Agenda item

8.1

The Executive Director, Communities submitted a report seeking approval on the proposal for the future of Sheffield’s libraries, archives and information services.

8.2

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:-

(a)

agrees a new operating model for community libraries. Taking account of the Council’s obligation to deliver a comprehensive and efficient library service as informed by the needs assessment, consultations undertaken and Equality Impact Assessment. The new operating model will consist of:-

·         11 Sheffield City Council run hub libraries

·         Up to 5 co-delivered community libraries

·         Retain Tinsley Library as a Council run facility until its rental agreement expires in 2016

·         Up to 10 associate libraries, with support for up to 3 years

·         New opening times for Central Library

·         Closure of the mobile library service

·         Development of the Home Library Service through a volunteer progamme

·         All other existing library, information and archives services will be retained including the Schools Library Service

·         A volunteer programme

(b)

agrees £262,000 of funding from Council resources, carried forward to 2014/15, to support the sustainability and viability of associate libraries and volunteering, in response to issues raised during the consultation around the needs of older and disabled people and the role which libraries play in promoting health and well-being;

(c)

agrees funding of £262,000 from Council resources to support associate libraries and volunteering for the period 2015/16 and 2016/17, in response to issues raised during the consultation around the needs of older and disabled people and the role which libraries play in promoting health and well-being;

(d)

subject to consultation with the relevant Cabinet Members, requests that the Executive Directors and Resources to explore the potential for a further capital allocation for any major repairs to associate libraries; and

(e)

notes the resolution of the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee, taken at its meeting held on 18 February 2014.

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

Following extensive public consultation, to implement the review of the Libraries, Archives and Information Service, establishing a new service which will meet the City’s aspirations for the future, will be comprehensive and efficient and will develop new partnerships with community organisations and people who use library services.

8.3.2

This new service will take account of the issues raised in the public consultation, the needs assessment and Equality Impact Assessment and will be affordable.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The options considered in determining the proposed operating model can be found in Section 8 of the report, and further detail in Appendix I.

8.4.2

Following analysis of the consultation 2013/14 and the Equality Impact Assessment, the options considered and rejected were:

(i)  No change to the proposal.

(ii)  Offer all the associate libraries (with an approved initial business plan) co-delivery status for a limited period.

(iii) Offer all the associate libraries (with an approved initial business plan), an enhanced support offer, including financial support for a limited period.  Access to SCC services limited to a book depository service.

8.5

Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted

None

8.6

Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration

None

8.7

Respective Director Responsible for Implementation

Laraine Manley, Executive Director, Communities

8.8

Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In

Economic and Environmental Wellbeing

8.1

The Executive Director, Communities submitted a report seeking approval on the proposal for the future of Sheffield’s Libraries, Archives and Information Services.

8.2

In addition to this, Cabinet considered a report (circulated at the meeting) of the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee which had considered the Cabinet report at its meeting held on 18 February 2014. Councillor Cate McDonald, Chair of the Committee, attended the meeting to present the report of the Scrutiny Committee. She reported that the Committee resolved that they were satisfied that the proposals contained in the Cabinet report can be put forward to the Cabinet at its meeting to be held on 19^th February 2014 and requested that the Executive Director, Communities submit a report on the progress made in implementing the proposals, set out in the Cabinet report, to the Scrutiny Committee in 12 months’ time.

8.3

Dawn Shaw, Head of Communities Services Projects, Communities, presented the report. She outlined to Cabinet that the proposals had been developed following extensive consultation. It was important to establish a new service which would meet the needs and aspirations of a modern service. The proposals in the report took into account over 7,000 survey responses between October 2012 and January 2013 as well as the views expressed in the workshops and public meetings.

8.4

Where a library had been identified as vulnerable, community groups and organisations were encouraged to submit business plans to run the library. Every library which had been identified as vulnerable has had a group come forward with an initial business plan in place approved by the Council.

8.5

£262k of funding had been identified from Council resources to support associate libraries running and associated costs.

8.6

Questions from Cabinet Members

Councillor Jack Scott referred to the needs assessment outlined in the report. He asked who had been involved in that, whether it covered the whole City and which groups were involved? Councillor Scott also asked why officers chose that particular approach?

