Agenda item
Memorial Safety Programme
- Meeting of Cabinet, Tuesday, 17th February 2009 10.00 a.m. (Item 147.)
- View the background to item 147.
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Kerr)
Report of the Corporate Director (Community Services).
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Kerr)
The Corporate Director (Community Services) submitted a report informing Members about the options for the future of the Council’s Memorial Safety Programme, as requested by Cabinet at its meeting on 20th January 2009.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment, were set out in the report as follows:
|
|
Options |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Risk Assessment |
Financial |
|
1 |
To make the Memorial Safety Team (reduced to 2 posts), full time. |
Retains expertise to allow: § Implementation of rolling testing programme. § Ability to repair unsafe and vandalised memorials. § Ability to monitor work of private masons to ensure future compliance with standards. § Provide the necessary operational resources to deliver essential services required at the time of burial. § To carry out permanent repair to previously staked and banded memorials. § Provides extra resilience for business continuity in the event of a major incident.
|
§ Ongoing revenue costs as outlined in financial implications section. § One post made redundant § Noticeable reduction in GM standards, especially grass cutting.
|
Ensures Council is complying with legal responsibilities and cemeteries good management. |
§ 2-man team including equipment, tools and vehicle approximately £55k/year. § In 2009/2010 up to £6,000 redundancy costs required § In 2010/2011 onwards memorial safety programme would be fully funded from within existing cemeteries grounds maintenance budgets.
|
|
|
Options |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Risk Assessment |
Financial |
|
2 |
Laying flat memorials. |
§ Cost saving on materials that would be used to make a permanent repair. |
§ Would interfere with grass cutting operation leading to increased costs. § Would affect neat and tidy appearance of lawn sections leading to increased complaints. § Increased officer time in dealing with complaints and distress caused to relatives and public by laying flat large numbers of headstones.
|
§ Large scale laying down of memorials may be deemed to be maladministration should a complaint be made to the Ombudsman. § Potential trip and slip hazard. § Potential for damage to headstone by grass cutting operation. § Could lead to bad PR for Service and Council. |
§ By not carrying out a repair, approximate annual saving would be £3,000 on materials. |
|
|
Options |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Risk Assessment |
Financial |
|
3 |
Carry out a repair to staked and banded memorials to ensure compliance with NAMM standards. |
§ Makes memorial safe. § Preserves lawn section layout and allows for cost effective grass cutting and maintenance. |
§ Increased material costs when compared with laying flat.
|
§ Reduces risk of accidents and potential litigation. |
§ Cost in materials for in-house repair is £20/memorial. § Costs can be met from within the allocated running costs budget of £3,500 for 2009/2010. § Cost of repair will be recouped from relatives should contact be made with them in the future. |
Option 1 is recommended for approval on the basis that it enables the Council to meet its responsibilities for Memorial Safety in a cost effective way which can be delivered operationally.
Option 3 (refixing memorials in place) is the recommended option for effecting a permanent solution which reflects recently published guidance and best practice.
It was moved by Councillor Kerr and seconded by Councillor Mace:-
“(1) That the two person Memorial Safety Team be retained
(2) That the preferred method of making memorials permanently safe is to re-fix headstones in place rather than lay down.”
Members then voted as follows:-
Resolved:
(7 Members (Councillors Archer, Blamire, Bryning, Charles, Gilbert, Kerr and Mace) voted in favour and 2 Members abstained (Councillors Barry and Fletcher.)
(1) That the two person Memorial Safety Team be retained
(2) That the preferred method of making memorials permanently safe is to re-fix headstones in place rather than lay down.
Officers responsible for effecting the decisions:
Corporate Director (Community Services)
Head of City Council (Direct) Services
Reasons for making the decisions:
Expertise will be kept within the Memorial Safety Team. Repairing memorials has more advantages and less disadvantages than laying memorial flat.
Supporting documents:
PDF 67 KB