The York Council announced last week that it had obtained external funding for the planned new “forest” near Knapton.
Ironically the first signs of activity on the proposed site have been tree felling works over recent days. (Clearly some of the trees were diseased).
No sign yet of any environmental evaluation.
The expectation was that there would be an attempt made to justify turning good quality agricultural land into a forest, with benefits and adverse consequences clearly enumerated.
Seems that will not happen nor has any public consultation on layout and other options yet started.
The Leader of the York Council’s Liberal Democrat Group (Keith Aspden) has issued a statement asking the government to delegate funding for the Coronavirus Track and Trace (T & T) activities to the authority.
He says that;
“York has seen the highest percentage of contacts traced and completed (68 per cent) across the Yorkshire and Humber region, this highlights the extent of the amount of people failing to be contacted”.
That will come as news to most residents. The Council publishes no volume or success measures on T & T on its open data web site.
Currently we are seeing only 3 or 4 positive pillar 1 and 2 test results in the City each week. Following up contacts from such a small group should not be too demanding. As with many other issues, the fundamental flaw in York is a lack of openness.
Cllr Keith Aspden has been asked to add his voice to demands for more local information to be published.
He has not replied to a request for at least the following local information to be published
The number of beds at York hospital occupied by Coronavirus patients
The number of ICU beds at York hospital occupied by Coronavirus patients
The number of tests (pillar 1 and 2) carried out (the positive result figure is published)
The number and results of any anti body tests carried out in the City.
To this can now be added the number and proportion of successful traces completed following a positive test result.
Transparency
We raised the issue a few weeks ago of missing public service quality statistics. Many were available through the “open data” web site but recently updates there have been slow to appear (even for pre Pandemic information).
One performance area that was out of date was the number of fines (FPNs) issued for littering offences. The outturn figure for last (financial) year is now available, Three penalty notices were issue, half the number issued the previous year.
There is some good news with the number of street lighting issues reported having fallen for the third successive year (the Council has invested heavily in new street lighting columns)
But figures for transportation matters are mainly still at least a year out of date. The are no figures published for the number of journeys completed by different transport modes. Only bus service use (stable) and, separately, Park and Ride passenger numbers (down), have been added.
These are mainly figures for the period before lock-down and are important if the economic recovery is to be monitored.
The Council has failed to produce KPIs on air quality or carbon emission levels.
The York Council exceeded its expenditure budget during the last financial year by nearly £2 million..
Road repair programme failed last year
It was able to fill the gap by drawing on £1/2 million from its contingency allocation. It also raided its reserves to find an additional £1.4 million which it had previously earmarked for pay and pensioners liabilities. The final £309,000, held to repay unlawfully issued fines connected to the Lendal Bridge closure, was also utilised.
While this juggling of funds allowed the authority to emerge with a £128,000 surplus on its 2019/20 £123 million budget, the moves camouflaged large overspends on Education and Social Care. Promised efficiencies there failed to materialise.
The £1.5 million overspend by the Education department will no doubt result in a renewed focus on inessential expenditure. One trenchant “citizen auditor” has reported finding that the department apparently spent £10,000 renting rooms at a luxury hotel and golf complex in Humberside last year. The nature of the activity is being investigated.
Clearly the Council will now need to clamp down on anything other than essential expenditure.
The Council faces a new multi-million pound shortfall on its income this year as a result of the Coronavirus epidemic. It will not be able to call on the above reserves again but does have a buffer provided by the £7.4 million held in general reserves.
A meeting to discuss thereport takes place on Thursday
Quality of Public Services in York
The Council has also released some information on public service quality. Unfortunately, many of the figures are not up to date. There is likely to be some cynicism about some of the results with only 20% of road surfaces in the City classified as “poor” or “very poor” by Council officials!
Most waste due to be collected on Monday was picked up as scheduled. The only exception was recycling in the Naburn area.
The expectation was that the new waste collection lorries – due to arrive early next year – would provide a boost for recycling.
However it seems that hopes that additional capacity might lead to the collection of a greater variety of recyclable items may be dashed. There has been no discussion with Councillors about the configuration of the new lorries. There seems to be little prospect of the collection of, for example, food waste being introduced.
Indeed once source at the York Council is saying that – like the Leeds Council – the separate collection of glass may be abandoned. Instead residents would be asked to return bottles to the “bring sites” which are located across the City.
It is likely that such a policy would lead to a further reduction in the proportion of waste that is recycled in the City.
From Sunday 29th March, the following changes will take effect:
First York is moving all services to a Sunday timetable (bolstered by additional buses during peak times) to ensure key workers, including health service and emergency workers, can get to and from their places of work and those without a car can still collect medical prescriptions or do their essential shopping.