In response, Andi Walshaw, Performance and Research Manager, reported that the methodology for the needs assessment had been established in 2011. The current model was a very comprehensive model and took into account the needs of all groups in the City. He was confident that the data in the report was correct and it had been subject to intense scrutiny to ensure this.

In response to a further question from Councillor Scott about how the assessment covered the whole City, Mr Walshaw reported that the assessment focused on all groups across the city. Scores were worked out based on catchments for each library based on the number of registered users for each local library. The needs of those aged 65 and over and under 19 were looked at as well as low attainment and BME population for each library catchment. There was also a focus on the Indices of Deprivation, both the Learning, Skills and Training domain and the Index of Multiple Deprivation. These figures were weighted by population. Geography was focused on at the priority tool stage and the distance between a library and its nearest neighbour by public transport was calculated from information provided by the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE). Officers modelled what would happen if certain libraries closed and assigned people to their nearest local library. The assessment also took into account the priorities of the Fairness Commission.

Councillor Scott then asked a question in relation to the consultation. How comprehensive had this been? What had been done to ensure that disadvantaged groups were consulted with properly? Had the Local Authority responded to comments from people with expertise in this field?

In response, Kate Register, Quality and Involvement Development Manager, reported that her team had run the consultation from October 2013 to January 2014. Her team was independent from the library service and had expertise across many areas. It was the job of her team to make sure the proposals were clearly explained and that they obtained views from as many people as possible across the City.

The consultation had also focused on trying to get people who didn’t usually have their say in consultations such as these to express their views. There had been an online survey available for people to fill in as well as a hard copy available at First Point and libraries across the City. Officers had emailed the consultation to 7,500 organisations and asked them to cascade this down to their partners and others.

Easy to read formats were made available and it was also issued in different languages where required. A member of the team had offered to go and talk to the groups directly to explain the survey and questions further. People had been given the opportunity to ring up and officers were able to provide advice and guidance on completing the survey.

In total comments had been received from around 9,000 people across the City. 200 letters and posters had been received from children. All responses had been analysed. There was a strong wish to let children and young people have their say and groups had been commissioned specifically to consult with children. The consultation had been advertised on Schools Point and a number of schools had asked officers to visit schools to talk to children and staff.

Each survey had 12 free text boxes available for people to express their views and these had been analysed carefully. Officers had made sure that the consultation responses had been included within the Cabinet report.

Officers had endeavoured to ensure that they had consulted widely with disability and Black, Minority and Ethnic (BME) groups and people completing the survey had been asked to provide information about themselves to see if there were any similarities in answers between particular groups.

Andi Walshaw added that, following suggestions that there had been errors in the needs assessment, he had listened to the feedback and taken the comments on board and had looked again closely at the methodology. Although some minor calculation errors were found, he was unable to find the errors highlighted, and the minor calculation errors had no bearing on the outcome of the categories.

Councillor Mary Lea asked how the proposals would ensure that a comprehensive service would be provided which would reach all groups across the City?

In response, Dawn Shaw commented that the development of the service would be an evolutionary process. The Council was looking to develop a buddying service for the associate libraries with the hub libraries. It was hoped that the funding offered to support the associate libraries in the first 3 years would help to keep the libraries open.

Work was being undertaken across the Council with different services to look at how the library could be a portal within the community. The school library service would be expanded and the children’s library would be maintained and a Little Library service operated for those who didn’t wish to engage with the traditional library.

Councillor Lea then asked why the names of the non-Council run libraries had been changed from independent to associate libraries?

Dawn Shaw responded that the Council wanted to work together in partnership with community groups and broader communities. The label of an independent library suggested that the Council would not support them when that wasn’t the case.

Councillor Lea then asked how the Council would mitigate against the discontinuation of the mobile library service?

Dawn Shaw reported that, to mitigate this, the Council would be extending the Home Library Service and this would go out to communities where people who met the criteria couldn’t access a static library. The Little Library Service for children could be extended and the Council were still maintaining the opportunity for people to access a library service.

