Agenda item

Strategic Performance Dashboard Report

To consider the attached report of the Head of Corporate Services and Democracy.


The Chairman asked Members to go through the Strategic Performance Dashboard in the order that it was set out in the papers.


Members raised the following points:


·         To question the street cleansing savings set out in the papers. Members were advised that the savings requirements had been identified as part of the budget process and that officers were responsible for identifying how to deliver these savings. It was noted that the Veolia contract was one of the Council’s biggest areas of expenditure.


·         Members discussed the proposals for reducing the frequency of high-speed road cleaning and queried why the Council was responsible for paying for this work. It was stated that this had been raised with National Highways and the Local Government Association by the Council previously. However, there was no appetite from the Government to take on the responsibility.


·         To question how the staff vacancy savings were achieved. Members were advised that there was a rigorous authority to recruit process that identified if a vacant post was still required. The saving was a combination of those posts not filled and the time it took to fill a vacancy that had been authorised for recruitment. Councillor H M Williams asked for a list of permanent and short-term vacancies. 


·         To enquire if there was any potential for income generation from improved recycling. Members were advised that the inter-authority agreement with Kent County Council  did allow the Council to benefit if recycling levels went up.


·         To question the slight decrease in green waste subscribers. Members were advised that the three Kent County Council Household Waste sites in the district had a significant impact on the garden waste scheme.


·         Councillor H M Williams requested a definition for major and minor planning applications.


·         Members discussed the decline in performance of indicator HOM23 (Average days to re-let properties (from tenancy termination to new tenancy start date) requiring major work) and were advised that there had been a high volume of voids that required substantial work before they were suitable for reletting. Officers were working to see if there were ways of improving performance but it was noted that faster turnaround may result in additional cost.


·         Councillor M J Nee noted that three of the risks shown were related to the actions of the government and suggested that the Council should write to the Government to highlight this. The Chairman advised that both the Local Government Association and the District Councils Network were highlighting these issues.


·         The methodology of PAD008 (Planning Enforcement Cases) and whether it could be shown as to how long it took to resolve cases.


·         Officers advised that responses would be provided in respect of:


o   The performance of indicator PH001 (Port Health - Total number of Port Health interventions received) and


o   The methodology for calculating and the average time of extension for PAD001 (Percentage of major planning applications determined in 13 weeks or within an agreed extension of time)



RESOLVED:     That it be recommended to Cabinet that it explore changing the status of the high-speed road network to special road status in order to obtain assistance in funding cleansing.

Supporting documents: