 s containers y John Williams, yw'r onlunnol i'n g relaxing a ddim haywch am y dweud yn ddod i'n llwyddiadau o'r mhilydd, oedd yna'r gwsud, o'r gwsud yma yma'r hynny yn maen nhw'n ei jennyddiadol? Yn cael rhan o gwmddiadol? Yn cael rhan o hollweithio ar y Llyfrgell, a chyfyddo dailingol o mlykahodd Fathwn i ddxhwrn, os yw'r hollweithio ar gyfer yllum yn rhan o fathwn i ddim. Roeddwn i'n meddwl i'n meddwl cael eu corwyr. Offes, maeth i'n mynd i'n rai'r Unmhut? Rwy'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r syniadau, a'n gweithio i Siobhwn. Roeddwn i'n meddwl i sgwrdd iawn i'r hyn. Rwy'n meddwl i'n meddwl i Siobhwn, am ymddangos yn yng Nghymru Gweithfawr. Ynmysg. Luke? Fy oedd yng nghymru Gweithfawr i Siobhwn. Cecilia? Good morning, I'm Cecilia and I work for the Communities and Team as a Development Officer. Emma. Hi, I'm Emma Dyer, I'm a Development Officer in the Communities Team. Jonathan, would you like to be introduced to the world? Thank you, Chair, I'm Jonathan, I'm the Cabinet Support Officer and I'll be live streaming this meeting. I'm Ciaran bydden bydden services and I'll be miniting this meeting. Thank you. And as I said, as Councillor John Williams is online, John, would you like to introduce yourself, please? Yeah, thank you. Good morning everyone. I'm Councillor John Williams, I'm the Lead Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources. Thank you very much. Members in the room, anyone got any declarations of interest with any items on this agenda or anything else they feel prudent? Councillor Allenton. I'd like to just record that I've had conversations and working with the people that run Shed It and Swayfsea. Thank you. Anybody else? I believe we've got these shared services now. There's no shared services with regards to mobile warden schemes, but I'm going to be there on the side of caution just in case there's any inference that I have an association with Melbourne mobile warden scheme which is funded by this council. Thank you. Okay, colleagues, agenda item number three, sorry about that, which is the minutes of the last meeting. So I'm going to go through as the normal procedures. It's page one of our agenda. It's going to be page one, just sing out if there's anything. Page two, page three, and page four. If I may, with your gift on page four, we didn't have a finished time for the meeting. Would it be possible to stick in 1606, please? If that's okay with anybody else, that's the time we've finished. Johnston has a look at the video, I think, for us. Brilliant, much obliged. That's that one. Okay, here we go. This is the main event, Luke. You're on. Zero carbon communities. This is for the Zero Carbon Grant Application Awards. Over to you, Luke. Thanks. Thank you, Chair. Good morning, everybody. So this is the Zero Carbon Communities Grant, or the ZCC grant, provides funds to parish councils and community groups to run projects which reduce carbon emissions and engage communities on climate change. This report is therefore before members to present officer recommendations on the allocation of grant funding to projects that have applied to the 2022-23 round of the ZCC grant for the committee to recommend to the lead cabinet member. So a total of £124,554 is available in this round of the ZCC fund, which includes an underspend from last year of £20,554. So applications were accepted for two separate categories. Firstly, carbon emissions and reduction and locking up carbon category. And secondly, community engagement on climate change. And so the grants advisory committee of February 22 agreed to split the available funding between these two categories and allocated 70% to carbon reduction projects and the remaining 30% to projects engaging the community on climate change. So applications to the 2022-23 fund were open between 21 March and 17 June 2022 and 22 applications were received in total, the summaries of which I'm sure you've seen at Appendix F in your packs, but I'll go through a summary of each shortly. So applicants could apply from £1,500 to £15,000 per project and the requested funding in total is £330,000, which as in previous years exceeds the total grant fund available for this round. So applications had to be assessed and scored. This was done by two officer panels with one panel per category and using the methodology set out in Appendix C. Scores from each officer panel were then collated and are set out in Appendix A and this ranks the total scores from highest to lowest and shows the projects they're recommended by the officers for funding and they're highlighted in grey. Members may recall that the grants advisory committee of February 2022 recommended that £15,000 be set aside for a community climate leader training programme and such a programme has applied to the grant scheme and has actually received the highest score in the community engagement category and it's recommended to fund that project with the funding that was set aside and that is the project that's highlighted yellow in Appendix A in table two, which is the Cambridge Carbon Footprint project. As many of these community engagement projects score particularly well, members are also invited to consider adjusting the aforementioned 70-30% split across the two categories, which would enable higher scoring applications overall to receive the funding and again that distribution as recommended is already set out in Appendix A with the grey highlighted projects. So now we'll just summarise each of the applications in turn. So the first category being carbon reduction. So we received 11 applications from 10 organisations totaling £104,626 of requested funding. So scoring of these was across three criteria, 33% allocated to each criteria, being projected carbon emission reductions, added value and the lifetime impact and they are again set out in the tables in Appendix A. So the project was to fund seven of those, leaving four of them unfunded and the projects with scores that are falling below the line on this occasion were firstly an application from the organisation Hope Against Poverty for £4,700 for a Cambor based project to collect surplus food from supermarkets and other outlets and make it available through an existing Cambor community food project. Well, this project scored well on added value and longer term impact. It was less strong on impact on carbon reduction, which weren't quantifiable for this project. Secondly, there was an application by Cambridge Citizens Advice Bureau for £15,000 to fund 42 solar panels on their building. Whilst being based in Cambridge, 25% of their customers are South Cambridge residents. So they are eligible for funding in this instance. The panels would result in quantifiable carbon savings. However, the application did not show that any previous actions have been taken to reduce emissions from the building. There were no technical or expert reports or it provided in support of the application. An application for funding had been made to the city council, so this application just scored slightly lower overall. As you may have seen in the report, there