minutes of the meeting of stirling council held in the...

STIRLING COUNCIL

MINUTES of the MEETING of STIRLING COUNCIL held in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS,OLD VIEWFORTH, STIRLING on THURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007 at 10.00am.

Present:Provost Margaret BRISLEY (in the Chair)

Councillor Neil BENNYCouncillor Alistair BERRILLCouncillor Ian BROWNCouncillor Callum CAMPBELLCouncillor Scott FARMERCouncillor Tony FFINCHCouncillor Colin FINLAYCouncillor David GOSSCouncillor John HENDRYCouncillor Graham HOUSTONCouncillor Graham LAMBIE

Councillor Alasdair MacPHERSONCouncillor Corrie McCHORDCouncillor Colin O’BRIENCouncillor Gerard O’BRIENCouncillor Paul OWENSCouncillor Steven PATERSONCouncillor Graham REEDCouncillor Andrew SIMPSONCouncillor Jim THOMSONCouncillor Fergus WOOD

In Attendance:

Jim Boyle, Chief Accountant, Corporate ServicesPeter Broadfoot, Solicitor to the Council & Corporate Governance Manager,Corporate ServicesGreig Caulder, Research & Information Officer (Planning), Corporate ServicesIrene Cavanagh, Chief Social Work Officer & Head of Community Care, CommunityServicesBrian Devlin, Director of Environment ServicesLesley Gallagher, Community Planning Manager, Chief Executive’s OfficeLes Goodfellow, Head of Roads, Transport and StreetscapeJanice Hewitt, Director of Community ServicesLaura Hoskins, Policy Officer, Chief Executive’s OfficeBob Jack, Director of Corporate ServicesLyn Kennedy, Community Governance Manager, Corporate ServicesFiona Macleod, Head of Governance, Corporate Services (Clerk)Michelle MacDonald, Committee Officer, Corporate ServicesRebecca Maxwell, Assistant Chief ExecutiveWillie Watson, Head of Resources, Corporate ServicesKeith Yates, Chief Executive

SC91 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

SC92 URGENT BUSINESS

Councillor Alasdair MacPherson intimated that he had an item of urgent business.The item concerned the imminent closure of Cowie Credit Union. He advised thatthis was an important issue for the community and that if not resolved could lead to anumber of people turning to other means of obtaining money.

The Provost advised that as the Credit Union did not face closure until January 2008and that full information should be brought to the Special Council meeting to be heldin January 2008.

SC93 MINUTES

The following minutes were submitted for the approval of Council:-

a. Stirling Council 4 October 2007b. Stirling Council 15 November 2007c. Appointments Panel 1 November 2007d. Appointments Panel 14 November 2007e. Appointments Panel 23 November 2007f. Appointments Panel 26 November 2007g. Citizenship Appointments Panel 24 October 2007

Decision

The Council approved the Minutes of the above meetings as correct records of theproceedings subject to the inclusion of Councillor Thomson’s supplementary questionin the Council minute of 4 October 2007.

SC94 WRITTEN QUESTIONS

The Provost confirmed that 8 written questions had been received in terms ofStanding Order 33. The written questions and answers are attached as Appendix 1to these Minutes.

SC95 QUESTION TIME

In terms of Standing Order 40, Members had the opportunity to put questions to theProvost, the Leader of the Council, and any Executive Member or ScrutinyCommittee Chair with relevant responsibility or Chair of any other Committee orPanel regarding any business included in the Volume of Minutes circulated with theagenda for the meeting.

Volume Page 14087 – SC81 - Councillor Neil Benny asked for an update on theCrown Estate Land in Stirling. The Director of Corporate Services advised thatconsiderable progress had been made on this issue and discussions had beencontinuing since October. He further advised that there would be a full report at theSpecial Council meeting to be held in January 2008.

Volume Page 14072 – SC68 - Councillor Graham Lambie asked for an update onthe trunking of the A811. The Director of Environment Services advised that hewould investigate this matter and respond direct to Councillor Lambie.

Volume Page 14085 – SC80 - Councillor Scott Farmer asked what progress, if any,had been made in relation to the Homeless Persons Accommodation at Holy TrinitySchool. The Director of Environment Services advised that work was currently inprogress and that there would be discussions to look at support services. Moredetailed information could be provided to Councillor Farmer if required.

Volume Page 14064 – SC59 - Councillor Alasdair MacPherson asked the Provost ifthe Depute Provost had been invited to deputise at any civic functions since theCouncil meeting in October. The Provost advised that this matter had already beenthe subject of a written question to Council in October 2007. She confirmed howeverthat the Depute Provost had not been invited to deputise at any civic functions sincethe October Council meeting on the basis that she had attended all such functionsherself.

Volume Page 14078 – SC75 - Councillor Alasdair MacPherson asked whetherreceipts from commercial property sales on the HRA account should be re-investedin the communities in which the properties were based, and if this would be re-visitedin light of the new, larger, multi-member wards. Councillor Hendry advised thatrecords state that this required to be re-visited and that this would be done at theappropriate time.

Volume Page 14120 – PP33 - Councillor Alasdair MacPherson asked that officersbe given delegated authority to sign a Section 75 Agreement in connection with MoorRoad, Strathblane. The Director of Environment Services advised that a reportwould be presented at the first available Council meeting in the new year andundertook to check the status of the Section 75 Agreement and respond direct toCouncillor MacPherson.

Volume Page 14076 – SC73 - Councillor Scott Farmer referred to Page 15 of theagenda and asked in relation to decision 4, what the latest estimates were in relationto restoration balances. Councillor Colin O’Brien advised that the Council was ontarget for achieving balances at the end of year due to the sale of the Thistles.

Volume Page 14074 – SC71 - Councillor Neil Benny referred to the Strategic Plan,and asked, what progress had been made in the development of the Administration’svision on parks and roads. The Leader of the Council advised that work wascurrently being undertaken on the Council’s new vision and values and that furtherdetail would be available by the time of the budget process.

Volume Page 14079 – SC76 - Councillor Graham Lambie asked what the currentfinancial provision for Gargunnock and Killearn Village Halls was. Councillor ColinO’Brien advised that there was no policy at present.

Volume Page 14078 – SC74 - Councillor Jim Thomson asked for an update onspend with regard to Station Square. The Director of Environment Services advisedthat no further spend had been committed as Station Square had been caught up inthe creation of the Stirling Development Agency and consequently no decision wouldbe taken until January 2008.

Provost Brisley took the opportunity to remind members that questions raised during‘question time’ should be referenced from the volume of minutes. In future membersshould state the relevant page number to which they were referring and allow therelevant page to be identified by others before proceeding to ask a question.

SC96 CITIZENSHIP APPOINTMENTS PANEL – APPOINTMENTS TO POOL

The Citizenship Appointments Panel had met on 24 October 2007 to recruit suitablecitizens to the “pool” for the future appointment of Safeguarders. The Panel hadinterviewed four applicants.

The Director of Corporate Services had delegated powers to appoint suitable citizensfrom the “pool” to the various Committees and Panels.

Decision

The Council agreed to appoint the following citizens to the Citizenship AppointmentsPanel Pool:-

Mary Gilham,

Kenneth Marsh

Margaret Ann Tobin

(Reference: Report by Director of Corporate Services dated November 2007submitted)

SC97 STATION YARD SITE, CRIANLARICH

At the Executive Committee meeting of 13 November it had been decided to offerStrathfillan Community Development Trust (SCDT) an option to acquire the site atStation Yard, Crianlarich at market value based on the terms contained in the Reportby the Chief Executive and the Director of Environment Services.