Councillor Jackie Drayton referred to the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) included in the report. That stated that in four areas the proposals would have some significant impact. The BME community in Tinsley/Burngreave, Young People in Park and Old People in Tinsley. How would the Council therefore mitigate against this?

Steve Eccleston, Assistant Director, Legal Services, reported that the role of the EIA was as a tool to enable an understanding of what the issues were and how the Council was meeting the obligations of the Equality Act 2010. This stated that the Council must have due regard to eliminating discrimination and due regard to protected groups such as the BME community, elderly people etc. There was no formal obligation in law to undertake an EIA but it was considered to be good practice.

The EIA started out by looking at the challenges facing each group. It then looked at an action plan for each group which highlighted the negatives which were apparent for each group but also work which could be done to mitigate against these. The EIA looked at each library which was vulnerable to closure and outlined data in relation to these. Mr Eccleston considered the EIA to be a very thorough document but also a live document and this could be reviewed when the issue came back to Scrutiny in 12 months’ time.

Councillor Drayton commented that a number of people had said to her that they did not wish to be an independent library and wanted to be part of the Council’s library network. In moving a recommendation to amend the name of the libraries from independent to associate did this mean that those libraries could be part of the wider library network?

Dawn Shaw confirmed that this was the case and they could still be part of the People’s Network with access to the library catalogue and could access services. The Volunteer Co-ordinator would also assist associate libraries and it was hoped to introduce the buddying system.

Councillor Leigh Bramall, Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development, commented that the hub model assumed an increasing reliance on people using public transport. In the needs assessment how was the distance measured? Was there any indication of a typical journey time? Could people access a hub library and the Central Library within a reasonable journey time?

Andi Walshaw reported that the distance was measured from bus stop to bus stop via its actual route and the bus stop needed to be within 300m of the library. This meant that in most cases the distance between the same libraries was different in each direction. Although the travelling time was not taken into account, Mr Walshaw was confident that people would be able to access a library within a reasonable time.

Councillor Ben Curran, Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, commented that he was aware that groups welcomed the additional Council resources which had been allocated to support the associate libraries in the first three years. However, there was still some anxiety. How did the money match up to what the groups said they needed? Was this sufficient to make the model work and how would the funding be distributed?

Lynne Richardson, Project Manager, reported that it had been discussed with the groups concerned what funding was needed. The funding was based on a budget for the running costs of the associate libraries and the Volunteer Co-ordinator post. The groups would not be bidding against each other for the funding and it would be distributed based on a set allocation.

Councillor Isobel Bowler, Cabinet Member for Sport and Leisure commented that she was aware from within her portfolio when the council had to remove staffing budgets from the two Adventure Playgrounds these have been able to remain open run by local Friends of Groups. However, these groups required significant support to do this. Therefore, how was the Council supporting the library groups and how would we continue to support them?

Dawn Shaw reported that extensive workshops had been held and guidance issued for business planning. All the initial business plans submitted met the Council’s criteria. Further workshops would now be held in the transitional period until September 2014. If groups required further assistance the Council could look at this. The final business plans needed to be submitted by 30 June 2014 which would then be evaluated for going forward. There was a clear wish for continued Council support as highlighted by proposals for a buddying system.

Responding to a further question from Councillor Bowler regarding training for volunteers, Dawn Shaw reported that training packages would be offered which would help them understand the library service. Support would also be offered in recruitment and retention of volunteers.

Councillor Jackie Drayton commented that she had seen good examples of strong community groups willing to run the libraries. She asked if any consideration had been given to buddying with friends groups?

Dawn Shaw confirmed that this was the case and where there was expertise within community groups this should be shared. This would be a learning experience for the Council as well as community groups. The Council were working with the voluntary sector looking at developing a central pool of volunteers which could be shared across the City.

Councillor Julie Dore commented that not much reference had been made in the discussion for the need to modernise the service. User numbers had dramatically declined in recent years and most people were moving towards accessing material in other ways.

Dawn Shaw confirmed that this was an important part of officers’ consideration. They were looking to introduce e-books and wifi more widely across the service. Officers were working with officers within digital inclusion to look at the digital offer. Older people had commented that they valued the community space to interact with others so officers were looking at that and they were taking on board the creativity and vision of other organisations.

