Agenda and draft minutes

          Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Huntley, Elkins, Blanchard-Cooper and Warr.

Members and Officers are invited to make any declaration of pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this agenda, and are reminded that they should re-declare their interest before consideration of the items or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

Members and Officers should make their declaration by stating:

a)             the item they have the interest in

b)             whether it is a pecuniary/personal interest and/or prejudicial interest

c)             the nature of the interest

There were no Declarations of Interest made.

The Committee will be asked to approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Environment Committee held on 14 November 2024.

Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Committee Manager explained that Councillor Elkins had requested that the reference to him being absent for all or part of discussion of Minute 284, the Work Programme, be removed from the Environment Committee Minutes 14 November 2024. The reason for this was that Councillor Elkins stated he was present for the Item. The Committee agreed that this be removed from the Minutes.

The amended Minutes of the meeting held on 14 November 2024 were then approved by the Committee. These would be signed after the meeting.

The Chair confirmed that there were no urgent matters for this meeting.

To receive questions from the public (for a period of up to 15 minutes)

The Chair confirmed one question had been submitted, which is briefly summarised below:

1    From Mr Hamish Neathercoat to the Chair of the Environment Committee, regarding Clymping Beach.

A response was provided by the Chair. A supplementary question was then asked and the Chair confirmed that a response would be provided in writing and uploaded to the Arun District Council website after the meeting.

(A schedule of the full question, supplementary question asked and the responses provided can be found on the Environment Committee Public Question Web page)

The Chair then drew Public Question Time to a close.

This report provides the Committee with an update following the fourth meeting of Arun Flood Forum, held on the 25 November 2024.

[20 Minutes]

[During discussion of this Item, Councillor Greenway declared a Personal Interest as a Member of West Sussex County Council]

          Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager presented the report, which provided an update on the fourth meeting of the Forum. A cross-organisation presentation had been delivered, which featured information from West Sussex County Council, Southern Water, the Environment Agency and Arun District Council (ADC). This presentation was shown in Appendix 1 of the Environment Committee agenda pack. The presentation was followed by a question & answer session where members took the opportunity to ask site specific questions and discuss the strategic impacts of future works. The Chair had then summarised the Forum’s progress to date and invited members to consider how they thought the group was progressing, and what the group should strive to achieve the following year. Appendix 2 of the Environment Committee agenda pack contained the minutes of the Forum. The Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager felt the Forum had been very positive, and had successfully brought the various agencies together. Arun Flood Forum was being referenced by other agencies as a model that they would benefit from.

          The Chair invited questions, and the following points were raised:

• The Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager was thanked for the comprehensive update.
• It was asked whether the Forum was now a permanent body that would continue indefinitely. The Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager explained there was no defined end point for the Forum, however it was expected that member involvement would reduce while officer involvement would increase.
• It was suggested that public awareness leaflets around flood prevention be included with the Council Tax bills. Officers would look into this.
• It was asked whether the work of the Flood Forum contributed to flooding being recently averted in the Aldwick area. The Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager felt this was a contributing factor.
• There was recently a flood on South Terrace involving a pumping station, and it was felt the communication from Southern Water around this was very effective. It was asked what the cause of this flood was. The Flooding and Coastal Engineering Manager would obtain this information and update the Committee after the meeting.

          The Committee noted the report.

This report sets out a proposal to extend the GMC with Tivoli Group Limited (Tivoli) for a further five years. It provides detail concerning improvements and initiatives to achieve best value and support delivery of the Council Vision objectives detailed above.

[20 Minutes]

          Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Parks & Cemeteries Manager presented the report, which set out a proposal to extend the Greenspace Management Contract (GMC) with Tivoli Group Limited (Tivoli) for a further five years. It provided detail concerning improvements and initiatives to achieve best value and support the delivery of the Council Vision objectives.