The site at Station Yard, Crianlarich had been the subject of discussion andcompeting proposals for some time. It had been acquired for the provision ofaffordable housing in 2002 but had not as yet been developed although £76,800 hadbeen spent in acquiring the site and on essential servicing. Since 2005, theStrathfillan Community Development Trust had been seeking to develop the site toprovide play and other community facilities.

A recently conducted local housing needs study and housing pressure report haddemonstrated that there was a continuing need for new affordable housing in thevillage. The National Park as planning authority was likely to allocate further land forhousing during 2008.

The Council was advised that the site could be released for alternative developmentprovided that an alternative suitable housing site was made available and otherconditions met as set out in the report by the Director of Environment Services.

Motion

“That, in addition to the recommendations contained within the Report, the Councilagrees that the aspiration would be that the proceeds from the sale of this site wouldbe ringfenced for use of affordable housing provision in Tyndrum and Crianlarich.”

Moved by Councillor Corrie McChord, seconded by Councillor Neil Benny.

Amendment

“That, in addition to the recommendations contained within the Report, and contraryto current policy, the Council agree that the proceeds from the sale of this site beringfenced for use in the area for affordable housing provision in Tyndrum andCrianlarich.”

Moved by Councillor Alasdair MacPherson and seconded by Councillor FergusWood.

On the roll being called, the Members present voted as follows:-

For the Amendment (7)

Councillor Scott FarmerCouncillor Graham HoustonCouncillor Graham LambieCouncillor Alasdair MacPhersonCouncillor Steven PatersonCouncillor Jim ThomsonCouncillor Fergus Wood

Against the Amendment (15)

Councillor Neil BennyCouncillor Alistair BerrillProvost Margaret BrisleyCouncillor Ian BrownCouncillor Callum CampbellCouncillor Tony FfinchCouncillor Colin FinlayCouncillor David GossCouncillor John HendryCouncillor Corrie McChordCouncillor Colin O’BrienCouncillor Gerard O’BrienCouncillor Paul OwensCouncillor Graham ReedCouncillor Andrew Simpson

The Amendment fell by 15 votes to 7.

The vote was taken on the Motion.

For the Motion (15)

Councillor Neil BennyCouncillor Alistair BerrillProvost Margaret BrisleyCouncillor Ian BrownCouncillor Callum CampbellCouncillor Tony FfinchCouncillor Colin FinlayCouncillor David GossCouncillor John HendryCouncillor Corrie McChordCouncillor Colin O’BrienCouncillor Gerard O’BrienCouncillor Paul OwensCouncillor Graham ReedCouncillor Andrew Simpson

Against the Motion (7)

Councillor Scott FarmerCouncillor Graham HoustonCouncillor Graham LambieCouncillor Alasdair MacPhersonCouncillor Steven PatersonCouncillor Jim ThomsonCouncillor Fergus Wood

Decision

The Motion was carried by 15 votes to 7 and accordingly the Council agreed:-

1. to offer the Strathfillan Community Development Trust (SCDT) an option toacquire the site at Station Yard Crianlarich at market value based on the termsset out in the report.

2. that any disposal of the site of a non-housing use should be at market value, andthe proceeds included in the Strategic Housing Account for investment in newaffordable housing.

3. to instruct officers to explore with SCDT alternative proposals for thedevelopment of play and recreational facilities in Crianlarich in case the StationYard scheme proved unfeasible.

4. that the aspiration would be that the proceeds from the sale of this site would bering-fenced for use of affordable housing provision in Tyndrum and Crianlarich.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive and Director of Environment Servicesdated 12 November 2007 submitted)

Councillor Gerard O’Brien left the Chamber at this point in the proceedings.

SC98 REVIEW OF POLLING DISTRICTS AND POLLING PLACES

The Electoral Administration Act 2006 required all Local Authorities to undertake areview of polling districts and polling places by the end of 2007, and then every fouryears. In undertaking the review the Council had to ensure that all electors hadreasonable facilities for voting which were practical in the circumstances, and hadregard to the needs of electors who had a disability.

Polling districts and polling places were last reviewed in the Stirling Council area inSeptember 2006 in preparation for the multi-member wards. The polling districts andpolling places approved at that time had worked well at the combined elections inMay 2007.

As part of the current review, comments and suggestions had been invited on anyaspect of the polling districts and polling places. Details of the Returning Officer’sinitial proposals, polling district and polling place maps and other relevant documentshad been made available on the Council’s website. The website also included an on-line questionnaire inviting comments on the current polling districts and polling placesand inviting suggestions about possible improvements.

Councillor MacPherson suggested that a polling place should be located in Throskand the Chief Executive agreed that this location would be looked at.

Decision

The Council agreed :-

1. to approve the proposed polling districts and polling places following the recentreview of polling districts and polling places.

2. to note that details of the new polling districts and polling places and allrepresentations made in connection with the review would be made available atthe Council Offices, Central Library and on the Council’s website.

3. to delegate authority to the Chief Executive to approve any alterations to pollingplaces in the event that a building used as a polling place unexpectedly becameunavailable immediately before an election.

(Reference: Report by Director of Corporate Services undated submitted)

SC99 AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT ON 2006/07 ACCOUNTS

The Council’s External Auditors, Audit Scotland, had certified Stirling Council’sAccounts for the year to 31st March 2007. In accordance with the Local AuthorityAccounts (Scotland) Regulations 1985, the Accounts were formally presented toMembers at the Council meeting on 4th October 2007.

The 2006 Accounting Code of Practice (SORP) required significant changes to boththe format and content of the Council’s Accounts in 2006/07. The Council had metthe new requirements and it had been noted that the Auditor had provided anunqualified audit opinion on the Accounts.

The Auditor’s Final Report on the Accounts together with a formal action plan toaddress those key issues arising from the audit were attached as an Appendix to aReport by the Head of Resources. The audit findings had been drawn together withinfour main sections of Performance, Financial Position, Governance and FinancialStatements. On 27 November 2007 the Governance and Audit Committee hadconsidered the Report in detail and had agreed to monitor ongoing progress inaddressing the key issues arising from the audit and that the Report become aregular item on the Committee agenda.

Members welcomed the Report and recognised that there was work sill required tobe done.

Councillor Berrill enquired about the number of litigation claims which had beenmade. The Solicitor to the Council advised that he did not have this information tohand and would respond direct to Councillor Berrill with a full explanation.

Decision

The Council agreed:-

1. to note the Auditor’s Final Report on the Accounts; and

2. to note the formal action planned by Management to address the key issuesarising from the audit.

(Reference: Report by Head of Resources, Corporate Services, dated 4 December2007 submitted)

SC100 STIRLING/CLACKMANNANSHIRE JOINT WORKING – FEASIBILITY STUDY

On 22 June 2006 the Council had agreed to a proposal for integrated workingbetween Stirling and Clackmannanshire Councils.

The Council had also established a Political Monitoring Group between the 2Councils to give political direction to these proposals.

The Scottish Executive agreed in March 2007 to provide £265k to pay for a feasibilitystudy to be undertaken. This had been led by SOLACE Enterprises but includedfinancial work by the Institute of Public Finance (IPF) and a consultation element withElected Members.