were two applications received from the multi-community centre and recreation grounds, one which was for battery storage, another for an interior and exterior LED lighting system. So as only one project per organisation can be funded, officers have recommended the battery storage project for funding. As again, that's project scored slightly higher overall and was deemed to align better with the aims of the funding. Finally, in the category of projects that were recommended for funding, there is the Land Beach Village Hall Transportable Trust who requested £14,035 for a solar PV array on the roof of Land Beach Village Hall. Again, this application showed good measurable carbon savings, but no match funding was offered and there was no independent report provided so the application scored slightly lower in the added value category. The remaining applications in the carbon savings category all provided a carbon savings and a good balance between added value and lifetime impact and a recommendation for funding, these being the application from Cotton and Parish Council who applied for £15,000 for 30 additional solar panels and a three phase battery system for Cotton and Village Hall. Then there was Cotton and Parish Community Centre who sought funding for 33 additional solar panels and a battery system also for the sum of £15,000. Again, as mentioned previously, the other Milton Community Centre project which requested £13,296 for a battery storage unit linked to an existing solar panel array. Followed by West Wickham Village Hall who requested £4,000 to install 20 solar panels and battery storage to supply a heating system and an LED light system. Hardwick Parish Council who applied for £5,292 for an e-bike rental scheme in a village accompanied with two bicycle sheds, found me a recreation ground of Village Hall who sought to replace the remainder of the Village Hall lights with LEDs and requested £2,000 to do so and then finding this category, Mastern Village Hall Trust who applied to replace a rendering throughout their Village Hall with insulation to improve thermal efficiency with a request for £8,956. So, they're moving on to the other category of projects. So, they're projects with measurable community engagement. Luke, so much for interrupting, my friend. Before you move on to the other section, I have a question from Councillor Lent or if you wouldn't mind with one of the comments you made. Yes, of course. Good morning, Luke. Sorry, was the number 25 or 75% of CAB clients are in South Cambridgeshire? Sorry, yes, but as I understand it, it's 25% of the people they serve in South Cambridgeshire, yeah. Thank you. I heard another one from Sue Ellenton. Sure. Sorry, I don't think it was me. Yes, I just want to be convinced that Kotlin Parish Council and Kotlin Community Centre are not actually the same people because I rather suspect that they are and in which case it's two applications from the same people. And I don't care, but I fear that there are people who would feel that that was being overgenerous to Kotlin at the expense of somebody else. As far as I know, they are not. They are different organisations. The Community Centre is a separate charity and runs separately with volunteers to my knowledge. And the Parish Council, I don't believe, are part of that operation as an organisation. I believe it's run separately. Thank you. Once you're sure of that, then I'm happy. Luke, on that basis alone, do you have the addresses for the Parish Council project and the Community Centre project? Are they different addresses? I can find them for you. I will just go to the individual application forms. You can find them. Just give me a short moment. So the address for the Kotlin Parish Council application is the Village Hall, Recreation Ground, Lambda Lane, Cotinum, CB248TA, which is the address applied on the application form. The address for the Community Centre is 250A High Street, Cotinum, CB248RZ. Thank you. That's splendid. Luke, if you'd like to carry on now, thanks. Thank you very much. We were at the second category of applications for projects for measurable community engagement. In this category, we had 10 applications, totaling £86,204 requested for funding. As mentioned previously, we are able to fund the project with Cambridge Carbon Footprint for a climate leader training programme from £15,000 set aside from the previous years' underspend. So this then leaves nine applications totaling a requested amount of £74,204, sorry, £71,204. So scoring of leads again was across three criteria. Firstly, the community engagement impact, so effectively how many people were likely to be involved and the level of engagement. And then secondly, as with the previous category, the added value criteria and lifetime impact criteria. So the office panel recommendation is to fully fund three of the applications in this category and to part fund one application, leaving the five lowest scoring applications unfunded. So these five lowest scoring applications an application from Oakington Primary who requested £4958 for education environment and biodiversity activities. Great Shelford parochial charities requesting £3462 for a tree planting project. There was Babrum Parish Council who requested £4,500 for videos documenting the Forest Garden project in Babrum which was funded from an early round of the ZCC grant. As then the A10 corridor cycle campaign he requested £1,353 for cycle stands in two locations. And then the North State Horticultural Association he requested £14,000 for a composting toilet enabling more people to access the allotments and the community garden. So as with the previous category these are all good projects. They just didn't quite score quite so well as those that were recommended for funding. And it's also worth noting that three of these projects may also be eligible to apply for the community chest grant for up to £2,000 for biodiversity projects. So then moving to the three applications that were recommended for full funding these all scored slightly higher and these are the Canable Cambridge Sustainable Food project requesting £11,318 for a project building on existing work with food hubs in Harveston and Gamlingay. There is the Shedit project requesting £14,131 to build a mobile library of things to visit Swayvesey and neighbouring villages. And then the social enterprise called Let's Cook who requested £15,000 to train up 30 people with skills, knowledge and confidence to deliver cookery sessions with emphasis on avoiding food waste. The next type of scoring application was from Sustainable North Stoke for projects, events and engagements around a range of sustainability issues across the next three years. This project lends itself to part funding hence the office of recommendation to use the remaining funds to provide £1,551 of the requested £2,480. So I set out in paragraph 23 of the committee report members can recommend to the lead cabinet member that funding is awarded as recommended by the office of panels and set out in Appendix A or alternatively that funding is awarded in a different