 Felly mae'r cymdeithas. Thank you. Good morning, Members Officers, and any Members of the Public who are viewing this live stream of this meeting. Welcome to this meeting of the Grants Advisory Committee. My name is Councillor Dela Delfield and I'm the Vice-Chair of this Grants Advisory Committee. For information of Members of the Public, the role of this committee is to consider and make recommendations to the Lead Cabinet Officer for Finance, Councillor John Williams. The applications made under the Council's Grants themes, Councillor Williams then makes his decision taking into account our recommendations. This is one of the early virtual meetings that we've had. We've had a number now, but I would like everyone to be patient with us if we have any technical issues. If you're watching virtually online, please do be patient with us if we have connection problems. We are getting used to this way of working. Members, can you please remember to mute your microphones unless you're called on to speak, and you'll need to unmute in order to speak. I'll give you time to do that. Let's move on to the agenda. The first item is Apologies for Absence. Thank you, Chair. We've received two Apologies for Absence this morning from Councillor Joes Hales and Councillor Sue Ellington. For the rest of the members, I will read out your name. Could you please confirm that you're present remembering to unmute your microphones before you speak? Councillor Dawnton, please. Yes, I'm here. Councillor McDonald. Yes, good morning. And Councillor Delfield, clearly you're obviously present. And Councillor John Williams, lead Cabinet Member for Finance. Can you also confirm that you are in attendance today, please? Yes, good morning. I'm here. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. I can confirm then that this meeting is quarat. May I ask the officers in the meeting to unmute themselves and introduce themselves, please? I believe we've got a number of officers present, and I can see you, Siobhan, and please do introduce yourselves. So actually, we'll start with you, Aaron, as soon as you've spoken already. My name is Aaron Clarke. I'm the Democratic Services Officer for this meeting, and I will be Clarke in the proceedings. Thank you. Jonathan. I just unmuted myself. Is that working? Yes. Sorry, I just unmuted myself, but I'm Jonathan Moulton, a Cabinet Support Officer, and I am livestreaming this meeting. Thank you. Siobhan. Morning, I'm Siobhan Rowley. I'm the Development Officer for Climate Environment. Thank you. Emma. Hi, I'm Emma Dyer. I'm Project Officer for Climate Environment. Rebecca. Hi, I'm Rebecca Wainmouth-Woods. I'm a Technically Waste Policy Manager, but I also look after the two ladies, the Climate Environment Team. Thank you very much indeed. Have I missed anybody, or have we covered everybody that's on the call? I think we're covered. Thank you. Do any members have any interest to declare in relation to any of item business on the agenda today? And if an interest substance becomes apparent later, then of course please raise that, but any interest to declare? You know, I have everybody shaking their heads, so we'll proceed then. So that takes us on to item history, which is minutes of the previous meeting. I'm going to actually take these minutes kind of on block and check whether you're comfortable with assigning them off on block first. So please could I check with members of the committee if they are happy with them to be signed off as they are. I'm going to start with Councillor Dawnton. Yes, I'm happy with that. And I will go to Councillor, sorry, Councillor Donald. Yes, yes, I'm happy with those, Chair. And as am I, I'm happy with those too. So can we take that I can sign those off as a true record and arrange for that to happen, however these things happen electronically now. Thank you. That's item three. Text is to item four, which is to the main point of this agenda, which is the zero carbon grants new criteria and guidance, which is again the notes are at item four. And there's a number of a couple of the appendices which go with that. So, Siobhan, are you going to introduce this item? Yes. So, as you know, this item poses changes, we could say refinements to the zero carbon grant scheme, as we're always intended following the review of the scheme, the scheme's first year. So in a moment, I'll hand you over to Emma, who will run through the detail of the scheme as now proposed. But just to say that, as this scheme involves grants of over 5,000 pounds, Cabinet are the decision makers, the scheme criteria, and therefore the committee are asked to recommend approval of the new scheme to Cabinet with or without any changes you feel necessary. Cabinet will look at this on Monday, and so your recommendations will be published this afternoon as an addendum to the report, which has already gone to Cabinet. We also ask the recommend that authority to make minor changes to the scheme documents for the purpose of clarity is delegated to the head of shared waste and environment. And now I'll pass you over to Emma, if you're happy with that for her to run through the details of the proposal. Thank you. Can I just pause for a moment, because I've noticed that Councillor Bata-Taria has joined us morning. Councillor Bata-Taria, we've just moved on to item four, which is the main item for today. But just before we do that, can you confirm whether you have any interest in any of the items on the agenda today? There was one application submitted from my charity, which I am associated with the CAMCARE UK, so I will keep myself on here. Okay, thank you very much, because