The final report from the consultants was expected in the near future.

Decision

The Council agreed to note the report on progress with the feasibility study.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 5 December 2007 submitted)

SC101 GENERAL FUND BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08

A Report by the Head of Resource Management provided an update on the overallGeneral Fund Revenue Budget position for the current year.

At the Council meeting on 4th October it had been noted that significant budgetpressures were resulting in a projected overspend on Service budgets of £2.125m.The expectation was that Services would endeavour to do what they could to mitigateoverspends over the remainder of the year.

The current position had been reported to the Executive on 13th November andshowed an improvement with Services now anticipating an overspend of £1.511m,representing 1.1% of the total Service budgets. The major reason for this was theadjustment for anticipated savings on energy budgets from the mini-tender processfor gas and half-hourly electricity. The majority of Services were continuing to reportoverspend positions with the exception of Environment Services, which wasexpected to be on budget. The STOs anticipated an overall budget surplus in thecurrent year.

As previously reported, Children’s Services were experiencing severe budgetpressures from the need to provide for childrens’ residential placements. Increasedcosts of new care packages for clients with learning disabilities was impactingsignificantly on Community Services budget outturns.

The Council had been undergoing a review of levels of employee pay and terms andconditions under the Single Status and Job Evaluation process. The Council hadrecently agreed to a formal 90-day consultation period with the aim of reaching anagreement. Current budget provision of £2m had been identified to contribute to theanticipated ongoing costs. Due to uncertainties however around the timing, natureand ultimate cost of single status and the potential for further equal pay claims, it hadbeen anticipated that not all of the budget provision would be spent in the currentfinancial year. By the very nature of the uncertainty, it was felt prudent at this stagenot show this budget provision as being underspent.

The report also provided an update on corporate projections which showed thatsavings of £900,000 were now expected from loan charges and interest earned onrevenue balances, and £100,000 from recovery of prior years’ Council Tax andCommunity Charge. As the year progressed, further favourable outturns might arisein these areas.

Balances at the end of the financial year were currently anticipated to be £4.027m,being 2.2% of budget, and represented the position prior to making any adjustmentsfor carry forward arrangements under the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management.The 2007/08 budget included a sum of £800,000 for restoration of balances, whichhad been intended to enable the Council to reach the agreed target level forbalances of 2.5% (£4.5m). It was likely that the target would be achieved in thecurrent year, provided that Services continue to take action to mitigate overspendsover the remainder of the year.

The budgeted net surplus for the year of £344,000 which was outlined in anAppendix to the report, related to a sum of £800,000 for restoration of balances, asadjusted for net Service budget carry forwards of £456,000 from 2006/07 under theterms of the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management.

Councillor Thomson stated that elected members required to understand whychanges occurred to the budget throughout the year and suggested that there be fourcolumns to the reporting system covering the published budget; previous budget;current budget; and forecast budget. The Head of Resources confirmed that therewould always be changes to the budget throughout the year and that this would bethe result of varying factors, the detail of which could always be made available tomembers on request. The Director of Corporate Services confirmed that the Servicewould always be willing to consider adjusting reporting styles if this made theinformation more accessible to the reader.

Decision


1. to note that Services were projecting a net overspend position for the current yearand would be expected to manage back any overspends, or carry them forwardto 2008/09 under the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management;

2. to note that the STOs fell outwith the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management,and that the projected budget surplus of £484,000 would have a favourable effecton year-end balances;

3. to note that savings of £1m were currently projected from corporate budgets, andthat further favourable outturns might arise over the remainder of the year; and

4. to note the sum of £800,000 for restoration of balances which would enable theCouncil to reach the agreed target level of 2.5% and that the target was likely tobe achievable in the current year, provided that Services continue to take actionto mitigate overspends over the remainder of the year.

(Reference: Report by Head of Resources, Corporate Services dated 4 December2007 submitted).

SC102 GENERAL SERVICES CAPITAL MONITORING 2007/08

A Report by the Head of Resource Management summarised programmedexpenditure and resources for the Capital Programme for the year to date for allServices, and, as in previous reports, the core programme had been presentedseparately from ringfenced funded budgets. In line with previous reports, the coreprogramme had been divided into Service responsibilities.

For the core programme, actual expenditure to date was 29% of budget or £2.953M.Services had projected year-end expenditure at £10.127M, of this £4.737M waslegally committed and an underspend of £0.147M was anticipated. For Forthsideand PTF budgets expenditure to date was £2.733M or 39% of budget. For otherringfenced budgets, the actual expenditure to date was £0.815M or 19% of budget.

Plans to spend individual programmed budgets were generally well advanced withservices striving to enhance progress on numerous projects. For the totalprogramme overall, expenditure to date was £12.541M, representing 33% of a fullyear approved programme of £37.963M. Of this sum, £11.722M was ringfenced forthe Sports Village.

Appendix 1 to the Report set out the expenditure programme. Comments on themain variances were provided in the main body of the report.

Decision

The Council agreed to note the position of capital programme expenditure to date.

(Reference: Report by Head of Resources, Corporate Services dated 18 December2007 submitted)

The Provost agreed to a short adjournment at this point in the proceedings.

The meeting reconvened at 12 noon.

SC103 CITIES GROWTH FUND PROGRESS REPORT: ALLOCATION OF REMAININGBUDGET

A Report by the Director of Environment Services provided members with a financialupdate on expenditure for the previously agreed Cities Growth Fund (CGF) projects.The two rounds of CGF totaled £3.658m and the total expenditure to date against theagreed projects were set out in Appendix One to the Report.

The Scottish Government had introduced the Cities Growth Fund, initially for theperiod 2003 to 2006. This new and innovative fund had been provided, to Scotland’ssix cities to encourage and stimulate economic growth where no existing fundingstreams were previously available for this type of initiative.

The first round of CGF for Stirling amounted to £1.9m. The six city Councils, inpartnership with their Planning Partners, were able to allocate the CGF to their ownlocal priority projects, so long as they met the broad objectives of stimulating andencouraging local economic growth. Appendix 2 to the Report provided details of theprojects and their associated expenditure.

A second round of CGF had provided a further £1.758m of funding for Stirling,covering the period 2006 to 2008. Appendix 3 to the report provided details of theprojects and their associated expenditure.

The projects required to be founded in Community Planning partners’ aspirations forthe city, expressed within the Communities’ City Vision documentation. Stirling’s Cityvision comprised four key themes and the initial funding had been subdivided, so thateach theme had been allocated funding.

The four themes were; Healthy Stirling; Sustainable Stirling; Inclusive Stirling andVital Stirling. The initial allocations were; £38k for Healthy Stirling; £675k forSustainable Stirling; £183k for Inclusive Stirling and £1004k for Vital Stirling. Overtime, with additional sources of funding being made available to the Council, as wellas changing political priorities, the allocation between the four key themes had beenadjusted. The first round funding was now substantially spent.

The second round of CGF would allow Stirling to progress a number of schemes,from within the original first round of projects, towards implementation. For example,designs funded from the first round monies were implemented during the secondround. The most notable projects in this category were the Orientation andInterpretation Strategy, which received £410k from the first round and £350k from thesecond round. Similarly, Port Street and Friars Street environmental improvementschemes received funding from both rounds, a total of £1.8M.

The financial data in Appendix 1 confirmed that the combined expenditure, for all theCGF projects, stood at £3.119m, with a further £318k of committed expenditure in theperiod ending 31st March 2008.

