Issue - meetings

Option 1:  Delegate Responsibilities as outlined

Option 2: Seek Cabinet approval on each individual basis

Advantages

As there are so many projects in this area of work, this will save time, allowing officers to focus on supporting the community and delivery of the corporate objective for green spaces.

It will allow groups to respond quickly to opportunities which arise.

Projects are usually funded by three or four different funding bodies.  Delegated responsibility will provide flexibility when pulling funding packages together.

Enables quick applications to go in to maintain community interest.

Allows consideration of specific budgetary pressures and commitment of future budgets as and when bidding opportunities arise.

Disadvantages

Annual commitments against existing budget levels may be incurred, reducing future scope to make savings in those areas.

It does not provide the flexibility and responsiveness which is required for these small scale community projects. Some funding is available at short notice which does not easily fit into council procedures and timescales.

Due to the quantity of projects and funding applications – the officer time in complying with these requirements on a project by project basis.

Risks

There will be no immediate risk regarding ongoing maintenance costs as this will be addressed at the start of any project, but would be risk associated with committing future years’ budgets, potentially.

There is a risk that the group don’t fulfil their requirements and the funding is reclaimed – Officers work very closely with groups to ensure this does not happen.  Acting as the accountable body also allows us to have more control over funding requirements, procurement procedures, quality of work, etc. that may reduce long term risks to the council.

Loss of funding opportunities due to the required timescales.

Loss of community interest due to the required timescales especially when funding has been secured and needs spending by a certain date.