Decision details

Communities, Transport and Environment Panel (13^th November 2017) decision:

The call in of the decision E2999 (Modern Libraries Bath – Consultation Outcomes and Proposals) was heard by the Communities, Transport and Environment PDS Panel this afternoon. The call in was dismissed (5 for 4 against)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report will cover the outcomes from the consultation on the location of Bath Library/One Stop Shop and propose that Cabinet make a decision on that location.

Call in of Cabinet Member Decision E2999 “Modern Libraries Bath - Consultation outcomes and proposals” made by the Cabinet on 11^th October 2017.

The call in request is made in the public interest of full disclosure of the facts underpinning the decision to move the One Stop Shop to The Podium and for the following specific reasons:

a.  The need for public scrutiny of the Council’s expenditure on this project to date – no breakdown of the expenditure costs has been published – and of the proposed savings related to the investment.

b.  No open, public consultation has taken place on the issue of whether co-location of Bath Library and the One Stop Shop is desirable or accepted by service users.

c.  No evidence has been presented about the practicality of co-locating services at The Podium, nor whether this would benefit or disadvantage service users. No assessment has been made of the potential impact on both services. No assessment has been made of the needs of users for either the One Stop Shop or Bath Central Library. No benchmark example of comparable conversions of a small main city library into a co-located library and One Stop Shop has been given.

d.  It is unclear whether the project is deliverable or sustainable given the issues around The Podium lease arrangements, and the Police/Shopmobility lease arrangements at Lewis House, which have not been resolved.

The Chair invited the Lead Call in Member Councillor Richard Samuel to make a statement. Councillor Samuel stated that actions should be clear and supported by facts and that scrutiny is necessary where decisions appear irrational. He highlighted the four main issues in the call in notice which were: the need for scrutiny on the expenditure on the project to date; the lack of consultation on co-location; lack of evidence of the practicality of co-locating both services and issues around the deliverability of the project (Councillor Samuel gave Panel members some information on the lease documentation which is attached to these minutes). He concluded by saying that if the Panel has any doubts, the decision must be sent back to the Cabinet to fill in the gaps.

The Panel made the following points and asked the following questions:

Councillor Bull asked Councillor Samuel to explain the point about the space, Councillor Samuel stated that when a public body plans spending such as this, there should be early work to assess if the proposals are possible. He stated that it would give people more confidence if they could see plans of how the One Stop Shop (OSS) could be transferred into the library space.

Councillor Romero stated that there had been a lesser response from OSS users and asked if it was fair to assume that they might need private areas to discuss sensitive issues. She also asked about the risks regarding deliverability. Councillor Samuel stated that, with his experience of being a trustee of CAB (Citizens Advice Bureau) he did think that OSS users would need to use private interview spaces.

There was some discussion around the paper on the lease handed out by Councillor Samuel (attached to these minutes). Councillor Anketell Jones asked if the situation referred to in paragraph 7 is likely (a lease termination), Councillor Samuel stated that clarity was needed on this.

Councillor Butters asked if the Guildhall had been considered as a venue for the Library, to which Councillor Samuel explained that it was, but it was one of the three locations that were discounted. Councillor Samuel stated that he was told at Cabinet that £25k had been spent so far but that the members briefing paper provided (attached to these minutes) quoted £108k professional fees.

The Chair invited the Cabinet member for Transformation and Customer Services, Councillor Karen Warrington to make a statement. Councillor Warrington stated that there are examples where integration (Library and OSS) has worked well and she felt that the blend of the two services will make both sustainable, and benefit users. She explained that the next stage in the process was about engagement with stakeholders and design. She explained that the costs had been included in previous papers but had been circulated again for clarity. She explained that the consultation survey was available online and in hard copy and the results were on the website along with the needs assessment and Equality Impact Assessment. She further explained that there will be an ergonomic design for the project.

The Panel made the following points and asked the following questions:

Following a query from Councillor Hale, Councillor Warrington asked the Legal adviser Shaine Lewis to respond with information regarding the lease. The officer explained that Councillor Samuel had provided a summary of the lease and paragraphs 7-10 should give the Council comfort as it explained that if that landlord did terminate the lease, they would have to provide compensation and an alternative site.

Councillor Butters asked if there was a new build option, to which Councillor Warrington responded that office space in Bath is very expensive and a large capital sum would have to be invested to buy a building or land.

Councillor Romero asked if it would be in the next phase that different user needs would be identified. Councillor Warrington explained that £330k (Capital budget) had been requested for the next stage and there will be an engagement process and independent architects appointed. Plans will be laid out and staff, users, partners and interest groups will be engaged with this phase.

Councillor Bull asked if the Cabinet member was confident that there would be enough space in the Podium for the needs of the Library and OSS users. The Cabinet Member replied that there was enough space and that OSS use had dropped recently anyway due to the Universal Credit system. There will be ergonomic design to make good use of the space.

Councillor Romero asked for confirmation that the public had not been consulted regarding co-location. The Cabinet Member explained that the public consultation contained a free text box and only 7.35% commented about their opposition to co-location.

Closing statement from the Cabinet Member – Councillor Karen Warrington

Councillor Warrington made reference to the financial challenge facing the Council at this time with 80% of revenue being spent on adult and social care which reflected the national picture. She explained that co-location is an opportunity to invest money and improve services. Stakeholders will be engaged in the next phase, independent architects used and there will be a design with a good use of space and private areas. She further explained that the provisional capital budget is £2.8million and the call in is about a decision regarding the approval of a capital budget of £330k. She asked that, if the Panel uphold the call in, they identify another way to find revenue savings.

Closing statement from Lead Call in Member – Councillor Richard Samuel

Councillor Samuel stated that, regarding the lease, notice from the landlord had to be triggered by 10^th January 2018, but the design would not be complete until February 2018; this was the wrong way around putting the Council’s money at risk. He stated that the uncertainty around such issues was his central point and that the Council should make the right decision with the right information in place.

Panel discussion

Councillor Romero put forward a motion to uphold the call-in which was lost.

Councillor Evans stated that he did not support this motion as he was satisfied that financial information had been supplied; that co-location would be an improvement; that there will be consultation on the design and he was satisfied with the legal explanations around the lease.

Councillor Anketell-Jones stated that he did not feel the call in added up to an argument against the weight of the information on the savings that have to be made. He explained that he is a library user (3-5 hours a week) and feels the space is big enough to accommodate two services.

Councillor Romero stated that she was disappointed but not surprised at the above comments and she remained concerned that open public consultation had not taken place and there was still uncertainty over the practicalities and deliverability of the project.

Panel decision

On a motion from Councillor Hale, seconded by Councillor Evans, it was:

RESOLVED that the Call in of Decision E2999 ‘Modern Libraries Bath – Consultation Outcomes and Proposals’ be dismissed (5 members voted for the motion, 4 members voted against the motion, there were no abstentions).