Assuming that all of the £318k of committed expenditure was realised, a sum of£221k remained to be spent. Some of this £221k had been allocated to projects thathad not yet been fully agreed and approved and so might not achieve the desiredlevel of expenditure by the end of March deadline. Some projects had beencompleted and the level of expenditure incurred had been less than the budgetallocated, resulting in a residual amount that needed re-allocated to another projector projects.

Although every effort was made to manage project spend, it was inevitably that withsuch a large number of projects, some had over-spent their allocation while othershad under-spent. It was important that the remaining projects achieved the desiredobjective of spending all of the £3.658m by the end of March 2008 deadline.

Decision


1. to note the level of expenditure on the agreed projects funded from both roundsof CGF, as set out in the financial report as Appendix 1 to the Report; and

2. to instruct officers to advance the projects identified as priorities for expenditureby the Economic Strategy Group, to ensure that the CGF was, as far asreasonably practicable, fully spent by the end of March 2008 deadline.

(Reference: Report by Director of Environment Services dated 3 December 2007submitted)

SC104 STRATEGIC ASSET MANAGEMENT GROUP

A Report by the Director of Corporate Services sought the establishment a StrategicAsset Management Member Officer Group to over-see the development of astrategic asset management plan for the Council, associated asset managementpolicies and procedures (including disposal of assets and use of capital receipts) andto increase Elected Member involvement in asset management issues generally.

Councillor Houston requested that this Report be deferred until the Special Councilmeeting in January 2008 in view of the number of Member Officer Groups beingestablished.

Decision

The Council agreed to defer consideration of the Report to the Special Councilmeeting in January 2008.

(Reference: Report by Director of Corporate Services dated 7 December 2007submitted)

SC105 AREA COMMUNITY PLANNING – BOUNDARY AND RELATED ISSUES

On 16 June 2007 a Community Conference had been held which brought togetherStirling’s new Councillors and the district’s community representatives. Two mainissues had been discussed at the conference. The first was whether the boundariesof Area Community Planning Forums should be brought into line with the newCouncil Wards. The second was how best communities and the new Councillorscould work together. It had been agreed at the Conference that communities shouldbe given additional time in the Summer to consider these issues and feedback to theCouncil. The report set out the main output from the Conference and consultationfeedback. The feedback seemed supportive of the boundaries remaining as theywere but specific concerns had been raised relating to the viability of Area 1 giventhat Bridge of Allan, Dunblane and Logie did not support the Forum.

The Executive had considered the report on the Conference and consultativefeedback on 13 November 2007 and had agreed to recommend that the Forumboundaries be left as they currently stood, re-numbering them in accordance withthe Wards where possible.

Decision


1. to note the output from the Community Conference held on 16 June 2007, thesubsequent consultative feedback and the decisions taken by the Executive withrespect to boundaries;

2. to dissolve Area Community Planning Forum 1 (now re-numbered as Area 3) –Bridge of Allan, Dunblane and Logie and to note the financial informationprovided in Appendix 2 to the Report;

3. to give Bridge of Allan and Logie Community Councils the opportunity to joinArea 2 (now re-numbered as Area 4), noting that this deviated from alignmentwith Ward boundaries;

4. to instruct the Director of Corporate Services to consider the resource and otherimplications of Dunblane receiving dedicated Community support and Bridge ofAllan and/or Logie being absorbed into Area 4 as part of the review of theCommunity Governance Strategy; and

5. to note that Members would have an opportunity to consider issues raised duringconsultation on Councillor/community interaction in more depth at a MembersSeminar which will form part of the review of the Community GovernanceStrategy.

(Reference: Report by Director of Corporate Services dated 20 November 2007submitted)

SC106 ESTABLISHMENT OF THROSK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AND ALTERATION OFTHE SCHEME FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY COUNCILS

On 17 August 2007 the Council had received a petition for the establishment of aCommunity Council for the community of Throsk.

A Report by the Director of Corporate Services confirmed that Polmaise CommunityCouncil, which currently represented Throsk, had not yet provided a formal response– this had been pursued for the Council meeting. In the meantime, informalcommunication had indicated that Polmaise were opposed to the proposal.However, the petition had been signed by 40 residents when only 20 signatures wererequired in terms of the Council’s Scheme for Establishment of Community Councils,In a subsequent household consultation local residents indicated 23:10 that theyfavoured the creation of a Community Council for Throsk.

The proposed Community Council would comprise a population of 190 making itStirling’s second smallest Community Council.

In September 2006, the Council had approved a Code of Conduct for CommunityCouncils including sanctions which could be taken against Community Councillors ifthey were considered to be in breach of the code. A Report by the Director ofCorporate Services outlined a mechanism for determining whether a breach hadoccurred and what sanction might be applied. The Scheme for the Establishment ofCommunity Councils had been adjusted to incorporate these provisions.

The Provost tabled a letter that had been received from Polmaise CommunityCouncil asking that the decision on the establishment of Throsk Community Councilbe deferred to a future Council meeting.

Decision


1. to establish a new Community Council to be called the ‘Throsk CommunityCouncil’, comprising the area delineated in the plan attached as Appendix 1 tothe report;

2. that the new Community Council should comprise 8 Members (the minimumpermitted under the Scheme), and that elections to the new Community Councilbe held in February 2008 at the same time as the general elections to fill currentvacancies across all Community Councils;

3. to amend Section 13 of the Scheme for the Establishment of Community Councilsto include a new paragraph which confirmed the requirements of the Code ofConduct and what Sanctions might apply if breached as set out in the Report.


SC107 SINGLE STATUS AND JOB EVALUATION

On 13 September 2007, the Council had considered the position on Job Evaluationand Single Status negotiations. Members noted the progress that had been madesince the Council Meeting of 28 June 2007, and had urged both sides to continuenegotiations and make every effort to achieve agreement. At that stage, of the 50Terms and Conditions, 12 had not been agreed.

The Council also agreed that there was an urgent need to progress theimplementation of Single Status and Job Evaluation to ensure that the Council’semployees were paid appropriately, and because of the ongoing liability from EqualPay claims. To help progress matters, the Council had agreed to initiate the statutory90-day consultation period with the Trades Unions. This would give 3 monthsconcentrated opportunity to communicate and engage with employees and to allownegotiations to be concluded.

A Report by the Director of Corporate Services updated the Council on the progressof Job Evaluation and Single Status since the previous meeting.

The Director of Corporate Services confirmed that 5 Corporate Negotiating Groupmeetings, as well as Sub-Group meetings, and 3 Corporate Tripartite Working Groupmeetings had taken place since the last report to Council. In addition, two updateshad been sent to all employees who were affected by Single Status; this included abooklet detailing all the proposed Terms and Conditions, and the grading structure.Also, 45 employees representing a cross section of Single Status employees, hadtaken part in a Focus Group Workshop to identify the issues from their point of view.

A further Corporate Negotiating Group meeting had taken place on Monday 10December. At this meeting agreement had been reached on the following: a)Working Week, b) Public Holidays, c) Saturday Enhancement, d) Flexible Working,and e) Essential Car User.

The Council would not be meeting the anticipated full savings but that was becausethe Council had stressed the need to reach agreement rather than make savings.