that has been noted. Yes, please do carry on then with the item, thank you Emma. Okay, thank you. So last year we allowed for a broad range of projects to be considered. We received 42 applications, which is fantastic. We managed to fund 19 projects, but this year we want to make some modifications. Why change the grant? We wanted to build on the success of the first round of the scheme. We wanted to share our thinking and listen to the members' comments and suggestions. We wanted to take into consideration the feedbacks from last year's applicants. We wanted to make it a little bit easier of the application process. We wanted to make it easier to compare and score projects and allow us to procure services and possible bulk discounts. So this year we're proposing three streams, cycling, community buildings and tree planting and other nature-based solutions. These three streams were the most popular with our applicants last year. Our members' workshop also allowed us to take into consideration suggestions, concerns and improvements for round two. So first of all we've got cycling. The first thing we are proposing is a cycling stream. Last year it was the most popular option with eight successfully funded projects covering a broad range from cycle racks, cycle repair cafes to e-bike share schemes and an app to make it easier to apply for infrastructure changes. We appreciate the needs of villages can vary due to different demographics. So this year we're proposing to make it easier to compare bike projects by allowing us to ask specific questions with the objectives of one, reducing the miles travelled in private vehicles. Two, increasing the take-up of cycling by people who would not otherwise cycle. Within our cycling stream we are proposing three categories. The first one is improvement to cycling infrastructure. So in this category applicants could bring forward a cycle lane, a cycle way, install a cycle stand or make some other improvement which promotes cycling. We recognise it's important that we know who owns the land and what value it brings to the community. And also that a small change can make a big difference which is what we are looking for in terms of value for money. Second category is the electric bike or electric cargo trikes category. It was evident last year that electric bikes and trikes were considered valuable assets to the villages of our district. We thought that this year we could offer applicants the chance to own their own e-bike for use in a local share scheme managed by themselves. By using our procurement power we can hopefully get better value for money with bulk buys. Applicants will be given the opportunity to tell us how they propose to manage their scheme and how they intend to ensure the bikes which I know has caused issues in the past. As we funded e-bike share schemes last year we can draw on their expertise and offer advice if needed. It might be that users would have to pay to help cover these costs. The third category would be one to kickstart a commercial electric share bike scheme in the area. By using a commercial operator applicants can also run an e-bike share scheme without the worry of taking on the booking, the maintenance replacement of any bikes with punctures or mechanical faults, insurance. There's a dedicated helpline and battery recharging as well as part of this all provided by the operator. All that is needed is a suitable clearly marked out location for the bikes to be stationed. The bonus here is that bike lockers are not needed due to the attached locking and tracking devices attached to each bike. We are proposing to fund four bikes per application and this would give the opportunity for families and friends to cycle together. It also means bikes are more likely to be available to hire. Users would need to pay a small rental fee of perhaps £4.50 for 12 hours through a mobile phone app or pre-paid smart card. Again we will procure the services of a commercial operator such as Cambridge Electric Transport and provide a 50% subsidy to a commercial operator for the first year to kickstart the scheme. Typically four e-bikes would be based in each village which would cost £2,400 for a year's subsidy. On to the next stream which is community buildings. The second stream we are proposing is a community building stream to help with improvements to those community buildings which are available for use. Last year, although very popular with 11 applications, only one community building project was funded which was Iculton Village Hall and that was a lighting upgrade, the rest fell down due to not enough in the way of community engagement. This year we have clearly stated in the objectives that along with a reduction of fossil fuel energy we would like proposals to include an increased awareness of energy improvements to the public. We believe that taking a whole building approach which takes into account the energy hierarchy is the most efficient approach as it ranks the stages on the way to using less energy in a building. So the energy hierarchy, I don't know if you've seen this, basically you'd have to do the energy conservation measures first then the energy efficiency and then go on to renewable energy. We believe leading by example is key and we hope that the projects we receive will raise awareness to the public on how improvements can benefit any building. For example, by holding an open event promotion via social media or newsletters. We are requesting that applicants have a free hold or lease hold interest in place and at least must have at least 21 years on it. So the first category within buildings is energy