To notify the Chairman of any items that appear later in the agenda in which you may have an interest.

Members had no interests to declare.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 6^th September 2005.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 6^th September, 2005 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

A representative of Ferryhill Police will attend the meeting to give a report of crime statistics and initiatives in the area.

Sergeant K. Vincent was present at the meeting to give details of the crime figures and local initiatives for the area. 

It was reported that the crime statistics for the area over the following months were:

Sgnt Vincent informed members that Operation Ballade, Pelmet and Shore were ongoing in the areas of Chilton and West Cornforth and were producing results in targeting racial problems and anti social behaviour. Operation Darc had also resumed to promote household security. Security equipment would be available from the Crime Prevention section based at Spennymoor Police Office.

It was reported that the problems regarding uninsured vehicles in the area were being addressed. Sgnt Vincent explained that an operation was being carried out by Durham Constabulary Road Policing Department. The operation enabled Police Officers to seize vehicles that were stopped and found to have no insurance.

Specific reference was made to a number of multi-agency initiatives that were taking place. Members of the Forum were informed that they included the removal of graffiti and 30 tonnes of rubbish. A protocol had also been developed by Sedgefield Borough Council and County Durham Fire and Rescue Brigade to target and remove unauthorised bonfires. 

With regard to confidential reporting boxes, it was pointed out that they had now been installed in Hutton House, Henderson House and Chilton and Windlestone Community College. It was noted that they had already been installed in areas of Ferryhill and West Cornforth.

Concerns were raised regarding the continuing problem of anti-social behaviour, specifically the problem of properties being targeted. Sgnt Vincent explained that the Police were aware of the problem and it was receiving their attention. 

Detailed consideration was given to ways of tackling the problem, with suggestions being made for the introduction of youth shelters. The positive and negative points of youth shelters, together with where they had been introduced successfully/unsuccessfully were discussed. It was reported that Chilton Town Council was considering the implementation of a Multi-Use Game Centre, which could be floodlit, with security installed.  Members welcomed the proposal and asked to be kept up to date.

A representative of Sedgefield Primary Care Trust will attend the meeting to give an update on local health matters and performance figures.

N. Porter, Chief Executive, Sedgefield Primary Care Trust, attended the meeting to present an update on local health matters and performance figures. Copies of the Board papers for achieving patient access targets and baseline performance requirements together with “Your Health Matters” magazine were distributed at the Forum.

N. Porter informed members of the Forum that Primary Care Trusts across the country would be reconfigured by October 2006 following the publication of ‘Commissioning a Patient Led NHS.’ Proposals had been made to the Department of Health that the number of Primary Care Trusts within Durham and Darlington be reduced from 6 to 1. 

It was reported that the Leaders and Chief Executive Officers of the District Councils within County Durham had met with the Chief Executive Officer of the new Strategic Health Authority to express concerns regarding the proposal to have one PCT to cover such a large area. It was felt that the health services were best provided on a locality basis and there should be at least two Primary Care Trusts established, at the very minimum.

Members of the Forum felt the existing structure was working well and the fact that Sedgefield PCT had recently obtained a 3 Star rating, supported that view. It was pointed out that Members of the Area 5 Forum had supported the above recommendation of the District Councils of establishing two Primary Care Trusts. It was agreed the Area 2 Forum would do the same.

Reference was made to the number of Listening events that had taken place, which had been successful in allowing the public to air their views, together with the success of the Integrated Teams. 

Members of the Forum raised concerns regarding the lack of progress that had been made on the development of the new Health Centre. They expressed their disappointment at the management of the project and the fact that promises had been made on a number of occasions and had not been kept.

Specific reference was made to the lack of contact with the Chairman of Chilton Workingmen’s Club, the owner of the land on which the centre could be sited. It was also believed that the feasibility study had not taken place, nor had the land been valued by the LIFT Company.

The Chief Executive of Sedgefield Primary Care Trust apologised for the fact that the community’s expectations had not been met. He reassured the Forum that contact would be made with the Chairman of the Club and the matter would be discussed with the relevant officer. 

Members of the Forum were also reassured that the Feasibility Study was underway and should be completed by June 2006. The results of which would then be sent to the LIFT Company. Once the results had been complied and the land identified as suitable/unsuitable the project would be able to progress. It was explained that if the land at the Club was found to be unsuitable it would not result in the collapse of the project. Chilton had been identified as a priority location and would receive a Health Centre.  

The Leader of the Council was present to inform Members of the Local Improvement Programme.

It was explained that the Borough Council had received a substantial receipt from the sale of land and had agreed to use the money to support activities that fell within the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s eligible expenditure definition of regeneration and affordable housing. 

It was pointed out that schemes to be advanced through the Local Improvement Programme would need to demonstrate:

·               Conformity to the specified ODPM regeneration and affordable housing criteria.

·               Clear linkages to the delivery of the Council’s Community Strategy and its key aims and plans and outcomes.

·               Appropriate levels of community consultation and reference to any Local Community Appraisal.

·               Provision of sufficient detail in the project’s submission to show a specific quantification of the benefits to be achieved by the investment and to explain the process by which the scheme will be delivered and over what time period.

·               How any current or revenue funding implications would be managed.

·               Value for money should clearly be demonstrated to include any match funding from other grant sources.

Allocations were based on the local areas percentage share of households within the Borough.  It was emphasised that there was no pressure to spend allocated budgets within any one financial year.  Unspent money would be rolled forward into the next financial year and protected for that Forum Area.

All project proposals for the 2005/06 financial year needed to be forwarded to the Regeneration Team by January 2006.  The Team would appraise the proposals for the relevant Area Forums and make recommendations to Cabinet in the new year.

It was pointed out that from April 2006, each Area Forum would be engaged in preparing a Local Area Framework based upon the Borough’s Community Strategy to help identify those projects that would best meet the needs of the area.  It was noted that officers in the Regeneration Section were currently engaged in preparing facts and figures for the five areas on which the Local Area Frameworks could be based.

Detailed discussion was given to problems associated with Private Landlords and the type of properties that would be built. 

A Neighbourhood Warden will attend the meeting to give an update in relation to abandoned vehicles.

C.  Mason, Neighbourhood Warden, was present at the meeting to update the Forum of the recent changes regarding abandoned vehicles.

It was reported that Neighbourhood Wardens had become responsible for Abandoned Vehicles on 8^th October 2005. 

It was explained that any vehicle that had been abandoned, was untaxed or advertised for sale on a public road was at risk of being seized.

Neighbourhood Wardens were now able to access personnel details from the vehicles number plate, which would enable them to contact the owner. They could issue letters and 24-hour Notice directly to the owners to inform them to remove the vehicle. If after that period the vehicle had not been moved, it would be seized and the owner issued a fixed penalty notice.

Members of the Forum were reassured that Neighbourhood Wardens were on patrol across the area monitoring the problem.

It was agreed that a further report would be brought to a future meeting in the new year.

Land Rear of New South View, Chilton

Report of Building Control Manager.

Land rear of New South View, Chilton

Consideration was given to a report of the Building Control Manager regarding a request received from Riverdale Homes to officially name and number the above development comprising eleven detached dwellings.  (For copy see file of Minutes).

Members of the Forum proposed the name of, “John Herriott.” 

10^th January 2005 at 6.30 p.m. at West Cornforth Community Centre.

10^th January 2006 at 6.30 p.m. at West Cornforth Community Centre.