It was anticipated that an implementation date of 1st April 2008 would be metalthough any agreement would not come into force until it had been approved by amajority of the members of the Trades Unions’ Stirling Council branches voting in alocal union ballot(s) held for this purpose. The Trades Unions had indicated that theywould be willing to hold their local ballots on the same date.

It was important that the Trades Unions agreed to work with the Council to promotethis Agreement and the Local Conditions of Employment among the Trades Unions’members and among the Council’s employees generally.

Finally, dependent on progress made, a further report on the negotiations would bebrought to the Special Council meeting in January.

Members of the Council congratulated all parties who had been involved in thenegotiations.

Decision

The Council noted the stage that had been reached in negotiations and agreed thatmanagement should conclude the agreement as outlined by the Director of CorporateServices.

(Reference: Report by Director of Corporate Services dated 7 December 2007submitted).

SC108 REPORT ON COST OF RESIDENTIAL AND RESPITE CARE

At its meeting on 4 October 2007 (para SC77 refers) the Council had established aScrutiny Panel to investigate the reasons for a projected overspend on the budget forresidential care placements as reported by the Director of Children’s Services to theCouncil’s Executive on 14th August 2007.

Membership of the cross-party Panel comprised Councillors Ian Brown (Chair), TonyFfinch, Colin Findlay and Graham Lambie. The Group had met on 18 and 25October, and 1, 7 and 15 November 2007.

Councillor Brown introduced the Group’s report by offering his thanks on behalf of thePanel for the co-operation of Children’s Services in providing timeous information tothe Panel and for the range of supporting material and reports provided by theScrutiny Panel’s Officer Support Team.

Discussions with the Service had confirmed the Panel’s view that the scrutinyexercise had been carried out in a positive, non-confrontational way. The Panelhoped that this experience would be of value to other scrutiny exercises in the future.

Throughout the review, the Panel had been aware that the fundamental role of theService was to consider the best interests of the child. The Panel’s report did notquestion, nor investigate that role, since this was outwith the remit of the Panel.Where issues were identified which might have an impact on the budget, the Panelhad highlighted these.

Councillor Brown confirmed that when the Panel had been established, the projectedoverspend on residential and respite care was £0.9m. The overspend now stood at£1.3m excluding the respite care element which was not projecting a year-end over-spend at the present time.

As part of its terms of reference, the Council had requested that the Scrutiny Panelconsider the potential introduction of a charging scheme for residential andcommunity based respite care. The Panel had concluded that this would require adegree of further deliberation since in the short time frame afforded to the Panel; itcould not do justice to this issue. The Panel had proposed that this issue be takenforward in the context of work emerging through COSLA, to be the subject of aspecific discussion at Council at a future date.

The report’s recommendations built upon information provided to the Panel byChildren’s Services and Corporate Services (Procurement, Legal and Internal Audit)supported by analysis by Business Design and a Policy Officer from ChiefExecutive’s Services. The recommendations were grouped into six categories:Information Management; Forward Planning/Monitoring & Best Practice; Budget;Procurement; Increased internal provision; and Governance. The Panel’s report

gave detailed reasons where the Panel had identified key issues that needed to beaddressed in an effort to control, and hopefully reduce, the cost of residential care forthe Children’s Services budget.

In concluding, Councillor Brown acknowledged the co-operation of COSLA in thework of the Panel and the interest shown by the Scottish Minister for Children andEarly Years. It was proposed that, subject to approval by Council of the Panel’srecommendations, the Council should write to CoSLA and the Scottish Government,highlighting the Panel’s findings that might usefully contribute to a national debate onthe issue, given that Stirling was not the only authority facing this situation.

Questions from Members followed at the conclusion of which the Councilcongratulated the Panel on their work in producing such a considered report in sucha short timescale.

Councillor Farmer proposed that recommendation 15 of the Report be changed toread the following “to instruct Children’s Services that there would be no charging forRespite Care and that the only applicable charges for full time Residential Carewould be equivalent to the applicable rate of the Care Component of Disability LivingAllowance (DLA) for the particular individual concerned”. The Council unanimouslyagreed this.

It was further proposed that the Scrutiny Group, reporting to Council, should continueto meet to oversee the development of a service action plan to address the terms ofthe recommendations and monitor the implementation of these.

Decision


1. to instruct Children’s Services to review the existing practice of administrativestaff inputting data to the SWIFT database on behalf of Social Workers. Thereview should consider social workers being responsible for entering informationdirectly into the SWIFT database to ensure an accurate and current record wasmaintained. (This might require training of social workers in the use of SWIFT);

2. to instruct Children’s Services to undertake a review of existing businessprocesses and procedures (relating to MARG) within Children’s Social Work andFinance teams, in order to further identify areas and implement improvement.This should include as a matter of urgency, procedures and processes on casereviews including frequency of case reports and associated financial position tothe Service Management Team;

3. to instruct Children’s Services (with appropriate support from BusinessTransformation & Technology and the Business Support Team from CommunityServices) to undertake a review of the capabilities of the SWIFT database.Community Services should be consulted on their experience of using theSWIFT database for financial management, billing and payment of invoices;

4. that Children’s Services issue to all relevant staff the current guidance on theMARG procedures and processes, and undergo training to ensure compliancewith Stirling Council and Scottish guidelines. Existing written procedures andprocesses should be updated as improvements to existing business processesare identified and implement;

5. to instruct the Service to ensure that MARG decision-making procedures wouldinclude full consideration of resource implications including identification ofassociated costs in relation to a care placement;

6. to request that the Service adopts formal project management and governanceprocedures to ensure the effective implementation of improvement, changemanagement and benefits realisation. This might require the support of otherServices within the Council for the review and implementation programme –these could include Business Transformation & Technology and RecordsManagement;

In relation to Forward Planning/Monitoring/Best Practice:

7. that as the MARG processes and procedures, and the associated call on itsbudget, were essentially reactive in nature and often in response to externalfactors (e.g. increased number of child protection referrals) the Service shouldidentify and specify in these procedures the relationships with other agencies inan effort to enhance multi-agency working and facilitate forward planning;

8. that the Service considers best practice models for forward planning the budgetresources required for looked after children;

9. that given that the Service operated within a framework and rationale of ‘childrenfirst’, to instruct the service to set up an effective monitoring and review systemfocussed on looked after children and costs. This would enable the Service toevaluate and improve care outcomes for looked after children, to betterunderstand past trends and the current situation and to assist with forwardplanning. The Service’s Planning, Performance & Resources Team would berequired to play a key role in this process;

In relation to the Budget:

10. to instruct Children’s Services to minimise any overspend in the current year.The extent to which any overspend at year end might be treated as anexceptional cost under the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management should beconsidered in the light of the services actions to minimise the overspend.Expenditure considered by the Council to be exceptional would be a call onbalances and would not be required to be recovered by the Service in the2008/09 budget year;

11. to note the cost pressures and agree that the Council give consideration toincreasing budget provision for looked-after children residential and respite care.This would be considered in line with developing the budget strategy and wouldtake account of opportunities for Children’s Services to redirect funding fromareas where ‘ring-fencing’ would be removed from 2008/09;

In relation to Procurement:

12. to request Corporate Procurement to advise and support Children’s Services toadopt a more strategic approach to commissioning care in order to maximisebenefits including the reduction of costs and to report back to Council on a six-monthly basis on progress;

In relation to increased internal provision:

13. that the service give consideration to investing more in foster care and‘preventative measures’ in the short to medium term and deliberate further onthis issue and further that a separate review exercise be undertaken byChildren’s Services on current Foster Care arrangements;

14. to instruct Children’s Services, in tandem with other services as appropriate, toproduce a business case for increasing in-house provision of residential care,and whether this could best be pursued as part of a shared services approachwith neighbouring authorities. A project team would be established to producethe business case;

15. to instruct Children’s Services that there would be no charging for Respite Careand that the only applicable charges for full time Residential Care would beequivalent to the applicable rate of the Care Component of Disability LivingAllowance (DLA) for the particular individual concerned;

In relation to Governance:

16. that the service develop an action plan to implement actions arising from thescrutiny review;

17. to instruct Children’s Services to report back to the March meeting of theCouncil, outlining how they would implement the Action Plan – specifyingtimeframes, outcomes and responsibilities;

18. to write to COSLA and the Minister for Children and Early Years at the ScottishGovernment highlighting the budgetary pressures on the Council in meeting thecost of residential and respite care, for information/further action as necessary;and

19. that the Scrutiny Panel continue to meet, to oversee the developmentimplementation and delivery of the Service action plan and report back toCouncil as appropriate.