surveys. We recognise that it is wise to use the services of experts when making energy efficiency measures to make the best savings reductions in carbon emissions. For this reason we propose to invite applicants to apply for an energy efficiency survey. A bespoke reports and advice all procured by us. Reports are typically around 1250. Second category is energy and conservation or efficiency measures. This is where applicants have already had their energy survey and would like to improve the changes that we have been recommended. We are proposing to fund the insulation of walls, ceilings or floors of community buildings, replacement doors or windows and energy efficiency measures such as lighting upgrades. Although applicants with no energy survey can apply, we would prefer to see advice given from a professional. And the third category is solar PV and or battery storage system for solar PV. Solar PV and battery storage are a popular choice in this stream with five applications not funded last year due to lack of community engagement, inaccuracies and CO2 savings and lack of detail on or no energy conservation measures already undertaken. If our applicants satisfactorily answer our questions, we would want them to register with Cambridge Solar Together by their deadline of 5 October. Then if they are happy with their offer and are successful with our grant, we will then pay Cambridge Solar Together the price they are offered to undertake their project. And the prices are typically 20% less than the market rate, which is quite a good deal. Our final stream is the popular tree planting and other nature-based solutions. Last year we funded four out of the five applications we received for tree planting. We would like the tree planting to be a theme again this year as it was a great opportunity to involve communities no matter how small. We have therefore included an awareness of trees as an objective along with a reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere. Habitat creation or restoration has been added into as we see this as an important added benefit. We propose to keep the stream quite broad as we appreciate demographics and volunteer numbers can vary considerably. We would like funded projects to be sustained in the long term and have included privately owned land so long as applicants can show that the trees will be preserved in the future. We also recognise that tree planting can sometimes cause more damage than good, so we have included an option to fund a tree consultant and those projects which have already sought advice from a tree consultant will be looked upon favourably. Any questions? Thank you very much indeed. What I'll do first is actually just run through what it is that we're looking to be asked for recommendations on today and then we'll go to councillors for questions and clarifications. So just to be clear that the recommendation that we've been asked to look at today is for us to approve the changes to the zero carbon communities grant scheme as have just been outlined by Emma there on cycling community buildings and tree planting. And also the secondly to delegate to the head of shared waste services environment who I think I saw during the meeting but perhaps he just dipped in and dipped out again. Sorry, I'm here. Well, that's okay. Good to see you and to allow minor changes to be made to those scheme documents that are in the appendices. So they're the things that we're considering. But I'll open up to questions and comments from the councillors. So I will go in order if that's okay. So councillor, do you have any questions that you would like to ask or clarification on this recommendation? I'm okay. Okay. Thank you. Cattsford-Dawnton. Yes, please. I have a couple of questions. One is to do with dates. You mentioned, Emma, the solar, getting advice from solar energy. Can we show it together? Can we show it together? Thank you. Can we show it together? With a deadline of the 5th of October. The applications for this new round of grants doesn't close until the 30th of September and people do send things in at the last minute. So will there be enough time between the 1st of October, the 2nd of October, even by the time an application comes in, and the deadline of the 5th? Siobhan, I think you know more about the solar together than me, don't you? I need to unmute Siobhan, sorry. Yes, what we will be asking through the application form is for organisations with a community building where they're interested in solar PV to put in an application with a quote which is derived from another company. Now they could get this as an online quote. So they don't necessarily have to go to a lot of difficulty with this. But then they apply using that quote. And then they go through the solar together curvature process, which is very likely to produce a lower quote. So we would be asking you to decide the applications on the basis of the original quote, but then looking to actually fund them through kimchi solar together as a lower quote, if that makes sense. Yeah, thank you. I've got two other questions, Clare, if that's all right. So one is a general question and that is to do with the support that you will offer to applicants. I mean, we know that there were issues with the bikes this year. I won't go over all that. We're very familiar with that with television. So I just wanted to be sure that applicants in parish councils, particularly small parish councils, will you'll be able to provide them with enough support in the application process with dealing with the questions. The anxieties even feeling that, you know, they perhaps want to put in