1, 4, 5, 5A, 6, 66 – Will operate a revised timetable operating every 30 minutes during the, with early journeys operating Monday – Friday. Services will operate at hourly intervals during the evening, reduction to hourly intervals earlier on a Saturday and Sunday evening than present. Saturday and Sunday morning services have also been thinned out till approx. 9am.
10 – Will operate a Sunday timetable with additional early journey weekdays. Late journeys will continue to operate Monday to Saturday, to be reviewed dependent on usage.
11 – Will operate a special timetable with early journeys weekdays, service will operate every 70 minutes. Late journeys will continue to operate Monday to Saturday, to be reviewed dependent on usage, and whatever decision is made regards tendered services.
12 – Will operate a special timetable with early journeys weekdays, service will operate every 60 minutes, journeys after 1900 will continue to operate subject to patronage review.
200 – Will operate Monday to Saturday, the final journey will operate 10 minutes later.
HSB – Will operate normal schedule.
York Park & Ride
Service 2 – Will operate every 30 minutes as service 2A, observing all stops. Service will commence at 0700 Monday – Friday, and 0930 Saturday and Sunday. Evening service will operate hourly, these evening journeys terminate at Station Avenue. Return journeys will commence at Station Avenue.
Service 7 – Will operate every 30 minutes, Service will commence at 0700 Monday – Friday, and 0930 Saturday and Sunday. Evening service will operate hourly, these evening journeys will terminate at Rougier Street. Return journeys to Designer Outlet will commence from Clifford Street.
Service 9 Will operate every 30 minutes. Service will commence at 0700 Monday – Friday, and 0930 Saturday and Sunday. Last journey from City Centre 1900.
Services not operating (Grimston/Askham/Poppleton Park & Ride – closed)
66A, UB1, 3, 3A, 8, 59, 11S
At First Bus, your safety is our top priority. In the wake of the evolving impacts of coronavirus, we are working with the Government and wider industry to ensure we are following the latest advice to keep you safe on our buses.
If there any key workers not able to get to work due to the changes, please let us know and we can look to try and make amendments. Contact us at: YorkCommercialTeam@firstgroup.com
The Council, has confirmed that it is establishing neighbourhood “community hubs”. Council staffed they will NOT be open to the public. They are planned to support residents identified as vulnerable or those who have been in touch asking for support, by providing them with essential, non-perishable foods.
What’s App
The UK Government has launched a GOV.UK Coronavirus
Information service on WhatsApp. The new free to use service aims to provide
official, trustworthy and timely information and advice about coronavirus
(COVID-19), and will further reduce the burden on NHS services.
To use the free GOV.UK Coronavirus Information Service on WhatsApp,
simply add 07860 064422 in your phone contacts and then message the word ‘hi’
in a WhatsApp message to get started.
A set of menu options is then presented which the
user can choose from and then be sent relevant guidance from GOV.UK pages as
well as links to GOV.UK
for further information.
Public toilets in the city centre will be closed
until further notice.
Parks and open spaces
All council-run parks in the city will remain open
for exercise but we’re asking visitors to ensure they adhere to social distance
best practice. From this weekend, Rowntree Park will reopen following the
flooding earlier this year.
Play areas will be closed from today and this
includes basketball courts, skateparks, caged five a side areas and tennis
courts. Notices are being placed in all play areas instructing the public of
this decision.
To ensure we follow the government’s guidance on
social distancing the York Bar Walls are closed.
One interesting side effect of the Council report, on improving graffiti removal processes across the City, has been the re-publication of the Service Level Agreement (SLA) or “Customer Contract” for Council estates. The agreement was last reviewed in 2013 and is one of several SLAs which were agreed for different public service areas across the City.
All references to them were removed from the Council web site several years ago.
Service Level Agreement page 1
The SLAs have never formally been abandoned by the Council, but even a casual glance at some of the requirements (above), reveals failings.
The Council promises to “Publicise the dates of estate inspections on our website” & “conduct an estate inspection every three months and to show you (the tenant) the actions identified and progress with it on our web site”
Tenants will search
in vain for such information on the Councils web site.
The Council no longer even publishes the agendas & minutes of resident’s association meetings on its site. Lack of support from the Council, means that many of the listed residents associations have ceased to function.
Although the Council promises to “remove dumped rubbish within 7 days”, proactive cleansing no longer routinely takes place. A mobile “estate worker” reacts only to reported issues. This may explain the lamentable drop off in street cleansing standards in some estates this summer.
Service Level Agreement page 2
Customer satisfaction and KPI stats are not published at an
estate level. Most are not routinely shared with residents’ associations.