(Reference: Report by Chair of Ad Hoc Scrutiny Panel on Children’s Social WorkServices: costs of residential and respite care dated 30 November 2007 submitted)

SC109 MUSEUM HALL, BRIDGE OF ALLAN – ADMINISTRATION OF COMMONGOOD FUND

In order to dispose of the Museum Hall, Bridge of Allan, the Council required toobtain the approval of the Court of Session. The approval given by the Court wasconditional. One of the conditions had been that the proceeds of the sale of theproperty, less the necessary expenses of disposal, should be held as a CommonGood Fund for the benefit of the Community of Bridge of Allan. The funds were to beapplied for that purpose in such manner as the Council determined from time to time,in consultation with Bridge of Allan Community Council.

The sale of the Museum Hall had been completed and it was necessary to agree howthe Common Good Fund would be administered and disbursed. It was proposed thatas the Provost’s Panel already had the remit of administering other Common GoodFunds, it would be appropriate to remit this function to that Panel.

Decision


1. that Provost’s Panel manage and administer the Bridge of Allan CommonGood Fund;

2. that all Members for the Bridge of Allan ward who were not Members of theProvost’s Panel be included in the membership when the Panel wasconsidering any matter to do with the Bridge of Allan Common Good Fundand that such Members would have full voting rights on matters affecting thatCommon Good Fund;

3. that the remit of the Provost’s Panel in the Scheme of Delegation beamended as set out in paragraph 3.4 of a report by the Director of CorporateServices; and

4. that Standing Order 104 be amended as set out in paragraph 3.5 of thereport.


SC110 MOTION IN TERMS OF STANDING ORDER 15

(a) Support For The Citizens’ Advice Bureau and Other Voluntary Bodies

i) “This Council applauds the contribution made by the Citizens’ AdviceBureau to welfare and advocacy services in the Stirling Area.Furthermore the Council applauds the volunteers who willingly give uptheir time to provide this service.

ii) The Council further resolves to seek ways of supporting the Citizens’Advice Bureau and looks to the Executive to investigate ways this supportmay manifest itself. The Council seeks a report on the Executive’sinvestigations at the next Council meeting.

iii) Furthermore the Council would like to pay tribute to all the voluntary,religious and socially entrepreneurial groups in Stirling who provideservices in a tailored way to the benefit of all the people of Stirling.”

Moved by Councillor Neil Benny, seconded by Councillor Graham Houston

Amendment

That the Motion be amended to read

i) “This Council applauds the contribution made by the Citizens AdviceBureau and other voluntary bodies in the Stirling Area. Furthermore theCouncil applauds the volunteers who willingly give up their time to providethis service.

ii) The Council further resolves to seek ways of supporting all voluntarysector organisations in Stirling and look to the Executive to investigateways this support may manifest itself in settling the Council Budget for2008/09.

iii) Furthermore the Council would like to pay tribute to all the voluntary,religious and socially entrepreneurial groups in Stirling who provideservices in a tailored way to the benefit of all the people of Stirling.”

Moved by Councillor John Hendry, seconded by Councillor CorrieMcChord.

Decision

The Council unanimously agreed to approve the terms of the Amendment tothe Motion.

Prior to the following items of business the Council agreed that voting wouldbe conducted by a show of hands and not by a roll call vote.

(b) Clarity of Language

“This Council notes that there is a high level of jargon and acronym in manyCouncil papers. While this is often for the communication of complex issues,such communication is not helped by opaque or technical language.

This Council resolves to instruct all staff that use of jargon and acronym isundesirable in any communication both within the Council and externally tothe public.

Furthermore this Council has an ambition to gain a Gold standard of the PlainEnglish Campaign’s Diamond Mark, believing that the standards outlined bythem are a good guide to how documents should be written.

The Council also resolves to insist that all papers presented to it are clear,concise and jargon and acronym free.”

Moved by Councillor Neil Benny, seconded by Councillor Ian Brown.

Decision

The Council unanimously agreed to approve the terms of the Motion.

(c) Westminster Government Financial Settlement for Scotland

“This Council condemns the Westminster Government Financial Settlementfor Scotland that will result in only a one half percent increase next year inreal terms and the consequent impact on Council Services in the StirlingCouncil Area.”

Moved by Councillor Scott Farmer, seconded by Councillor Jim Thomson.

Amendment

That the Motion be amended to read

“This Council deplores the UK Government’s financial settlement of one halfpercentage real-terms increase in Public Service provision throughout the UK.

This will adversely affect services for Stirling Council and throughoutScotland,”

Moved by Councillor Graham Reed, seconded by Councillor Ian Brown.

The vote on the Amendment was as follows:-

For 4Against 10Not Voting 7

The amendment was defeated by 10 votes to 4 with 7 members not voting.

The vote on the Motion was as follows:-

For 14Against 0Not Voting 7

Decision

The Motion was carried by 14 votes with 7 members not voting andaccordingly the Council agreed to approve the terms of the Motion.

(d) COSLA – Voice of Local Government in Scotland

“Council reaffirms its view that COSLA should be the representative voice ofLocal Government in Scotland.

In order to do so the political balance of COSLA should reflect the nationalpolitical balance.

Council instructs its COSLA delegates to support amending the COSLAstructural arrangements to ensure that all Scotland’s Council delegation toCOSLA is representative of the political balance on that Council.”

Moved by Councillor Scott Farmer, seconded by Councillor Jim Thomson.

Direct Negative

Moved by Councillor Corrie McChord, seconded by Councillor John Hendry.

The direct negative having been moved, the vote was taken ‘for’ and ‘against’the motion.

The vote on the motion was as follows:-

For 14Against 7

Decision

The motion was carried by 14 votes to 7 and accordingly the Council agreedthe terms of the Motion.

The Council resolved under Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland)Act 1973 that the public be excluded from the meeting for the following itemsof business on the grounds that they involve the disclosure of exemptinformation as defined in Paragraphs 8 & 9 of Part 1 of Schudule 7A of theLocal Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

SC111 ACQUISITION OF STIRLING MINERS’ WELFARE CLUB – BURGHMUIRREDEVELOPMENT

The former Stirling Miners Welfare Club had closed on March 2007 and Trustees hadbeen appointed to oversee disposal of the subjects.