          The Chair invited questions, and the following points were raised:

• It was asked what would happen with the contract with the impending local government restructure. The Parks & Cemeteries Manager explained that this was uncertain, however the likelihood was that the contract would remain in existence under the new structure, and extending the contract provided assurance.
• One Member expressed unease about the extension of contracts, which meant these contracts were not being formally tested. Officers explained that Tivoli’s overall performance was good, and this had been well received at the performance report update to the Committee in November and that extending on the same terms reduced any financial risk to the authority.
• It was asked why Members were being asked to note and not approve the contract renewal. The Environmental Services & Strategy Manager explained there was no requirement for the Committee to approve this, however Officers wanted to be completely open and transparent, which is why they had brought the matter to Committee.
• It was noted that Tivoli had recently been acquired by the Nurture Group, and it was asked how ADC could be confident these new owners would continue to deliver the service previously enjoyed. The Parks & Cemeteries Manager explained it was unclear how this would affect the delivery; however he felt comfortable with the situation. Nurture were a large organisation dedicated to ground maintenance.
• It was asked whether there was an argument for separating the grounds maintenance contract from the outdoor recreation contract in the future. The Parks & Cemeteries Manager explained there were various models that could be explored for outdoor recreation.
• It was asked whether there would be an opportunity for Councillors to contribute to discussions with Tivoli around priorities and future investment. The Parks & Cemeteries Manager felt it would be important for Members to contribute to ideas with a view to getting the public into outdoor spaces and using them for recreational purposes.
• Page 113 mentioned a proposal for a pop-up crazy golf course in Felpham, and it was asked whether Ward Members would be involved in such decisions. The Parks & Cemeteries Manager confirmed Ward Members would be consulted, and in the case of the pop-up golf this was a trial to achieve commercial viability for the site.
• It was asked why this report was not combined with the previous Greenspace Management Contract report at the November Environment Committee. Officers confirmed this was due to a timing issue, however understood bringing the two reports together would have been ideal.
• There had been a divide between the level of public satisfaction in the cleanliness of East and West of the District, and it was asked whether this tied into the GMC. The Environmental  ...  view the full minutes text for item 492.

This report sets out for the Committee details of the work and research undertaken by officers as a result of the Motion referred to the Committee on 8 November 2023. The report informs the Committee of the progress made by officers in identifying options to establish a mechanism of advocacy and improved protection for the River Arun by assessing the feasibility of the ‘Rights of the River’ and sets out an alternative option for establishing a method to help protect the River Arun to ensure that its biodiversity and function are maintained.

[30 Minutes]

          Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Climate Change & Sustainability Manager  presented the report, which set out details of the work and research undertaken by officers as a result of the Motion referred to the Committee on 8 November 2023. The report informed the Committee of the progress made by officers in identifying options to establish a mechanism of advocacy and improved protection for the River Arun by assessing the feasibility of the ‘Rights of the River’, with support from neighbouring local authorities and river trusts.

          The recommendation was proposed by Councillor Worne and seconded by Councillor Wallsgrove.

Councillor McAuliffe, as original proposer of the Motion, was then invited to speak to it. He stated that when he introduced the original Motion in 2023, the aim was to find out what this authority could do to protect and improve water quality of the River Arun. This included what ADC could do internally and also in collaboration with others, who were also doing work in this area, to safeguard the rivers and streams. He had however, made an error, which was to introduce the word ‘rights’, as that had legal implications and this authority did not have the legal powers to introduce ‘rights’. The officer recommendation was to introduce a statement of intent, which was one thing of many ADC could do. He felt ADC needed to look at things that could be introduced and actioned rather than make statements upon, which was what the public expected. With the wording as it was, this was not possible. Looking at how the Council could take action on river quality with the limited powers and resources available, the best thing was to amend the wording of the original Motion and remove the word ‘rights’, because that word stopped action from being taken. He explained each department in the authority could look at ways that positive change could be made, for example the Licensing department could look at the ways it influences licensing. Pleasure boats that operate on the river needed a licence, and one of the things that could be done would be to incentivise electric motors instead of petrol motors. Something similar had been done with taxi cabs, who were offered lower fees in their application if they were applying for their licence with a hybrid or electric vehicle. The  Planning department could look at their policies; the Communications department could issue voluntary codes of conduct; procurement options could also be looked at. He explained that he was not allowed to propose an amendment as he was not a Member of the Committee, however Councillor Wallsgrove could do so. If Committee supported this amended wording, it would empower every department within the Council to find extra protections for Arun’s rivers and streams, and embolden and empower individuals to come up with ideas that could be looked at and taken forward should they be reasonable, suitable and viable. The public wanted action on river quality, and Members could do that if the Motion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 493.