an application but don't have enough time or expertise locally. You feel able to deal with all of those questions. That's my first question. And my second one is very specific and that is to do with schools. I know, and it's very clear here on page 13 that schools can't apply for an entry in improvement, but could a school apply for an improvement to a garden, a school garden, which would then be open? That's a very specific question, which you might not want to take now, but take offline. But you're very definite here in the objectives under B on page 13 that schools can't apply because there is, quite rightly, there is the Refit Schools Programme in Cambridgeshire County Council Refit Schools Programme. But the question is about a school garden. So two questions. Thank you. I'd like to have them on those. So the first one was about support. What support can we offer to parishes, especially electric bikes? That's what I'm dealing with. Any queries? Sorry. Can you hear me? Yeah. So any kind of queries can be directed to me. If I don't know the answer, I can find the answer out for them. We're going to have a web page dedicated to this with FAQs and as they come in, we can add them to the web page. So obviously other parishes, if they want to apply, they can look at the FAQs as well. And as for schools, schools can apply in partnership if they have got some suitable land. That's right, Siobhan, isn't it? You're happy with... Yeah. So I think it's a good point that we should make it clear on the application information and it perhaps isn't clear enough at the moment. The situation so far as schools and the tree planting for parishes. I think when you say schools, not schools themselves, but say a PTA associated with a school because that's a non-profit organisation, I think that if you've got some parents that perhaps wanted to raise some money and it's a school in agreement, the PTA could then do the application for them. This may be something that we do need to take offline unless perhaps Councillor Williams has any. I know that you've spoken before on this aspect of school. Will the district council to fund improvements to school grounds? Is that something that we would want to do or not? Councillor Williams, you need to unmute. Okay. Yeah, this is something that's come up in the community chest fund. How much... What the criteria is for schools. I think the criteria is, is it open to the public? And if it's not open to the public and it's purely for educational purposes then it doesn't qualify. If it's open to the public, if it's a school garden for example, if the school allows the public access to that school garden outside of school hours, then clearly that's something that benefits the whole community. But if that school garden is simply there as part of the education of the students in that school, then that's clearly an education matter and should be dealt with through the county council, not through Southcams. So I think that's where I draw the line. Is it something that's open to the community and the whole community can benefit from? And it's got to be meaningful benefit. It's not, you know, will we open it twice a year or something like that? It's got to be accessible to the public. I think we can use, for example, the water fountains that we agreed last year because they were in the public areas of the village college which is used by the community. The sporting facilities are used by the community. And not in areas that are just for the sole use of the students that wouldn't qualify. So that's my definition. I don't know if other people have a different view of that, but that's the view I have at the moment. The thing that obviously with the tree planting, we're proposing that it could be for landowners as well. So obviously that would be on private land. So in some ways that might sort of apply to schools as well. So in that case if they couldn't, then would we consider private landowners as well? I think when it comes to schools, as I say, the school is the land owner is the county council. And one thing that we do not do is give money to other local authorities. I don't think we're, I'm not sure actually if we're legally able to do that anyway. So when it comes to ownership, if it's land that's owned by the parish council then we don't, that falls outside the criteria. Thank you. I can see that Trevor Nicholls has to come in here. I presume it's on this, but do go ahead. So I think we will just review and make some clarity over exactly where on each of those elements what can be funded and can't be. I think it's being very clear that this is community funding and that the benefit for communities and what we mean by that. So we can add, we'll add something to the application I think is important, but we'll add some really clear examples and the frequently asked questions because I think that's where we'll help. So I think we'll just look at those issues because I think there is a, there's a fine line between what's successful and what's not. So we'll pick that up before it goes live. The other issue about support. So one of the reasons this time that we really look to make it more streamlined on the applications rather than a real open application process was A to make it easier for parishes and community groups to apply because we've sort of done some of the thinking it's about choosing what you do and then how you move it forward. But also that will free up officer time to actually provide support at application stage and throughout to ensure that these projects get moved in your head. And also when you look at how we're looking to procure some of