The site adjoined Burghmuir Industrial Estate which had been earmarked forredevelopment and transfer to the Stirling Development Agency (SDA). A Report bythe Director of Corporate Services proposed that there would be merit in the Councilacquiring the Stirling Miners Welfare Club so as to assist the SDA with ensuring ahigh quality holistic redevelopment of both sites.

On acquisition the site would immediately be transferred to the SDA for the sameconsideration.

Decision


1. to acquire the former Stirling Miners Welfare Club for the unconditional sum of£500,000; and

2. to the immediate transfer of the site on acquisition to the SDA for the sum of£500,000.

(Reference Report by Director of Corporate Services dated 6 December 2007submitted).

/forms/request.htm

SC112 ACQUISITION OF HEAD LEASE INTEREST, GEISHER ROAD, CALLANDER

The Council leased an area of ground with four industrial units on it from GleesonProperties Limited (formerly Lowbrock Investments Limited).

The units which were located at Geisher Road, Callander were part of the portfoliobeing transferred to the Stirling Development Agency (SDA).

It was proposed that there would be merit in the Council acquiring the Head LeaseInterest from Gleeson Properties Limited so as to consolidate the SDA’s portfolio.

Decision


1. to acquire the Head Lease interest from Gleeson Properties Limited for the sumof £125,000.

2. to transfer the Council’s interest to the Stirling Development Agency.

(Reference Report by Director of Corporate Services dated 6 December 2007submitted)

The Provost declared the meeting closed at 2.00pm

/forms/request.htm

APPENDIX 1

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR ALISTAIR BERRILL FOR ANSWER BY THECHILDREN & LIFELONG LEARNING PORTFOLIO HOLDER AT THE MEETING OF THEFULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“How many of Stirling Council’s schools are performing a traditional nativity play thisChristmas?”

Answer:

“This is not something that we hold statistics on and we could only provide an accurateanswer by contacting schools directly. It would be unreasonable to do this at short notice.The service would be happy to do this and report back to Council on this. The impressionfrom the invitations that we have from schools is that the nativity play is still very much partof school cultures”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR NEIL BENNY FOR ANSWER BY THE ENVIRONMENTPORTFOLIO HOLDER AT THE MEETING OF THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ONTHURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“Will the Environment Portfolio holder tell us whether Stirling Council has any plans tointroduce additional charges for domestic waste collection and if not then will he rule it outtoday?”

Answer:

“The Council currently has no plans to introduce charges for the standard domestic wastecollection service (comprising grey bin (for residual waste) and brown bin (for green wasteand cardboard) bins and blue boxes (for recycleables).

For special uplift of household items the current charge is £23.00. Old Aged Pensioners areexempt from charges”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR GRAHAM LAMBIE FOR ANSWER BY THE LEADEROF THE COUNCIL AT THE MEETING OF THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ONTHURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“Will the Leader of the Council inform the meeting how often the Emergency Planning Teammeets and what arrangements are in place to deal with an accident involving the convoy ofNuclear Weapons or Waste through the Stirling Council area”.

Answer:

“Emergency Management Arrangements in Stirling CouncilThe Council’s emergency planning and response function is co-ordinated by an EmergencyManagement Response Team (EMRT). EMRT is supported by a dedicated EmergencyPlanning Officer, located within the Chief Executive’s Office. EMRT consists ofrepresentatives from each Council service and co-ordinated by a lead Head of Service(Head of Performance, Resources and Advice in Community Services).

EMRT meets formally every quarter to discuss ongoing business. EMRT is also convened asand when required to co-ordinate the Council’s response in times of emergency. EMRT isalso currently meeting monthly as the project board overseeing the Council’s revision of itsBusiness Continuity strategy and plans.

Full details of the work of EMRT and the Emergency Planning Officer are available on theSource athttp://web.stirling.gov.uk/chief-executive/chief_executives_office/emergency_planning.htm

Incidents involving Nuclear Weapons or WasteAlong with all other Category 1 responders in Central Scotland, Stirling Council is a memberof a local Strategic Co-ordinating Group (SCG) under the Civil Contingencies Act. The SCGis chaired by the Chief Constable of Central Scotland Police and has responsibility forensuring co-ordination between and strategic oversight of all emergency planning andresponse arrangements across Central Scotland. This would include any incidents involvingnuclear weapons or waste.

Should a radiological incident occur in the Stirling area from any cause the main initialresponse would be from the emergency services – Central Scotland Police, Central ScotlandFire and Rescue Service and the Scottish Ambulance Service - quickly supported by theresources available to the MOD via the Nuclear Accident Response Organisation and by theGovernment Decontamination Service. The Council would have no direct role in this area ofresponse.

The Council’s emergency response role would be to provide support for the emergencyservices. This is a generic role, which is contained within the Council’s Major EmergencyManagement Procedures. These procedures allow the Council to provide support to theresponding agencies and deliver Council services with priorities established to support morevulnerable people in local communities. Staff are trained in these procedures and exercisesare conducted to test and refine them.

The Council response required would be based on the scale, duration and impact of theemergency and also includes assisting communities and individuals to cope during thecourse of a major incident, including providing rest centres to support any evacuationrequired, and to recover after the major emergency response is over.

A specific role for the Council in such an incident would be to close affected roads under thedirection of Central Scotland Police, and identify and set up any necessary diversions toensure safe routes of travel.

Movement of any nuclear materials through the Council area is co-ordinated by nationalgovernment, the Ministry of Defence, the Police and the Fire and Rescue Service. Anyconvoys are notified to the police at least 24 hours in advance to ensure consultation ontraffic arrangements.

Road movement of nuclear weapons is the responsibility of the MOD. Specialist vehiclescontaining the weapons are escorted in a convoy of military vehicles. A number of othervehicles make up this convoy; these include a fire tender, MoD police motorcycle outriders,escort and support vehicles. The highly trained crew (of up to 50 people) includes a first aidteam, fire crew and personnel equipped to monitor for radiological hazards. Oversight ofarrangements is also undertaken by the Health and Safety Executive, which has indicatedthat it is satisfied with precautions being taken.

Co-ordination undertaken through the local Strategic Co-ordinating Group ensures thatagency responses are understood, co-ordinated and fit for purpose”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR JIM THOMSON FOR ANSWER BY THE EXECUTIVEMEMBER WITH PORTFOLIO FOR ENVIRONMENT AT THE MEETING OF THE FULLCOUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“Leaving or depositing litter is a criminal offence.

How many Litter Enforcement notices has Stirling Council served and of those, how manyhave been served on persons below the age of 16?”

Answer:

“Leaving or depositing litter is an offence under section 87 of the Environmental ProtectionAct 1990, and the slightly extended powers under the Anti Social Behaviour (Scotland) Act2004. Under section 87 of the EPA 1990 an authorised officer can issue a perpetrator with afixed penalty of £50 Payment of this penalty effectively discharges the liability to conviction.Where a penalty is issued and not paid within 14 days, the matter is referred to theProcurator Fiscal who will decide what further action is to be taken.

Since 1st April 2005 to date Stirling Council have served 36 litter fixed penalty notices.

None of these notices have been served on anyone under the age of 16.!

At present minors found dropping litter will be issued with a verbal warning, with a letter sentto the Head teacher of their school. In addition, visits to High Schools to educate andincrease awareness on the litter issues, are seeking to promote litter reduction”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR FERGUS WOOD FOR ANSWER BY THE EXECUTIVEMEMBER WITH PORTFOLIO FOR ENVIRONMENT AT THE MEETING OF THE FULLCOUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“The Westminster Government is considering building Nuclear Power Plants in Scotland.