allocation. Just a final point is that members should also be aware that there is a discrepancy between the labelling of some of the appendices between the report and the committee report. So apologies for this error. I think the report refers to appendices B and C but these are in the pack as C and F respectively. So apologies for that. But that's the end of the introduction and summary so thank you for listening and I'm happy to take any questions. Thanks Luke. I've got another one from Councillor Lentall. Thank you Luke. That's very comprehensive. I just want to come back to the North Stoke Cultural Association because the composting toilet at the Allotments and Community Gardens that's a site very close to Longstanton as well and I just I know because I've been to mum and baby groups there currently there aren't very many facilities there to encourage that kind of outdoors you know quite forest school but outdoors learning which is a lovely group called Muddy Puddles. I like Muddy Puddles and I miss Muddy Puddles. So I just wonder whether this isn't an instance where the application I appreciate we don't have very much the way where the application hasn't actually spoken to its longer term benefits because it makes the Allotments more accessible to what's the polite way for saying older senior users who might find having facilities closer by more accommodating but also for mum and baby groups. I think you've almost certainly applied the criteria spot on I just wonder if we've got a committee a little bit more leeway maybe to put not very much. It's a good point, as all the points are this is a committee so we talk about it that's fine. The offices awaited is in that case just Dan has raised this Luke would you be kind enough to go through the thought process with the Northstone Cultural Association application please? I think part of the scoring for this application it was done across three categories of engaging the community additional value and lifetime impact and it's obviously a good project possibly the work done to justify the amount of engagement or the amount of outreach that was achieved possibly didn't quite meet the levels that other groups didn't therefore didn't quite score as highly and again there was I think against many projects managed to provide part funding or match funding which this one this one didn't so I think it was whilst again it's a good project it was probably just a slightly lower score in this particular case I don't know chair if with your agreement one of my colleagues Shavorn was involved with the scoring of these applications whether Shavorn may be able to add any more at your discretion chair but yeah that's my understanding of the scoring for this project Thank you well let me just put you straight Shavorn does not need my blessing at all so she's more than willing to jump in any times you like please if you have anything to add to that Shavorn please do I don't really have anything to add to that I wasn't actually on this panel it might be worth just asking Emma Dyer if she has anything to add as she was however I mean this is this is a really fundable project it's just whether this is is the fund for it I think and one of the things I mean depending on your decision on this I mean if you turn this one down I feel they should be strongly encouraged to apply to the fund or or somewhere else for this project whether Emma you have anything that I know you were in the office of panel discussion on this one I think Luke summarised it pretty well with what he said I mean I can read out the notes that I made from the office of panel if that would help in a couple of weeks since I read this application I said that it's a good idea to provide the toilet for those using the elements in community garden which would attract more people to use the amenity but unfortunately not enough details were given on the total size of the plot the number of allotment plots and the benefits of the compostable toilet how it would reduce the missions compared to installing a traditional toilet they haven't made contact with the town council or district councillors or any attempt to secure part funding from elsewhere like Luke said so and also we wanted to know if they were successful could they raise the other a thousand pounds so there were just a few sort of queries that this wasn't enough detail in our opinion that's what I suspected thank you very much indeed all three of you and Luke just echoing what Dan said that was a superb whiz through that was lovely thank you very much indeed okay colleagues councillor panellyn I'm a keen allotment here myself and I'd love to be able to support this but I think it's probably the wrong fund and I really do think that we should be encouraging them as Siobhan says to look at other sources of funding but you know allotments these days have got to be provided with loose so that particularly women and children feel more comfortable there and also there are other things like water absolutely essential these days for allotments but it's just the wrong fund that's all sorry anybody else can you think to me Michael right okay if there are no further questions and we don't have any up go for it it's not so much a question more of an observation of Let's Cook because there it's page 28 of the of the document where they're discussing successful projects in Merseyside do we know when those projects were we can probably find out from a quick look at the application yeah I'm looking now just bear with me and I'll have a look my argument is that during a cost of living crisis you know people are going to absolutely have to tighten their belts and all the rest of it I just wonder whether that requires the kind of funding that they're looking for and my concern is somebody who always enjoys a fairly decent cook an average gardener I worry about these sessions that they look great on paper they make everybody feel good but I find looking at their numbers I find them a little soft if I'm honest because this is about influencing long term behaviour and the question is how is that then broadcast to the wider community or you know people's private kitchen and all the rest of it this is I'm open to being at the moment I'm a soft no but I'm open to persuasion on this one just in terms of those Merseyside projects they aren't specifically referenced by date within the application that I can see although brief google search has revealed a couple in 2018-2019 from Let's Cook in Merseyside but there's nothing specifically referenced in the application itself that I can find as yet see that's my problem is that it doesn't then take into account that most people have had to learn a lot more kitchen skills over lockdown and we're in a very different situation in terms of food supply and the cost of living things up if this was three years ago I'd be like yeah this is a solid project but 15 grand is 15 grand and I'm just not convinced that for this moment in this period of time this is the right application so I'm still a soft no on that one Thank you very much right colleagues