Agenda item

Take Pride Community Fund

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

Report of the Head of Community Engagement

Minutes:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

Councillors Barry, Hamilton-Cox, Hanson and Leytham declared interests in the following item in view of their involvement with some of the organisations referred to in the report. Councillors Barry and Hamilton-Cox advised the meeting that they would abstain from voting on this item.

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Community Engagement to make recommendations on the allocation of the Take Pride Community Fund (previously referred to as Second Homes Funding for 2012/13).

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

	Advantages	Disadvantages	Risks
Option 1 Agree the recommendations as proposed	Early start for supported projects to ensure expenditure is achieved in line with the required timescales. Early achievement of community benefits. Projects selected via a fair and transparent process and collaboration maximised.	None	Some projects may fail to spend their funding in good time. Proactive monitoring needed to mitigate this.
Option 2 Allocate the funding to different projects	Gives Cabinet the opportunity to address other pressing issues	Potential loss of funding as expenditure may not occur within required timescales. County Council and Community expectations that the funding will be allocated in line with publicised arrangements would not be met. Work by organisations to bring forward proposals in this report would be wasted.	Reputational risk as County Council community expectations are that funding will be allocated in line with publicised arrangements. Funding allocated for later projects might have difficulty meeting financial deadlines.
Option 3 Allocate none or only some of the funding	Keeps some funding available for potential future projects	Potential loss of funds to the district if expenditure deadlines cannot be met Work by organisations to bring forward proposals in this report would be wasted. Loss of benefits to be delivered by the funds.	Reputational risk if funding is held back without a clear rationale. Funding allocated for later projects might have difficulty meeting financial deadlines.

The officer preferred option was Option 1. It confirmed the fair, transparent and Member-led process that had resulted in the recommended allocations.

The massive amount of interest in the Take Pride Community Fund had shown the effectiveness of the advertising process, the evident passion organisations have to continue their good work, and also the extent of the need for support for the VCF and Arts/ Leisure sectors in these difficult times. The Member Panel has had to make difficult choices in agreeing these recommendations but ultimately the proposed projects would deliver the greatest lasting benefit to local people and the organisations concerned.

Councillor Blamire proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-

“(1) That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved:

(6 Members (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour, and 2 Members (Councillors Barry and Hamilton-Cox) abstained.)

(1) That the process undertaken to seek bids to manage the bidding round for Take Pride Community Funding and the involvement and support of Lancashire County Council be noted.

(2) That the recommendations of the Member Panel for the allocation of Take Pride Community Funding to the full amount of £283,725 be approved.

(3) That authority be delegated to the Leader of the Council for any future changes to funding allocations, to ensure that all funding is appropriately utilised in line with the criteria for the scheme.

(4) That the General Fund Revenue budget and Capital Programme be updated to reflect the recommendations in this report.

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Head of Community Engagement

Head of Resources

Reasons for making the decision:

Requirements for the use of the available Second Homes funding are entirely consistent with the Priorities, Outcomes, Success Measures and Actions identified in the Council’s Corporate Plan 2012 – 15. The Member Panel has had to make difficult choices in agreeing these recommendations but ultimately the proposed projects which this decision endorses, will deliver the greatest lasting benefit to local people and organisations concerned.

Supporting documents: