed to look at how people found out what was going on within their community. This would be a two-way conversation and aimed to help people understand how they might input into Local Area Committee priorities. Paper copies of the consultation were available to take away and to share with those not present at the meeting. Ms Ohri confirmed that this consultation was being carried out in partnership with the Burngreave Messenger community newspaper and aimed to understand how residents preferred to receive community information and news. She welcomed insights from residents, and advised that her team would be happy to attend meetings of local organisations in order to gain more views.

8.2

The Chair thanked Ms Ohri for attending and advised that the Local Authority Team would also share the consultation information in order to help gain a clear idea of what people want and to help reach further into communities.

9.1

The Committee received the following questions from a member of the public who had submitted the questions prior to the meeting, and who attended the meeting to raise them:-

Graham Jones, resident of Burngreave and Member of the Burngreave Clean Air Campaign

In view of the imminent introduction of a City Centre Clean Air Zone which, through traffic displacement, is forecast to worsen already illegal levels of air pollution along some of our local roads, what measures are being taken in north east Sheffield to minimise this health and life threatening assault on some of the poorest districts in the city? Is the city council giving these areas additional finance to reduce this deliberate threat to our public health? Or does our council accept that our residents are relatively expendable as we live in a sacrifice zone where our life expectancy is already up to ten years less than other some other parts of the city?

In response, the Chair advised that this issue would be referred to the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee as it affected all parts of the city. She noted that it was a Government requirement that the Council implement a Clean Air Zone (CAZ), and it was required to be in place until city centre pollution had reduced to specific levels. She added that although the Council had been given some flexibility in how the CAZ was implemented, there were restrictions placed upon how the money received from the charging of vehicles was spent. She appreciated the points raised and confirmed that many members would have preferred the funding to have been allowed to be invested in different ways across the city where levels of pollution are also high.

Councillor Mark Jones thanked Mr Jones for his ongoing work with this campaign. He believed that the Government had failed to limit pollution effectively and that they had transferred the responsibility onto the Council. He stated that the Council had received one-third of the funding that had been requested, and agreed that areas outside of the city centre would be affected by road users choosing different routes. He advised that air monitoring stations in Burngreave had shown that certain areas had high pollution levels. He noted studies that showed that becoming more active could help to tackle certain diseases, but was concerned about the difficulties faced by those with respiratory conditions. He believed that improvements could be made to this situation with more trams, improvements to bus routes and more electric buses. He added that action was needed to ensure residents did not suffer.

Councillor Price added that air quality action had come a long way since the days of ‘smog’ but there was still a long way to go, and he believed that it was important that people took some responsibility for their individual travel choice in order to help tackle the problem. He noted that the M1 motorway impacted upon Sheffield’s air quality, and believed that it was important to invest in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.