other than the issues we're going to go through this I think as Luke presents it so we do the carbon mission reduction first it's okay with you Luke so I was going to say are there anybody voicing objections to any of the recommendations from officers with regards to appendix A in our pack which is the carbon mission reduction looking up carbon grants so the ones in grey the one in red is the one which is a double application by the same place so that's not happening right Luke that's great that's the comfortable carbon ones are separate carbon ones are two separate addresses so that's okay so as far as I'm concerned I'm comfortable with the officers recommendations we've asked the questions where needed does anybody else have any doubts, fears or otherwise so in that case would we be okay to take this as affirmation for the officer recommendation this is the appendix A as is yeah that's the answer yes okay Luke so the whole of the carbon mission reduction side appendix A is approved as recommendations from your good selves certainly in the page the table 2 which is the community engagement on climate change now you've said you can fund the Cambridge carbon footprint if I recall that's right yep good so the one that we are at the moment not in agreement with collectively would be the let's cook so are we putting that one to one side for the moment so take out of your mind the let's cook are we comfortable with the Cambridge carbon footprint the Cambridge sustainable food, shed it and the sustainable north stone applications as they stand but the recommendations from officers that's a yes that's a yes so those four are the yes Luke and team so the only one we now have to discuss is going to be the let's cook as to whether or not we fund it part fund it and think about if we have been left I'm going to if you don't mind colleagues bringing John Williams because I would like to hear what John Williams has to say as the lead member for finance who will be signing this off anyway John do you have any thoughts well I was happy with the officer's recommendation on this one I've to be persuaded that we shouldn't go ahead with that with that funding but I'm obviously open minded on this and if the committee feel otherwise then I'll take that into account but at the moment I'm minded that we should accept the officer's recommendation thank you John okay put your mic on I wanted to mention I agree with with Councillor Lento and also is it really necessary to have 30 cooks teaching people to cook when there's so much on television when there's so much on youtube I mean I didn't have a mother to cook for me I learnt it from all from there what is needed is nutritional information which will be available on the internet and it can be like maybe a pack and send to people I think you don't need to train 30 cooks to be teaching people to cook sorry that's my opinion thank you Councillor Henry I take Councillor Lentall's point on this and they're asking for what a large sum I mean food waste avoiding food waste is their main plank isn't it it's teaching people not to cook in a way that waste food which is laudable but whether or not that's enough for a grant of 15 grand I'm I'm leaning towards Dan's sorry Councillor Lentall's viewpoint on this okay thank you well I think Siobhan convince Councillor Lentall and Councillor Henry Irish and Councillor Hanley whether or not this is a worthy cause I mean one of the things I was going to say have you got any experience of this particular group elsewhere in South Canada as it's a first time shot so I personally don't have any experience of them they are based in Southcams but I wonder if we could I mean as my understanding is it's about actually sort of setting up clubs and so it's kind of it's a bit more than just the training but I think that as Emma was there with the officer panel discussion that if you're happy for her to provide some information there but I mean you know it's absolutely it's sort of a matter of opinion in a way and so if you want to go with the other one that's very much your right of course not at all Emma would you give us the benefit of your your experience please I thought it was a very strong application from an organisation with a proven track record across the country like we discussed the thing that I think was important was the benefits including improved physical, emotional and mental health obviously the reduction in food waste which we've just talked about ability to cook and eat on a budget improved self-confidence and reduced social isolation there's lots of engagement already from the local community with child and family centres, primary schools caring together supporting young adult carers via focus groups surveys and telephone communication lots of thought has been given to the community on the climate change I suppose the only negative is for a project requesting this amount they have not applied to any other organisation for park funding so I did think it was a strong application but yeah and there are multiple benefits Thank you Discussion? Senator? If somebody has to cook for the family do they really want to go to a cookery club to learn how to cook and wouldn't that sort of be a bit tedious? One of the things that Emma just said which was, and we did ask Luke to give us a praise seat so you could argue that would be our fault or my fault Emma just came out with some more information with regards to the mental health side of it so there is a different angle which very much is the community engagement side so that would be my only if you like push towards support is the fact that that extra information that Emma has just given us it's a game changer if you like in how you see the application forget whether you are being told to cook but it's that being brought into an environment where your mental health may be improved Thanks I I must admit I felt that this was a bit of a thin looking application but I have a lot of time for people to learn to cook there is an enormous amount of money and waste in people buying ready cooked food of one sort or another and not being prepared to start from scratch in cooking vegetables and having them raw and how to prepare them so that they still taste nice and I think it's that element that I think is important here that it's so much easier to pop down the chip or McDonald's or wherever and that is where people spend an awful lot of money I have to admit that yesterday afternoon the television was on and it was Eat Well for Less and the number I was astonished at a family of four that were spending over a thousand pounds a year more because they were having takeaways three times a week because they couldn't evolve to cook when they started to cook they found how much better that was and so the principle of teaching people to cook for themselves and use food better I like Councillor Henley Sorry Yes I actually thinking about it a little bit more and listening to what Councillor Wellington has just said yes we are in a cost of living crisis aren't we people are going to have to make their money go much