(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Fletcher)
The Corporate Director (Regeneration) submitted a report asking Members to consider savings options in respect of Salt Ayre Sports Centre and the three community swimming pools in Carnforth, Heysham and Hornby. The report was in two parts; the first dealt with Salt Ayre Sports Centre (SASC) and the second with the proposals regarding savings in respect of the three community swimming pools in Carnforth, Heysham and Hornby.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment for SASC, were set out in the report as follows:
Option 1
Officers enter into early negotiations with CAPITA regarding the facilities management issues and seek to address where, and if possible, savings that can be made.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
In re-allocating the facilities management function, care needs to be taken that the building operates in accordance with the Service needs and a strong Service Level Agreement will need to be in place.
|
Clarity around fixed cost budgets should provide clarity around monitoring of budgets and future financial management.
It would also mitigate future increasing costs such as utilities. |
The City Council has substantial health and safety, and corporate liabilities. A more focussed approach to facilities management should reduce the risk associated with this area. |
The City Council is currently setting itself challenging targets following recommendations made in the recent Carbon Trust report and a more proactive approach to facilities Management will assist this.
Mitigate increasing unknown costs associated with utilities. |
Option 2
Cabinet resolve to request a financial saving of 10%, which equates to £119,000 from the Service Delivery budgets, and request that a further report be brought back to Cabinet advising which areas of Service delivery have been affected by the proposal.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
Any cut in service costs will have an issue on the level of service provided. Officers will need to carry out a full options analysis and consultation process to identify where a revised capped budget can best achieve maximum service delivery, whilst minimising any effect on income. The above option will include the opportunity for officers to consider the possible closure of the SASC for 1 or 2 days.
|
Providing a set budget will provide clarity around monitoring of budgets and future financial management.
|
The service provision is discretionary. However, there may be employment and other contractual arrangements in place, which may be affected by redefining the services. However, these will be addressed as part of the options analysis that officers will undertake. |
Setting a revised fixed budget will offer up the necessary contribution to the 2009/10 Budget Process, and by allowing officers the flexibility and time to carry out a full options appraisal on future services delivery, will ensure that minimum service disruption within budget is achieved. |
Option 3
With regard to the revenue income (£956,600), Cabinet request officers look to explore possibilities of increasing additional income generation, and maximise such income, bearing in mind possible service delivery cuts, should Option 2 also be taken.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
Should the service savings be taken under Option 2, this may affect the capability of increasing income.
For a number of years, Cultural Services have adopted a ‘market pricing policy’ which subsidises targeted users via the Passport to Leisure scheme (PTL). If these are to be reviewed, this may have an impact on disadvantaged groups.
|
Any increase in income fees that are sustainable can only be a financial benefit to the City Council.
Care must be taken not to exceed the fees of any competitive market as this could cause a reduction in use and therefore income. |
There is no legal risk as fees are entirely at the City Council’s discretion. |
Increased income can have a direct knock on effect of increasing service delivery as in theory more budgets could be made available to improve future service delivery.
The issues of service delivery and the cost of delivering services are cyclical. |
Option 4
To retain existing budgets and service provision within SASC and not take any savings from the service.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
There are no operational risks |
There would be no contribution from SASC towards the City Council’s challenging financial position, and the cost is likely to increase as a result of additional utility costs. |
There is no legal risk as the service is discretionary. |
Cultural Services contributes to 3 out of 4 of Lancaster City Council’s corporate objectives, and delivers against 6 out of 7 of the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) priority themes. The work undertaken by, and with, the district’s sports organisations contribute to the City Council’s service priorities as well as local and national indicators. |
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment for the community swimming pools were set out in the report as follows:
Option 1
Cabinet resolve to serve notice on Lancashire County Council to terminate its current agreements with regards to the community swimming pools, with effect from 31 March 2010, and officers provide support over the next 12 months in assisting users to seek alternative venues.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
The City Council currently only operate the facilities due to the fact that Lancashire County Council withdrew its service provision. Closure of the pools would clearly have an impact on community provision but it would be hoped that these could be picked up within the other private/public facilities available (including SASC). |
The Council would make significant cost savings. It would also mitigate future increasing costs such as utilities. The cost of redundancies will need to be addressed.
|
The City Council would need to ensure that it terminates the contracts in accordance with the Legal Agreement in place.
The Council has no statutory requirement to make provision for community, or educational, swimming. |
Substantial budgetary savings without impacting on statutory service provision.
Mitigate increasing unknown costs associated with utilities. |
Option 2
Continue with existing Agreement.
|
Operational Risk |
Financial Risk |
Legal Risk |
Benefits |
|
The City Council currently only operates the facilities due to the fact that Lancashire County Council withdrew its service provision. Closure of the pools would clearly have an impact on community provision but it would be hoped that these could be picked up within the other private/public facilities available (including SASC). |
The cost of operating the pools would still have to be met by the Council. In addition, this cost may increase if the current increased energy costs continue into future years. |
The Council has no statutory requirement to make provision for community, or educational, swimming. |
|
The officer preferred option for the community swimming pools is option 1.
It was moved by Councillor Fletcher and seconded by Councillor Gilbert:-
“That, regarding Salt Ayre Sports Centre:-
(1) That Options 1, 2 and 3 for savings at Salt Ayre Sports Centre, as set out in the report, be approved.”
By way of amendment, which was accepted as a friendly amendment by the mover and seconder of the original proposition, Councillor Barry proposed:-
“(2) That energy savings be as high as possible within the £119,000 savings.”
Members then voted as follows:-
Resolved unanimously:
(Councillor Archer was not present when the vote was taken.)
That, regarding Salt Ayre Sports Centre:-
(1) Officers enter into early negotiations with CAPITA regarding the facilities management issues and seek to address where, and if possible, savings that can be made.
(2) Cabinet resolve to request a financial saving of 10% per year, which equates to £119,000 from the Service Delivery budgets, and request that a further report be brought back to Cabinet advising which areas of Service delivery have been affected by the proposal.
(3) That energy savings be as high as possible within the £119,000 savings.
(4) With regard to the revenue income (£956,600), Cabinet request officers look to explore possibilities of increasing additional income generation, and maximise such income, bearing in mind possible service delivery cuts.
Regarding the Community Pools, it was moved by Councillor Fletcher and seconded by Councillor Mace:-
“(5) That, in recognition of the value of the 3 Community Pools, they are retained. In light of increasing energy costs, the 3 pools are involved in the facilities management review in order to achieve year on year reductions in energy costs.”
By way of amendment, which was accepted as a friendly amendment by the proposer and seconder of the original motion, Councillor Gilbert proposed:-
“(6) That officers investigate raising charges to service users.”
Members then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(5) That, in recognition of the value of the 3 Community Pools, they are retained. In light of increasing energy costs, the 3 pools are involved in the facilities management review in order to achieve year on year reductions in energy costs
(6) That officers investigate raising charges to service users.
Officers responsible for effecting the decisions:
Corporate Director (Regeneration)
Head of Cultural Services
Reasons for making the decisions:
The decisions allow the Council to make ongoing savings and achieve value for money.