the schemes rather than leaving it up to parishes to have to do that work once they've got the funding on a number of these we're looking to do the procurement side. So that also ensures that our money is being, we're getting the most effective use out of our money and that's why we're the solar together and we're asking for quotes. We do get two quotes quite easily about that, but we're actually only asking the parishes or the groups to get one and we'll get the secondary quote and hopefully we'll get the increase in savings will come through that side so we can help more groups. So I think we've tried to take all of those points across, but it is about trying to make it easier across the board with groups that are now helping and enabling these projects to actually happen a lot faster than some of them this year. And I know some of those have been caught up in COVID, but I think a lot of them have been caught up in just the complications of having to do these where we can do a lot that for the parishes and move them on. Thank you very much. Siobhan, I see your hands up again. Did you want to just come in on that? A couple of points actually. One just on this support for parish councils in making their applications and we have provisionally scheduled a session on the 6th of July where we will go through what is involved in the scheme as it's now set up. We've also discussed Emma and I actually scheduling a session with appointment slots. A sort of surgery where specific proposals can be discussed with us. I mean, we're available at any time, but we thought that if we scheduled that for the end of July, it would really give that message very clearly that we're very happy to do. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Sorry. I had asked a few questions that you had. Yes, thank you. Thank you very much. I think that will all help enormously. I would just also add to the form. I would just sort of add an injunction or a suggestion that people read the form first before applying. Because an awful lot of mistakes or queries happen because some people simply didn't read the form. But that happens. It does happen. Thank you. Councillor Macdonald, do you have any questions or points? Yes, thank you. Once a general question. Well, I suppose two general questions. First one is for the projects that didn't succeed last year. Presumably they can resubmit that project with additional information and it will be considered against the criteria. That's my first question. Yes, I see nodding heads. Yes, I see nodding heads. Emma, I think you said 41 and 19 were approved. That's right. So they can resubmit? Yes, they will get an email as well. If they want to contact me, I did give them feedback last time as well. So they know where they fell down. The second one is a request stroke suggestion with my economic hat on. Could we say please in the applications that those that are sourcing from a South Cambridgeshire supplier, we can't exclude those outside South Cambridgeshire because you may have somebody who's got very good technology from London, Scotland, wherever it may be. But can we just say to help the economic recovery that where a project or where this capital involves expenditure, where it's sourced from a South Cambridgeshire supplier will be considered favourably kind of thing? So they wouldn't be disqualified if it's outside, but we might look at it more favourably if it's within South Cambridgeshire. I think we just need to be very careful about how we, that wording by some of the work we're looking to do to procure ourselves rather than handing money over and allowing parishes or groups to procure or it gives us greater flexibility to procure in that route or to add that as a weighting. What we don't really want to do is we're trying to make this streamline as possible. We don't want to add in another criteria to measure against. What we may want to do is just put that in the general wordings that as a community led funding it will be great to see that the any money is being spent within the local community. So I think we have to be a little bit lighter in that that rather than a criteria, it is a suggestion. However, for the funding that we are looking to to spend, if we're spending that grant money on solar together or other, that does allow us to be a bit more. We can put that into the purements to be a bit more forceful. So I don't think we want to add extra burdens in, but I think we should be saying that sticking with our sort of our mantra of buying local for whatever we spend, we can put that in just in the wordings. And again, in the frequently asked questions, but I would really suggest that we don't put that as a criteria in because I think that would leave us both up to challenge and it puts more burdens on through the groups. I was going to come to John next. So John, thoughts on that? Well, also, don't forget we have a value for money policy. And this also applies here. The value for money policy applies to this fund as it does to all our funds. So we will need to tie that into account as well. Thank you. I like the idea of there being some kind of sort of recommending looking at the local suppliers, but without it being a criteria that seems sensible and they rely on the value for money that we have to do. So that's comfortable without that sort of being added. Anything else? No, that's fine. And I agree with Travis recommendation. I don't want it to be a criteria. Just maybe some guidance. Yeah. OK, thank you. OK. Any more comments or questions before we move towards the recommendations of Sheffan? Yes. There is one aspect that is not clear at