Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Environment Select Committee Minutes

Date:
Monday, 13th October, 2008
Time:
2.00pm
Place:
First Floor Committee Room, Town Hall, High Street, Stockton-on-Tees. TS18 1AU
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Mrs Maureen Rigg (Chairman), Cllr Michael Smith (Vice-Chairman), Cllr Dick Cains, Cllr Andrew Larkin, Cllr Colin Leckonby, Cllr Roy Rix, Cllr Mick Stoker, Cllr Bill Woodhead
Officers:
Mark Berry, Mike Batty (DNS), Debbie Hurwood (RES) Mrs Tanya Harrison, Roy MacGregor, Kirsty Wannop (LD)
In Attendance:
None
Apologies for absence:
Cllr Mick Womphrey
Item Description Decision
Public
ENV
23/08
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 
ENV
24/08
DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 22ND SEPTEMBER 2008
CONCLUDED that the minutes of the meeting held on 22nd September 2008 be approved and forwarded to Council for consideration.
ENV
25/08
REVIEW OF ANIMAL WELFARE SERVICE AND DOG FOULING:-
RESOLVED that the information be noted
ENV
26/08
REVIEW OF CUSTOMER FIRST:-
CONCLUDED that the changes be made and then the report be forwarded to Cabinet.
2.00pm/3.00pm

Preamble

ItemPreamble
ENV
23/08
There were no declarations of interest.
ENV
24/08
Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 22nd September 2008.
ENV
25/08
As Part of Local Democracy Week 2008, a small group of invited schoolchildren and staff from Crooksbarn Primary and St Mark's Elm Tree CE Primary attended the Select Committee meeting for approximately half an hour to observe proceedings and to participate in a short question and answer session in connection with the dog fouling scrutiny review.

The Chair, on behalf of the Select Committee, welcomed the schoolchildren and staff to the meeting and then gave a brief outline of the dog fouling review following which the schoolchildren and staff contributed to a general discussion on various matters related to the review including the cost of providing dog bins, their location across the Borough, emptying dog bins, ways to stop dog fouling, enforcement action, fining of offenders and use of cameras and signage.

Following the discussion, the Chair thanked the schoolchildren and staff for attending and for their contributions.

There was a short adjournment before the meeting resumed to consider the following evidence presented by the Principal Environmental Health Officer.

Location of dog bins across the Borough. Members were advised there were 250 dog bins in the Borough which started off as 125 in 2002 and had built up over the years; Members also received maps of where the dog bins were located. The Committee was informed that the bins were emptied once a week, sometimes twice. In relation to costs of providing dog bins, Members were advised bins cost 275 together with an installation fee of 45. Limited resources meant that it was not possible to put too many up each year.

Publicity - Members were also advised there were 6,500 signs around the Borough on lampposts. However, attention was drawn to the fact that once these had been seen initially by the general public, they tended to be forgotten about. In 2002 dog fouling awareness campaign was promoted through a publicity campaign that included T.V, radio and billboard advertisements. Information is also on the internet.

Gender and age analysis of Fixed Penalty Notices issued

Dog fouling complaints by month and ward

Legal issues in relation to dog control orders

The Committee was advised that the evidence relating to operational aspects under Care For Your Area would be brought to the next meeting.

A Member of the Committee tabled a photograph which they had seen when travelling around different Boroughs depicting a painted on picture on the ground of a dog fouling and underneath the slogan 'CLEAN IT UP'.
ENV
26/08
Consideration was given to the draft report of the scrutiny review of Customer First. The Committee's attention was brought to a slight change to the wording of Recommendation 11 of the report to include at the end 'The North East Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnership could, potentially, provide additional funding.' The Committee was advised a change needed to be made in the body of the report where it stated that the target to answer phone calls was 15 seconds, This was incorrect and needed to read '80% of calls within 20 seconds and the remaining 20% within 45 seconds.'

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction