Agenda item

Community Assets Report Attached.

Councillor Paul Myers presented the Panel with the information from the Task and Finish Group which covered the following:

·  Recent Visit Schedule

·  Community Campus Strategy – Wiltshire County Council

·  Bath City Farm

·  Community 67

·  Beacon Hall – Peasedown St John

·  Conclusions

·  How do we currently deal with Assets?

·  Recommendations

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

Councillor Macrae stated that this was a good report. He asked if all the organisations that shared the building in Wiltshire also worked together or still as separate organisations. Councillor Bull explained that he thought they worked separately at present but there could be scope for rationalisation. He further explained that the Wiltshire scheme was different from this report in that it had come from the top in Wiltshire. Councillor Gerrish suggested that it was not a fair comparison due to the difference in approach. He explained that there had been a session run by Property for the business tenants in Keynsham that was proactive and worked well.

Councillor Bellotti thanked the task and finish group for the report. He explained that an organisation can approach the Council at any time. He stated that recommendations 1,2 and 5 were sensible and that recommendation 3 and 4 needed some thought. He stated that he did not want to set this Panel up as the place to bring all requests.

Councillor Macrae asked that when an asset is leased but still on Council books – what are the impacts on finance for the Council. The Director explained that this links to the report to Cabinet and Council in February 2013 where a number of assets are listed. He stated that needs vary within groups and safeguards must be in place. There had to be a balance of subsidy and benefit to the Council.

Councillor Barrett asked about the Children’s Centre in Weston, Councillor Bellotti explained that this asset is corporately owned by the Council and subject to Council decisions and that the proposed rent increase was part of the indicated budget that did not go through, it was not directly connected to the asset. The Cabinet Member said he would get back to Councillor Barrett on his query.

There was some discussion around recommendation 3. Councillor Myers stated that groups just need somewhere to go, it did not have to be this Panel. Councillor Gerrish pointed out that there was a standing item on the Panel agenda ‘Items from the Public’ which could be used.

The Panel accepted the following:

Recommendation 1: Develop a Community Building Value Index which brings together the following three elements:

- Financial return on an asset (annual commercial rent £)

- Community benefit (discount rating 0% no benefit to 100% maximum benefit)

- Measure of organisational sustainability (High, Medium, Low probability that organisation will exist in 1,3, 5 over 25 years)

Recommendation 2: Encourage the use of flexible leases for community asset transfer projects rather than just long term leases for 25 years and over, these could be small leases of 3-6 months initially and once a project becomes established longer term leases of 6-10 years could be made available. 

Recommendation 3: We suggest developing an Officer Group which brings together key representatives e.g. Property Services, Policy and Partnerships, Health and Safety, Business Continuity to assess the feasibility of community asset proposals, similar to the way the existing Safety Advisory Group operates for events.

Recommendation 4: The Resources Policy Development and Scrutiny Panel could receive a regular update on progress with Asset Transfers.

Recommendation 5: Facilitate community asset projects with the creation of a self-help group. This would allow ‘successful’ community asset projects and newly established projects to share information and develop best practice. This could perhaps be done via the Run A Club (http://www.runaclub.com) website or similar

The Council should work with existing community groups to develop an ‘offer’ for community asset groups by working with them to identify what support groups would most benefit from e.g. flexible leases, access to legal/health and safety advise or the opportunity to seek support from other groups. A suggested self-help system of regulation and support should include:

·  Empowering volunteers and allowing them to share information and best practice (see recommendation 2)

·  Allowing the Council a light touch to ultimately ensure the proper use of public assets, efficiency savings for the Council, presenting advice and bringing in specialities

·  Avoiding large amounts of office time and money being required to micro manage such a diverse estate

·  Possibly instituting a voluntary quality standard based on self-inspection akin to the old Hallmark system