much further cooking veg and cooking meals from from scratch is probably one way of saving quite a bit of money I agree with that so maybe this is more there's more to this than just you know what's what the fund is for at phase value support to this in terms of value so I'm now starting to move towards supporting supporting this now chair but I'm happy to listen to other views Thank you, Councillor Lenton No, it's a meeting Councillor I beg your pardon Councillor Hanchard May I Do we know how typical it is for people to substitute cooking for takeaways I mean it isn't what a family usually does Cambridge is full of farms you can get nice vegans stuff also then there's the cost of the fuel required to cook so I don't think that a typical family lives on takeaways a takeaway is a treat from my point of view Councillor Lenton I mean look it's not that I don't like the aims of this project it's that they're asking for £15,000 of taxpayers' money and I'm not convinced that this is the time I think three years ago it would have been a good conversation but to give you an example I was in the Willingham Social Club last night and the main conversation at the bar was how to make a chicken last for three meals for the family rather than two and whether you're better off buying the ready cooked chicken or buying the broad chicken is a very detailed conversation about whether a lemon should be involved someone with very strong opinions I enjoyed that very much listening into that conversation and I just think this is the stuff that's going to happen organically this is what people are going to do naturally as a response to changing social circumstance and I think the point made earlier about there is so much TV content on how to cook there is so much TV content on how to prepare meals as affordably as possible I mean when I was a student you would not have wanted to come to dinner at my house tuna corma was on the menu and it was pretty foul looking back and it was TV that taught me first how to cook one of the first shows I saw was called take on the takeaway in which it demonstrated how you could produce the same meal as a takeaway for half a thing and actually that's still the Ainsley Harriet chicken from that recipe that is what I will cook for you guys if you ever come round this is £15,000 the north stone proposal that we're saying we're not going to do is £14,000 and it's actually about putting real boots on the ground in an allotment which as council handy says is one of the best mental health benefits you can have my concern is this is £15,000 it's a lot of money and I'm just not yet convinced that compared to all the other things all the other factors that are going to shift people's behaviour this is the most impactful bang for the buck we can reasonably expect and I would also argue that in the same way that look if we're comparing apples and pears here in terms of actual impact on people's lives actual impact on people's relationship with food production being out in open spaces I don't think this particular proposal holds in terms of its aims holds a candle to the north stone proposal but we've rejected the north stone proposal because it doesn't actually fit what we're doing right now which is about climate change so yes I applaud the I applaud the I applaud the aims I think the aims are absolutely fantastic but as somebody who really is you know pulled himself up by apron straps can we put it that way I went from zero knowledge of cooking to a possible knowledge of cooking I wouldn't have used a project like this I can't think of many of the other families that I know on lower incomes who would be attracted to a project like this they would far rather you know look after their improvements in their own way and I have to say I find this slightly condescending slightly condescending in terms of we must top down teach but that's maybe just my thing I'm afraid I'm a hardening no on this one it's £15,000 I don't think it's delivering carbon benefit here maybe somewhere else maybe with outside funding but yeah no for me I'm sorry thank you right there's only one way to solve this that's through the democratic process standby game we're going to do a show of hands if you wish so I think officers we are at an past hang on to see there please I don't know if it's of relevance but do you remember that a part of the children and young people's grant that was granted in the last financial year that included let's cook so I just wanted to note that point it may be because a separate financial year separate funds is absolutely no it goes as to whether we had funded the organisation I presume it is the same organisation the same branch it might be worth mentioning I had forgotten that completely so they've already had money they've had money elsewhere last year yeah last year and it was very appropriate within the children and young people's fund and it was well done so are they building on what they did last year then I can't comment on that because I don't know how this parallels in terms of it's a different how were they funded last year remind me was it the same fund no so it was the pilot the one-off pilot scheme the children and young people's and they received I mean I can give you the numbers they received about seven and a half I think it was why you haven't looked first I've seen Johnathan mate yep thank you chair having heard everything I'm with the view to continue and give the money one aspect that you haven't considered is the effect on us in having to collect in our blue bins all the recycling from the takeaways that people eat it's very noticeable that quite often we don't put our bin out every fortnight because we don't have enough in it because we mainly eat meals we don't have takeaways and we don't have packaged food by and large and quite often we don't have enough in our blue bin to put it out every fortnight and I think that's an aspect that the committee hasn't considered either the effect on our recycling levels and the cost of that recycling if we get people to actually cook their own food and reduce the amount of wastage from that cooked food but it's also the reduced level of recycling from the packaging that they would otherwise have thrown away if they hadn't cooked those meals themselves so I don't think the committee's fault of that but I do think that this is a very important aspect that we have to tackle when I was at school domestic science was a core subject and and kids would talk how to cook we had cookers in the school and people would talk how to cook from fresh food that was a long time ago now sort of 50 years ago and that's been lost schools don't teach domestic science in that way anymore and so people aren't taught how to cook and I hear what you say about you can watch how to cook from television well a lot of people actually have to remind you that most young people these days don't watch television my daughters don't watch television so you're teaching till a converted most of the time because the people who do watch television tend to be elderly people who have already