What is Stirling Council’s position on locating a Nuclear Power Plant in our boundaries”.

Answer:

“The Council does not have a formal position on Nuclear Power in general or the location ofNuclear Power Plants within its boundaries.

Until financial year 2007/08, Stirling Council paid a small grant (£1,115) to Scottish NuclearFree Local Authorities. As part of the budget setting exercise for 2007/08, this grant wasceased along with a number of other small grants assessed as not contributing significantlyto the Council’s corporate objectives as set out in its Corporate Plan. This did not change theCouncil’s position on nuclear issues generally or nuclear power specifically”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR STEVEN PATERSON FOR ANSWER BY THEEXECUTIVE MEMBER WITH PORTFOLIO FOR COMMUNITY AND HOUSINGSTRATEGY AT THE MEETING OF THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY13 DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“Stirling Council offers grants and support to a number of voluntary organisations andcharities.

Can the Portfolio Holder for Community and Housing Strategy advise of the total spend infinancial years 2005/6, 2006/7 and the budget for 2007/8”.

Answer:

“Grants and Payments to Voluntary Organisations and Charities as listed below:-

Service Grant/Payment 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08£000’s £000’s £000’s

Corporate Services (including ChiefExecutive)

Grants 234 301 236


SLA Payment 15 15 13


Total 248 315 250

Community Services Small Grants 20 22 23Community Services Core Grants 574 584 589Community Services SLA Payment 880 980 938Community Services Total 1,475 1,586 1,550

Chidren's Services Grants 234 240 245Chidren's Services Purchasing 1,290 1,315 1,056Chidren's Services Total 1,524 1,555 1,301

Environment Services - Housing Grants 57 47 53Environment Services - Housing SLA Payment 463 600 559Environment Services - Housing Total 521 647 612

Total All Services 3,767 4,104 3,712

Notes for Community Services funding:

Community Services provides total funding of £1,550,000 in 2007/08, to a number ofvoluntary organisations.

These are funded by three main funding arrangements:

- Small grants of up to £5,000- Core grants- Service level agreements (which can be used to purchase direct purchasing/services).

Following the Best Value Review of Funding within Community Services, we are working onrevised service specifications for 2008/09, and in the longer term towards the developmentof contracts to replace service level agreements and core grants, as appropriate.”

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR ALASDAIR MACPHERSON FOR ANSWER BY THEEXECUTIVE MEMBER WITH PORTFOLIO FOR CHILDREN AND LIFELONG LEARNINGAT THE MEETING OF THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 13DECEMBER 2007

Question:

“Will the new St. Modan’s (when it opens) be charged for the use of facilities at the newSports Village?

For the avoidance of doubt, will the school be charged for the use of the facilities in schooltime, evenings and weekends?”

Answer:

“St Modans High School has extensive facilities including:

• a full size Games Hall• a Dance studio• a Gym• a full size all weather pitch• a small (7 a side) grass pitch

The only facilities that St Modans may wish to use within the Sports Village are the full sizedgrass pitches. No final agreement has been established as to priority and charging”.

QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR SCOTT FARMER FOR ANSWER BY THE EXECUTIVEMEMBER WITH PORTFOLIO FOR CORPORATE, RESOURCES AND ECONOMY ATTHE MEETING OF THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 13 DECEMBER2007

Question:

“Can the Portfolio Holder detail (since April 2005), the land and building assets sold andcapital receipts from the sales”.

Answer:

Properties Sold by Stirling Council - SinceApril 2005

(Excludes receipts from the sale of council houses)

Property Address HoldingAccount Category Date Sold Receipt

Received

2007/2008Surplus site at Dunblane HighSchool Gen Services Land 06-Dec-07 £5,521,547

Thistle Ground Leases, Stirling Gen Services GroundLease 4-Dec-07 £23,000,00

0

QS1 & 2, Munro Rd, Stirling Gen Services Industrialunits 23-Aug-07 £1,800,000

Middlemuir Rd, Stirling Gen Services Land 23-Jul-07 £1

Cinema Site, Forthside Gen Services Land 03-May-07 £1,385,000

Sub-Total General Services £31,706,548

.604 Hectares, Oakwood, Kippen HRA Land To beconfirmed £140,000

.613 Acres, Mansefield, Tyndrum HRA Land To beconfirmed £1

78/80 Buchanan Street, Balfron HRA Shop 30-Nov-07 £65,500

4-8 Broad Street, Stirling HRA Shops 31-Oct-07 £101,100

22 Broad Street HRA Shop 28-Sep-07 £33,000

18 Bow Street, Stirling HRA Shop 31-Aug-07 £63,000

2 Broad Street, Stirling HRA Shop 24-Aug-07 £30,000

9 Main Street, Cambusbarron HRA Shop 18-Aug-07 £22,000

3/5 Duke's Court, Aberfoyle HRA Shop 10-Aug-07 £49,000

52 Baker St, Stirling HRA Shop 27-Jul-07 £59,000

Development Agreement for Saleof Land to RURC HRA Land 30-Jun-07 £1

151 Buchanan St, Balfron HRA Shop 19-Jun-07 £27,500

54 Baker Street, Stirling HRA Shop 15-Jun-07 £47,000

169 Buchanan Street, Balfron HRA Shop 6-Jun-07 £32,000

167 Buchanan St, Balfron HRA Shop 25-May-07 £36,500

56 Baker Street, Stirling HRA Shop 18-May-07 £40,000

153 Buchanan St, Balfron HRA Shop 4-May-07 £38,000

424m2 Ground Adj to 10 KeltieBridge, Callander HRA Land 12-Apr-07 £10,600

Land at Haugh Road, Cornton HRA Land 4-Apr-07 £500

Sub-Total HRA £794,702

Total 2007/08 £32,501,250

2006/2007

Museum Hall, Bridge of Allan CommonGood

Community Centre December-06 £405,000

Sub-Total Common Good £405,000

East side of Cornton Road, Bridgeof Allan Gen Services Land January-07 £100

348 m2 at Bellfield Road,Bannockburn Gen Services Land March-07 £450

Sub-Total General Services £550

70.6m2 at Culcreuch Avenue,Fintry HRA Land February-07 £1,500

Land at Wallace Place, Fallin HRA Land February-07 £2,500

0.604 hectares, Oakwood, Kippen HRA Land March-07 £140,000

0.613 hectares Mansefield,Tyndrum HRA Land March-07 £1

Sub-Total HRA £144,001

Total 2006/07 £549,551

2005/200622/24 King Street, Stirling Common

GoodOffices 24-Mar-06 £710,000

Sub-Total Common Good £710,000

5.3 acres Residential site,Forthside, Stirling

Gen Services Land Apr-07 £6,500,000

1 Glenartney Road, Callander Gen Services Offices 17-Jun-05 £76,250

17 Caledonian Place, Dunblane Gen Services Land 06-May-05 £50,600

Kerse Road Day Care Centre,Stirling

Gen Services Land 01-Jun-05 £1,376,000

Sub-Total General Services £8,002,850

Total 2005/06 £8,712,850

Note: for 2007/08 several other property disposals are in progress but missives have notbeen concluded between the Council and the purchasers.

minutes of the meeting of stirling council held in the...

Documents