Good environmental standards on estates require a lot more
than litter removal, of course. Many complaints relate to poorly maintained roads,
street furniture and anti-social behaviour.
Even when problems like overgrown trees and hedges are
identified as an issue the Council fails to take effective action.
Little progress on estate improvements this year
In Foxwood a list of streets
where hedges needed cutting back from public footpaths was identified 6 months ago.
The estate improvement budget was identified as a source of resources with
action to be taken over the winter period, but the work has, apparently, yet to
be authorised by ward Councillors.
The Council should review and republish all its SLAs. Performance against target should be reported frankly and regularly at least on social media channels.
That fresh approach needs to start now.It will need the committed and public support of senior managers and executive Councillors
The York Council are set to adopt a new “Council Plan” on Thursday. Although a significant document, it is likely to attract little comment. This is partly because much of its content is anodyne and partly because it is linked to impenetrable bureaucratic processes and documentation Only 353 residents responded to the initial consultation on the document.
Council Plans are rarely a “good read”
This plan though does have one major setback. It fails to react to the decline in street level public service standards that have been seen in recent months.
The KPIs suggested are essentially those that have been carried
over from previous plans. They have the merit of a good historic database
making trends easier to judge and they are generally easy to collect, but they offer
little for those seeking “smart” targets.
Nor has the Council addressed the issue of service level
agreements. This exercise presented an opportunity to update and reissue what
used to be known as “Customer Contracts” but it seems that taxpayers will
remain largely in ignorance of what their payments are buying.
There are a range of day to day services which residents depend
on. They therefore legitimately might expect to have access to stats which, for
example, tell them
How many potholes are reported and how quickly they
are fixed?
How much litter there is on our streets?
How many streets are 98% clear of weed growth?
How many reports there have been of obstructions
to public paths and how quickly those obstructions are removed?
How many bins are not emptied as scheduled each
week?
How reliable local bus services are?
How many streetlights are working?
Satisfaction with Council estates (communal
areas)?
Time taken to resolve issue reports by different
channels (on line, email, telephone, personal visit)?
All would give residents a clearer picture of Council performance
than some of those suggested.
The long awaited report, into the collapse of weed control activities in the City this summer, has now been published.
Key routes into the City were disfigured
The report lists several actions which might be undertaken to prevent a repetition of the problems.
It was clear as long ago as June that something was seriously
amiss with the Council contract.
A contract has been let which had omitted several key roads
like the A59, as well as many back lanes and paths. Gutters and paths rapidly become
overgrown. In some cases, because of restricted sight lines or trip hazards, there
was an unnecessary risk to public safety.
Amongst the worst affected were major entry points into the
City which gave visitors an early impression of neglect (It became clear later,
that former trunk roads were amongst these omitted from the contract)
The Councils reaction to the problems was highly complacent.
It was two months before they admitted that the list of streets to be treated
by the contractor was out of date. They blamed the weather (too much rain) and turned
a blind eye to the fact that the “quad bike” contractors were missing out large
areas altogether. Treatment, where undertaken, proved to be ineffective.
It was Septembers before the failings were finally acknowledged.
Contractors were asked to add a blue dye to the chemical so it would be clear
which areas they had treated.
To this day, residents continue to search for the illusive
blue dye trail.
Another problem was the choice of weed killer. Glyphosate,
which is a contact weed killer, has no residual effect, so it only kills weeds
present at the time of application. It is an industry standard product, but it
failed to act on deep rooted weeds. Alternatives were available but not used.
The Council claims to have “deployed additional resource to
focus on removing detritus which collects in kerb lines, particularly on the
offside of traffic islands where sweeping is more difficult and less effective.
The detritus build up is greater when weeds are present”.
The report doesn’t analyse how the Council came to issue an incorrect
contract specification, doesn’t reveal the results of supervisory checks on the
contractor, offers no update on the September recovery programme and fails to
review “difficult to reach” locations such as bridge parapets, snickets, back
lanes and garage forecourts.
The contract required certain outputs to be achieved. These included a 98% weed free appearance on treated areas.
No KPIs are quoted.
The Council has however listed 10 initiatives (see right) that
it could take to improve the appearance and safety of the City.
All, and more, will be required next year if the reputation of the City is not to be further damaged.
New off road vehicles are set to be used to grit 11miles (18km) of York’s cycle network this winter.
If successful, the pilot could be extended across the city to help keep cyclists safer in winter conditions.
A report detailing the pilot will be taken to a public meeting on Thursday 19 September, for approval to start during the winter season between November and March.
The pilot includes using two different vehicles to grit 11miles (18km) of cycle network, using small all-terrain vehicles including a quad bike and a gator type machine.
