Agenda item

To consider a report by the Community Engagement Manager (copy enclosed) which provides an overview on the funding allocated to enable Member Area Groups to support priority projects in their areas and seeks the Committee to review the funding’s success.

                                                                                                         11.25 a.m.

A copy of a report by the Community Engagement Manager, which provided an overview on the funding allocated to enable Member Area Groups to support priority projects in their areas and review its success, had been circulated with the papers for the meeting.

In March, 2012 the Committee received a report on the allocation of £50,000 to each of the six Member Area Groups (MAGs) with details of the criteria for its allocation and how it should be utilised for the benefit of the communities.  As many of the projects had not then been completed it was agreed a further report be submitted with an analysis of the benefits accrued.  The Head of Business Planning and Performance summarised the report which included details of the background to the allocation of the money, distribution of the funds, review of the process, benefits accrued and lessons learnt from the process and details of the recommendations for future distribution of funds.  Accompanying the   guidance note, which explained the principles behind the allocation process and the likely timetable for distribution, was a project proposal form (Appendix 1).  A copy of the ‘Overview of Spend to Date’ document, detailing each individual project, had been circulated in the Information Papers for the meeting.

Councillor J.M. Davies explained that it would be easier in Towns, where there were Town Plans, to work towards and achieve identified projects and schemes, where as in rural areas issues relating to geographical boundaries and other outside influences could complicate the allocation of funding.  Councillor C.H. Williams endorsed the view expressed and highlighted the problems experienced in distributing funding for schemes in rural areas and made particular reference to the allocation of funding between the respective towns villages in the Dee Valley area.

A number of Members expressed concern regarding the distribution and allocation of funding in certain areas of the county, particular reference being made to the allocation of funding to  subsidise car parking in Ruthin, which it was claimed had contravened agreed Council Policy in respect of car parking charges. 

Reference was made to the surrounding villages becoming a focal part of the Town Plans and the importance of encompassing the needs of the rural communities in the Town Plans.  It was highlighted that there was a need to recognise that different areas within the county had varying needs, priorities and requirements.  It was important to ensure that the Town Plans reflected local as well as county priorities and were therefore live working documents which could be amended at any time. Members supported the view that the allocation of similar community funding in future be linked to the development of the Town Plans.

The Head of Business Planning and Performance explained that assigning funds to support Town Plans, particularly in areas where regeneration was a priority, would be important.  The Corporate Director: Learning and Communities endorsed the view that following the development of the Town Plans the allocation of funding could be managed more strategically in future and that consultation on any future projects should be as inclusive as possible.  Following further discussion, it was:-

RESOLVED – that the Committee:-

(a)   receive the report and note the one-off allocation of funds with no commitment that the process would be repeated;

(b)   recommends that any suggested future scheme(s) must be submitted to a MAG meeting and be fully endorsed at that meeting rather than be devolved to individual Ward Members,

(c)   agrees that all future schemes be aligned to and support the delivery of the Town Plans/Rhyl Going Forward or rural projects agreed by the MAG; and

(d)   that all future schemes take into account the distinctive and diverse needs of different communities across the County.