8.7

Comments from Cabinet Members

Councillor Jackie Drayton commented that she welcomed the feedback from young people and commended all the people working hard to try and keep the libraries open. She also thanked the staff who had helped and supported these community groups to keep the libraries open. She appreciated that it was a difficult and emotive subject. Cabinet Members understood the implications of agreeing the proposals and it was a difficult decision but they had been elected to often make decisions in difficult circumstances.

Councillor Mary Lea commented that she recognised the health implications related to loneliness and isolation and that libraries were a good place for people to interact. Associate libraries were a good avenue to address this and she believed that the Council was delivering on its public health outcomes.

Councillor Bowler commented that she was disappointed that the decision to approve the recommendations had to be made and she was a library member and user so it was not the case, as she had heard from the press was being suggested, that no member of the Cabinet had a library card or used a library. At the same time she was optimistic for the future of the service across the city because local people were stepping forward. She recognised that if the Council failed to set a budget someone else would set it and even more libraries would close. She valued the fact that people cared about their community and was impressed with what people had achieved thus far. She was reassured that officers would do all they could to support libraries in the future.

Councillor Mazher Iqbal commented that this had not been an easy decision to make. He was grateful to his Cabinet Assistants, fellow Cabinet Members and Councillors for their support. He appreciated the fantastic staff that worked at the Council and at libraries across the City. It had been heartwarming to hear the responses of community groups. The process did not end at this meeting and the Council would work closely with groups to develop their business plans to ensure continued sustainability and viability. Councillor Iqbal also thanked the Chair of the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee for her hard work and support. In conclusion, Councillor Iqbal thanked the members of the public and stated that he had tried to answer the questions fully and it was important that this opportunity existed to hold Councillors to account. He then moved that the independent libraries be renamed associate libraries.

8.8

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:-

(a)

agrees a new operating model for community libraries. Taking account of the Council’s obligation to deliver a comprehensive and efficient library service as informed by the needs assessment, consultations undertaken and Equality Impact Assessment. The new operating model will consist of:-

·         11 Sheffield City Council run hub libraries

·         Up to 5 co-delivered community libraries

·         Retain Tinsley Library as a Council run facility until its rental agreement expires in 2016

·         Up to 10 associate libraries, with support for up to 3 years

·         New opening times for Central Library

·         Closure of the mobile library service

·         Development of the Home Library Service through a volunteer progamme

·         All other existing library, information and archives services will be retained including the Schools Library Service

·         A volunteer programme

(b)

agrees £262,000 of funding from Council resources, carried forward to 2014/15, to support the sustainability and viability of associate libraries and volunteering, in response to issues raised during the consultation around the needs of older and disabled people and the role which libraries play in promoting health and well-being;

(c)

agrees funding of £262,000 from Council resources to support associate libraries and volunteering for the period 2015/16 and 2016/17, in response to issues raised during the consultation around the needs of older and disabled people and the role which libraries play in promoting health and well-being;

(d)

subject to consultation with the relevant Cabinet Members, requests that the Executive Directors, Communities and Resources, to explore the potential for a further capital allocation for any major repairs to associate libraries; and

(e)

notes the resolution of the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee, taken at its meeting held on 18 February 2014.

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

Following extensive public consultation, to implement the review of the Libraries, Archives and Information Service, establishing a new service which will meet the City’s aspirations for the future, will be comprehensive and efficient and will develop new partnerships with community organisations and people who use library services.

8.3.2

This new service will take account of the issues raised in the public consultation, the needs assessment and Equality Impact Assessment and will be affordable.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The options considered in determining the proposed operating model can be found in Section 8 of the report, now submitted, and further detail in Appendix I of the report.

8.4.2

Following analysis of the consultation 2013/14 and the Equality Impact Assessment, the options considered and rejected were:

(i)  No change to the proposal.

(ii)  Offer all the associate libraries (with an approved initial business plan) co-delivery status for a limited period.

(iii) Offer all the associate libraries (with an approved initial business plan), an enhanced support offer, including financial support for a limited period.  Access to Council services limited to a book depository service.