The trial is welcome but rather distracts attention from other more pressing issues facing cyclists.
Many cycle paths in the City are obstructed
Many cycle paths are currently obstructed by overhanging hedge and tree branches. Unchecked weed growth has also reduced path widths as has the failure of the Council to systematically “edge” verges.
Perhaps the most pressing issue though is potholes. These affect some cycle lanes and many inner sections of carriageways – the surfaces most used by cyclists.
It is now 10 years since the last major programme of cycle margin maintenance works took place in the City.
The Council says that, “Popular cycle routes have been chosen for the de-icing trial, including the new Scarborough Bridge and other off road bridges too.
The introduction of the new smaller vehicles will ensure the networks are effectively gritted. Off road cycle networks are often difficult to grit or salt because cycles don’t have the same weight or action as a vehicle tyre. Effective gritting works by vehicles driving over the grit with their tyres which beds the grit into the snow and ice.
Whilst cars or heavy vehicles generally follow the same tyre path. Cycle tyres are much thinner and therefore these typical treatments are less effective.
For the pilot, the council will hire the vehicles and if, following the pilot, the council decides to roll this scheme out across York, it will look to purchase new vehicles to the council’s fleet.
The cost of the pilot is estimated to be £42k. This will be met by the current winter maintenance budget which is £401k.
By its nature the winter maintenance budget is not predictable, in 2018/19 there was an underspend of £61k. Should this not occur in 2019/20 there is a winter maintenance contingency available of £258k, in addition to the annual budget, which could be utilised.
This pilot will not formally be part of the council’s Winter Service Plan, but will run alongside this a pilot. After the winter the pilot will be assessed and considered for formally incorporating into the Winter Service Plan”.
Preparing for the winter season:
The council has stockpiled 3,000 tonnes of grit, which is stored in its grit barn at Hazel Court depot.
On average, crews spread around 4,500 tonnes of grit per season, over 75 road treatments (gritter runs).
Each season, crews treat eight routes across the highway, covering 365km of York’s road network, including 22km of priority footpaths and, when recourses allow, 58km of cycle network.
The decision session takes place on Thursday 19 September at West Offices from 2pm and is open to members of the public or is available to watch later online from: www.york.gov.uk/webcasts
Council leadership set to prioritise road repairs, play
facilities, housing, energy efficiency and Social Care.
The new Council leadership has announced changes to the budget
that it inherited. As expected, extra investment in improvements to street
level public services are planned.
There will be extra investment in
More to be spent on road repairs
Removing graffiti
Additional Litter bins
Tree management
Crime reduction
Waste collection
Street environment (cleaning and community
projects)
Buses
Electric vehicle charging point maintenance.
The biggest investment will be £1 million spent on road repairs
and a further £1 million on cycling/walking improvements
There will be a £250,000 boost for children’s play facilities.
The Council will invest £1 million in speeding up housing modernisation
and a further £1 million on energy efficiency improvements
£22,000 is being taken for the reserves to improve children’s and adult social care standards.
Several of the proposals are less than transparent. We are told, for example, that the Council will “Re-purpose funding from the Leeds City Region Business Rates Pilot to strengthen our approach to inclusive growth, including child poverty, greening the high street and promote lifelong learning”
We think that there is unlikely to be rioting in the streets as a result of the Councils decision to discontinue the “digital immersive model” marketing project. There may be public unrest if the Council doesn’t publish its reports in plain English in future.
Also, the Council will fund “connections with communities most impacted by EU exit to better understand their needs, and to take forward the community hubs work initiated”
Four schemes are intended to be self-funding. They relate to
foster care, Special Education Needs and Disability pupils, Public Health and mental
health.
The proposals will be welcomed by many in the City. It will, however, take more than £1 million to get the City’s roads back into good order.
£4.25 million of the plan is capital investment, meaning higher debt charges in the future (and less to spend in the revenue budget).
The plans are likely to be criticised for failing to clearly identify the objectives of some of the changes with no detail given of how the success of the projects will be measured.
No KPIs are listed and there is no clear vision of how the City will look in 4 years’ time.
Residents may feel that prompt attention to reducing the costs of some inherited major projects is necessary, especially if demands on taxpayers in future years are to remain under control.
It really shouldn’t cost £35,000 to “ launch a public
Citizen’s Assembly on how the Council can best work in an open way”
The Council must become a “can do” rather than a “can talk” organisation.
Still it’s a start, and a better one than was managed by the
last two Council administrations.
The proposal will be discussed at a meeting taking place on 17th July
A full list of budget proposals can be read by clicking here
Full list of budget changesBudget changes list continued
