Decision details

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE HEAD OF TRANSPORT AND ENVIRONMENT SERVICE)

The report was introduced by David Moorman, Parks Manager who summarised the key points. 

The Cabinet member advised that one deputation request had been received for this item. She also advised that a substantial number of written representations had been received which had been made available to herself and to the Opposition Spokespersons before the meeting. 

Mr Scott Patterson, who was speaking on behalf of the allotment associations in the city, wished to speak against the recommendations and was invited to make his deputation.

In response to one of the points made in the deputation, Mr Moorman advised that the age related discounts had not been refused.  Officers had advised the Cabinet member that a wider consultation would need to take place on this however due to the change in administration there had not been sufficient time to carry this out.

The opposition spokespeople were invited to ask questions on the report.  In response to these officers clarified the following points:

·         Mr Moorman advised that officers continue to meet with the allotment associations four times a year to consult on changes and in recent years officers had circulated a copy of the briefing report to all allotment associations as this allowed more time to consult.

·         Officers had consulted with Mr Wilson in the Council's legal team with regard to the Leeds County Council case and Mr Lawther assured members that this case had been taken into account when writing the report.  Mr Wilson would be preparing a detailed response to the legal points raised in one of the written deputations which would be sent to the member of the public raising the queries, the Cabinet member and opposition spokespeople.

·         The rate rises for allotments are above those for swimming pools.  Bowling greens had been handed over to the clubs to manage; this was an option for allotments however when this had been suggested to them the allotment associations they had not felt this was practical.

·         The maintenance work of allotments took place by a contractor who the council believe provide good value for money.  The Council had offered allotment associations the option to take on the maintenance work themselves, however this would need to be on the basis of a full transfer and as not all plot holders are members of an allotment association, this was not feasible.  The council carries out inspections of all allotment sites between March and October and if they are not satisfied the contractor will be called back. If the allotment holders had concerns about the quality of the work provided by the maintenance contractor they should report this to the Council.

Councillor Swan said it was important to note paragraph 4.1 in the report which answered a lot of the points raised in the written deputations and said she was extremely unhappy with option 2 in the report.

The Cabinet member said that costs would be kept under review.  The Council is facing huge cuts and therefore it was vital that full cost recovery is achieved.

DECISIONS: The cabinet member
(1) Approved option 1 in the report to move closer to the aim to ensure that fees generated from discretionary services cover the full cost of service delivery.

 (2) Noted the change in units of measurement of allotment plots.