been taught how to cook so I'm very passionate about this and I certainly do support this scheme and whatever you say I'm going to go and give them the money right well we're laughing but in all seriousness this is the the task of this committee is to make recommendations to the lead member for finance so we can go through the process which I would like to do actually to finish this item off and I'm going to go to the vote now we have our recommendation whether it's a yay or a nay for this application and we will make that recommendation to the lead member for finance who can make the decision to support our recommendation or not as the case may be that will be his ultimate decision so with that in mind colleagues may I have a show of hands for support of this application as is and those against it looks like I have to carry in one so I will go for support if that's okay with you again so thank you very much so that's a three to two in support John John is the member John has the vote that may well take that sting out of the tail that you have wagging in the back of you thank you very much thank you very much okay Luke Luke is still with us sorry Luke right in that case you've now got your answer for all of those so we've agreed with you eventually thank you very much indeed Luke is there anything else you'd like to add Luke that's all that's all from me but thank you very much so can I just add thanks to Eleanor Haynes who actually wrote the report and thanks very much to Luke for stepping in to present it since actually it's Eleanor's report absolutely that was very rude of me not to mention that so thank you very much for saving my bacon again from all of us thank you both very much for your time on that okay moving on the next agenda item will be the service of support grants now I believe that to be Cecilia morning Cecilia good morning so would you like me to start yes please over to you so this is the service support grants review we have obviously touched on this previously I'll run you through the paper just to clarify that so this is the review of all the grant schemes that we currently have within the service support grant scheme and we are about to launch a new cycle from April 2023 to March 2026 and so this review is looking at three key areas of total funding available within the scheme the themes against which the organisations can apply and the criteria for the scheme so it's about the key thing is for the grants advisory committee to obviously review this report and appendix and make their recommendations to our lead member for finance how he would like to move forward with this scheme so the main points within this cover the fact that we have a current pot sitting at 151610 so 151,610 pounds in the pot and as discussed in the paper there hasn't been any change for a number of years in terms of the amount sitting within the pot and therefore the recommendation has been to adjust based on inflation from an average inflation rate over the last five years and so the uplift would be up to 167,400 pounds now that is the new baseline for the fund going forward over this next three year cycle and consultation again with members of committee et cetera has resulted in us reviewing the themes as well and the themes which were previously at eight of them have now been reduced down to broader six hoping to make it a bit more streamlined and a bit more open and accessible and incorporate one new theme so just if we look at the table in the paper we've moved the key new one just to mention is arts culture and heritage but that absorbs in planning and economic development and we've gone through most of the others but one of the big noticeable ones is the mental health and well being is now included within that as well so to make sure that we don't lose any of the components that existed within the previous themes we have obviously refined the criteria and the guidance notes to explain what is acceptable within those new proposed themes so we've got proposed funding amounts against each of those themes with an indicative allocation which again the committee needs to recommend whether they agree with these indicative allocations to the lead member for finance and just to mention to clarify for everybody that the segment in grey at the base of that table under point nine in the paper the housing and homelessness budget is a part financially of this part it sits separately within its own service budget so just to clarify that point but for transparency reasons we would like to present them together because they are presented together as a grant so just highlighting the key changes within the criteria I believe you've all had that and had an opportunity to see the appendix A which all the revisions sit within but just summarising key changes we've got obviously mental health and wellbeing with a strong focus on acknowledging and requesting applicants from the children and young people organisations and this is because the one-off pilot that we mentioned previously the children and young persons pilot project grant was a one-off and therefore we wish to open up that side of things within this service support grant going forward similarly we've got independent living that will now include the community transport component because it promotes an aspect of independent living arts, culture and heritage is the new theme that we have added in and those are the key changes I mean the other things still are supported main time scales I think we've already covered off because that's going to be from next March but just in terms of agreeing these revisions the bidding round ideally would start from this September so just being aware that that's the time frame we're accounting for now and then yes obviously you can either review all these recommendations of the review and go forward and make that recommendation or potentially seek alternative choices and that summarises the report would you like me to go through the guidance notes I think the only thing worth mentioning separately individually is if we go to section 3 of Appendix A the eligible theme activities by theme you can see obviously all the new themes as included in the table but just we've highlighted those points underneath the activities supported of what needs to happen but also those key things so for example mental health wellbeing we've highlighted the fact that it needs to be children and young people that we're looking to support vulnerable residents and that projects addressing mental health wellbeing as they as for example as communities emerge from COVID-19 pandemic so those supplementary aims if you want to call them that have been integrated into the criteria at this point I do apologise to interrupt you but you mentioned Appendix A yes what about this is that if we look in the public give us a page of course yes so Appendix A so if you go into your pack it's page 37 apologies I was working off my one I'm sorry that's not the right page for you section 3 eligible activities by theme yeah exactly so if we look under the activity supported we've got those