This report sets out the 2025/26 revenue and capital budgets for this Committee to consider and recommend for submission to the Policy and Finance Committee on 13 February 2025.

[20 Minutes]

[Councillor Worne was absent for discussion for part of this Item and abstained from voting on it]

          Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer presented the report, which was for the Committee to consider and recommend its revenue and capital budgets for inclusion in the Council’s 2025/26 budget. The agreed budgets would then form part of the overall revenue and capital budgets for 2025/26 to be considered at the Policy and Finance Committee on 13 February 2025, so that recommendations could be made to Full Council on 26 February 2025 regarding the budgets to be set and level of Council Tax for the District for 2025/26. He explained there was still a budget deficit, and the Council still had an obligation to try and resolve the structural budget deficit. He highlighted paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 which showed the overall year on year budget increase was £345k, most of which was due to contract inflation, particularly on the waste contract which accounted for around £200k. There was also pay inflation. There was additional car parking income of £133k. The Capital Programme now included the waste management investment requirements around bins and vehicles, funded by DEFRA grants and borrowing. It was hoped the borrowing costs would be offset by contract savings in the future. The extended producer responsibility payment now also sat with the Council, which was currently not shown in the Committee’s report, but was included within the overall budget report.

          The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Hamilton and seconded by Councillor Wallsgrove.

          The Chair invited questions and debate and the following points were raised:

• It was asked how far the proposal went towards aiding the Council in the reduction of spending of reserves over the next five years. The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer explained the Financial Strategy, approved by Policy and Finance and adopted by the Council over one year ago, indicated there were several work streams that would be undertaken with a view to closing the structural budget gap. One of those work streams was the waste contract, and it was hoped that savings would be made in the future. He also explained that technically the extended producer responsibility income should be shown in the Environment Committee budget, which would reduce the actual net budget requirement for 2025/26.
• Car parking fees had been increased in the last two years by 10% and 5% respectively, however the budget for car parks had been reduced, and it was asked why that was. The Group Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer explained there were other adjustments. There was £133k of additional income, but there was also contract inflation around the enforcement/cash collection contract. There would also be other lost car parking income in 2025/26 due to closures, for example the West Green car park.
• There was disappointment that the Bersted Brooks programme had been reprofiled again, and it was asked whether the value of the project had gone down,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 494.

This report sets out the performance of the Key Performance indicators at Quarter 3 for the period 1 April 2024 to 31 December 2024.

[10 Minutes]

          Upon the invitation of the Chair, the Group Head of Environment and Climate Change presented the report, which updated the Committee on the Q3 Performance Outturn for the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which made up the Corporate Plan, for the 1 April 2024 to 31 December 2024.

          Questions were asked around CP24 (Household waste sent for re-use, recycling and composting) – it was asked why this was slowly declining and the target had not been reached, and what actions were being taken to address this. The Group Head of Environment and Climate Change explained the target had been challenging, and that the work being undertaken to increase recycling was being done in association with the West Sussex Waste Partnership across the county. The Council’s new Combined Cleansing Services Contract from February 2026, would introduce several initiatives that were expected to increase recycling performance figures. This included food waste collection and that residual waste would be collected every 2  weeks  instead of every week, which evidence had shown would increase recycling collection rates.

          It was asked whether further information could be supplied to Members around CP24, in particular splitting the percentages between the different types of properties, and what work was being carried out to improve recycling for property types that had lower levels of this.

          It was asked that in future the Committee received the KPIs only relating to Environment Committee which was felt would reduce paper and confusion.

          The Committee noted the report

          The Chair gave a brief verbal update, explaining she had joined the Portsmouth Water Customer Scrutiny Panel, who were working on a strategy to help people that were in water poverty.

The Committee is required to note the Work Programme for 2024/25.

[5 Minutes]

It was requested that future work programmes for the Committee be on a rolling 12-month basis. Officers confirmed this change would be made.

The Committee noted the Work Programme.