the moment in our information for applicants. And I think it would be helpful to have your steer on. And that is that it's not clear whether we invite organisations to apply for more than one project. Now this particularly comes up because some of the possibilities as we've now mapped them out are actually relatively low cost. In particular, a community building energy survey is selling so cost the electric bike or the kickstarting of the e-bike scene is a fairly small amount. It would be good to clarify that in our information for applicants. And it would be good to know how you feel about it since you will be looking at the propositions that come in and making your recommendations. Thank you. Comments from councillors on that? My view would be it would seem logical if you've got an organised local community who wanted to do an energy survey and an e-bike scheme. It would seem unfair to say that they could only apply for one would be my sort of view. How do other councillors feel about that? I'm torn. It's a very good question. I'm really torn. It might help the larger and better organised parish councils over the smaller and under-resourced parish councils and I'd be a bit wary of that. On the other hand, it might make for a really good set of applications where two matching or two partner grants could make a real substantial difference. I'm really torn. My view would be that we go back to what the purpose of the grants are and that is obviously pushing towards zero carbon communities and that that should be the focus when considering them. Cats the Williams. I assume that if you look back at last year's scheme, we had a criteria that we wanted to ensure that the villages, it was in even distribution across the district. I don't know if we managed to achieve that, but I would have thought that if that criteria is continuing, then if a village put in more than one application, we would make a decision as to whether we should grant more than one application on the basis that whether or not the £100,000, which is the limit of the scheme, has been distributed evenly across the district and if it hasn't, then we would take that into account into whether or not we award a particular parish council more than one application. I think that's probably covered in that criteria of wanting to ensure that this money is bred across the district and that they're not focused on maybe one or two parishes that happen to have the resources to deliver the applications. Is that right, Siobhan? Yes, I think one of the dilemmas that we'll face organisations seeking to apply will be whether to put in for a small thing or a large thing and I suppose I'm thinking that if they were to apply for what they're interested in, we wouldn't necessarily fund both of them, but it would actually give you a bit more flexibility as to how you do the funding. No, I'm happy with that. I think that was so long as at the end of the day we see this £100,000 invested. I fully appreciate we can't ensure that it's 100% across the district, but so long as we ensure that all parishes have an equal chance of the money and the money is being spent as far as we can in schemes across the district, then I don't have a problem with, say for example, a parish or an amenity group asking for money for two or more projects. Anything further on this that anyone would like to raise? Okay, in which case we'll go to the recommendations, which is item 0.2 of item agenda 4, a page 7 of the agenda. So are you quite comfortable, councillors, that we take these two recommendations, 0.1 and 2 together? Please nod. Yeah, thumbs up. Okay, thank you. In which case the proposal is the recommendation that we recommend to Cabinet, to councillor John Williams, the approval of the changes to 0 carbon community Scrant scheme as outlined in paragraph 11, which will result in a more focused scheme providing funding to projects under the three themes of cycling community buildings and tree planting at another nature-based solutions. And delegation to the head of shared waste services environment, the authority to make minor changes to the scheme documents in the pedicys A and B as necessary for clarity. So that is what we're recommending. So I will go through the councillors individually to ask if they're happy to accept that recommendation. So councillor Batticharia. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Daunton. Yes, I'm happy. Thank you. Councillor Donald. Agree. And I can confirm that I'm in agreement with that as well. And the fact that we have asked delegation for the head of shared waste services to make those minor changes means the things that we've discussed today can be picked up in there. So councillor Williams. The point I was going to make, Claire, for those that this needs to be amended to the Cabinet, those changes can be picked up by Trevor. Thank you as part of that delegation. Lovely. Thank you very much indeed. Okay, that finishes item four, which was the substantive item on the agenda. So just to item five, which is the date of next meeting. The date of next meeting is Friday, the 31st of July at 10 am. Thank you very much. I'd like to thank all the officers for all their hard work on the Zero Carbon Communities Grant and for all of the members who've taken part in the workshop and also thanks to all of the community organisations who have applied for what I think is a fantastic scheme for us to move forward with Zero Carbon Communities in South Cambridge here. So thank you very much indeed for everybody this morning and I'll see you again on the 31st of July. Thank you. Thank you everyone. See you. Bye. Bye bye.