breakdown bullet points which is essentially a supplementary points to clarify for applying organisations to make sure they understand the remit that we're carrying on there's no reference of Appendix as far as we were confused no no you're right so it's the draft Appendix so obviously any changes anyone wishes to add make suggest at this stage we're open very keen to receive those but if everyone's happy with it as it is that's also fine I apologise please carry on well no that's fundamentally it those are the significant changes everything else has been point 4 in the eligibility criteria for applicants is just highlighting the fact that we've now included this request to engage all applicants to join the CCVS at the point that they make their funding request or if not to clarify as to why they have chosen not to do so and I think those are the key changes so everything that's in the grant in that table under section 3 and then everything else has just been tweaked to make it appropriate for you know the next funding round thanks Sylvia right just to remind colleagues we've been on two or three workshops so we've been going through this three so we've had plenty of discussion and tweak as we've gone along Dan has just reminded me in one of the workshop things we talked about the percentages of allocation how we're going to do that if you recall Sylvia so yes that when we receive it that will be incorporated into the scoring matrix yes so that people make the application that percentage will come up then and be shown perfect long as we get that to see sight of that that would be lovely okay Councillor Linton I'm impressed that it has come together so nicely and that we can really encourage all of our applicants and such clear guidance of what's required because we should now get to a point where we get applications that we can go straight to and say yes thank you very much that's acceptable or no that isn't acceptable immediately I think it's really nice paper thank you very much thank you so anybody else Bill I agree completely on what Councillor Linton just said thank you Sinita thank you John Williams do you have any comics to make no other than to to support what others have said I think it now makes it this makes it very enables us to have very clear criteria against which to judge people's performance which I don't really think we had before and I think also it recognises it looks at the outputs rather than the operation of those of the applicants so for example you know recognising that community transport is actually all about people to overcome isolation etc but that can be done in other ways apart from community transport so I'm very pleased with the paper and thank you very much Cecilia for your hard work on this thank you John, yeah I'd like to echo that Cecilia and any other help she's had from anybody else it's been a pleasure actually going through the whole process it's been beautifully explained right away through and any awkward questions we thought we had were easily batted away by Cecilia and the gang, fantastic right okay colleagues so we have two options this is on page 35 of your agenda the grants advice committee could number one note the contents of the paper and make a recommendation to the lead member for finance to agree the proposed changes to the services grant scheme as presented or the other option number two note the contents of the paper and make recommendations to the lead member for finance to agree the changes with provisions giving details so I am almost 100% certain we're looking at option one so I'm looking around the room that's a yes from all five of us so that's a unanimous recommendation to you John to adopt this process with option one please thank you very much indeed and as Dan just said big thank you to the team super yeah I'll pass it on thank you very much thanks okay right gang we're going to go on to the community chest funding applications it's over to Emma good morning Emma thank you for being here and waiting and helping out morning okay so right I'll crack on so before I go into I just want to mention about two applications that were deferred last month the first one, Gertin, Cottontails preschool we're still waiting on some additional information so that will now be deferred until next month the second one was if you remember the great little everston allotments the pond project they were requesting 1,941 we did go back to them asking what measures they were going to put in place to fence off the pond health and safety reasons but they got back to us since that was made and I've requested to withdraw their application with no reason given so just so you're aware of those two points secondly hopefully you've had time to read the appendices sorry they seem to have been admitted from your packs so hopefully I'll go through them as much detail as I can so we've received five applications this month totaling £7,497 I will go to the first one which is Ellsworth preschool so this is a community interest organisation which provides childcare for 19 children aged two to four from Ellsworth and the surrounding community so that's Boxworth, Patworth, Hilton Napwell and Fern Stanton the preschool holds open days and there have been discussions to make the facilities available to users outside of the school day for example children's parties, meetings and classes and what they would like is basically some of the furniture and play equipment is old broken and beyond repair and they've got a entirely new board of trustees a new fundraising committee and a new preschool manager and what they would like to do is undertake a programme of refurbishments and upgrades to the equipment basically to improve the overall experience and learning opportunities for the children it will also help to raise the attractiveness and financial sustainability of the preschool and support life in the village more generally so they've also got plans to improve the external play areas in the autumn which is the second part of their project but this application is to provide funding to re-equip the interior of the preschool which means that they would like some replacement furniture and kits and to provide forest school equipment also the new manager is qualified to provide forest school sessions which is obviously a huge draw for children it's very popular at the moment so total costs are £1,828.69 which does include a 20% contingency to reflect price rises and unforeseen issues £969 is being requested from the community chest for a variety of resources which are listed hopefully you can see those various things light boxes tough trays and things like that and also the parish council were asked for 47% which equates to £859 of the project costs and this also equates to the percentage of children at the preschool who live in the village so they worked out on that basis and this has now since this report was written has now been confirmed by the parish council when it comes to green options they're particularly keen to invest in new items to maximise the lifespan of the equipment although they have regularly accepted second hand re-gifted items and they also invest in second hand equipment and they have said that if they are successful they're happy to review which retailers the items are sourced from within obviously the budget above and prioritise those retailers with the strongest sustainability criteria and ethical policies so we have support from both councillor Mark Howell and councillor Peter Sandford over to you Thanks Emma first off I'd like to say thank you very much to Mark Howell and Peter Sandford for their input and their support excellent as we've asked officers to make sure ward councillors are included in these fantastic comments colleagues council entall I think this is exactly the kind of grant we should be recommending to Peter because this is going to have real world impacts this is within a landscape of a strengthening improving hub within the community they're looking to engage the wider community and not just the kids who are enrolled at the thing genuinely if every grant was as good as this it would be fantastic this is a very strong grant and I entirely agree that newer equipment bought will last longer so I think this is spot on very well done lovely just for those councillor hand has just returned to the room we might not be developing this one we'll be okay thank you very much councillor Enton I'm very happy to support this I think it's been well presented and clearly they've covered all the options thank you thank you I think it's a very good project in that little children who who would benefit from all that they have identified and I support it thank you in that case colleagues I take this as a support as I say councillor Handing was out of the room at the time of the discussion so if you won't be voting that's so unanimous for those of us who are here thank you to you Emma for number two which is Falmere Falmere Recreation Ground Village Hall built in 1982 is used by many local groups and also provides sports facilities such as junior football and cricket for the local league teams the hall and land is vested with the charity commission and funds are raised through bookings for weddings, parties, children's events business meetings and other activities ten years is left on the current lease and rent is charged at £1 per annum the village hall management committee are responsible for maintaining, renovating and upgrading the village hall as well as maintaining the recreation grounds and they would like to upgrade and renovate all the toilets in the village halls that's the ladies and the gents this is a much needed total refurbishment including new flooring, toilets themselves cubicles and sinks for the benefit of all users both the rec and the village hall approval for this work is not needed from the parish council and the charity commission does not need to be informed all that is required is an insurance that the building is maintained to good standards so total costs for this project are £35,429.21 including the AT and £2,000 is being requested for the community chest just of note when the management committee renovated the existing changing rooms in 2020 the parish council contributed £2,000 the parish council also purchased maintained, upgraded all the play equipment in Falmyr but apparently it's not in the parish council preset that the rec and village hall receive any money from the parish council the management committee have contacted businesses in Falmyr for sponsorship and any shortfalls will come from earnings from bookings and general fundraising such as the monthly farmers market and concerts and we have support from councillor James Hobro over to you thank you Emma the $64,000 elephant in the room is it's costing $35,429.21 and they're asking for £2,000 which in my book leaves £33,000 and shrapnel they don't mention or is not mentioned here in the report where the other £33,000 is coming from to complete the project within this year to be able to make use of the £2,000 Do you have any information on that? Well they have said that they have contacted businesses and they seem quite confident that any shortfalls can be met through the earnings from bookings and fundraising but I can always go back and find out a little bit more I don't know if you wanted to put maybe a caveat in there that funding is provided as long as I think we use the usual format if we might but they need to be reminded that it's 12 months from the issue of the funds to spend and we will need to see that you spend so I suppose what I would like to see is what they're going to spend £2,000 on it's not just going to be if they're going to purchase something as part of their process then fine but if they're just going to stick it in a pot and wait till they've got 35k to do it with not acceptable because there's other people who can use it now and now Leave that one with you Emma, thanks So on that caveat Assuming all is the affirmative from what we just said with your good self and then it will be approved if not If you've referred back to the next committee meeting Is that okay? Yeah Cheers I don't know if that, yep Absolutely fine So on to the next one which is Camborn Church This began in 2000 and is a partnership of the Church of England Baptist United Reformed and Methodist Churches They have 130 members and provide a place where local people can worship or meet as a local community group Cafe 19 runs from the church hall and it is a not-for-profit enterprise It is open to anyone from and around Camborn and provides low-cost food and drinks and a place where people can meet and chat Customers can stay as long as they like in the cafe for example is normally taken advantage of by child binders and others with children and it is also used to supply free lunches on recommendation by the food bank So this application is for a new oven So the current gas oven used by the cafe and the church needs replacing It's now 18 years old has had a lot of heavy use It's used to prepare food for many community events such as the remembrance services and during the open gardens It's also used by community groups such as the guides who access the church hall and the annex The church ideally would like to purchase an electric oven to take advantage of renewable energy However, they've said that quotes for electric ovens are around £3,000 in excess of the equivalent gas oven They've said that total costs for gas oven is £2,298 which includes installation and VAT They've also said that it's slightly more expensive than other quotes obtained but it's from a local Cambridge company who installed the original equipment who know how it's all set up so they've requested £2,000 from the community chest and the church who are not able to reclaim VAT will meet the remaining costs if successful The town council are happy to support the application but under current legislation they are not permitted to contribute funding towards faith buildings So we have support from all three local councillors We have councillor Shobona Bataichari councillor Stephen Drew and councillor Helaine Leiming Leiming, sorry £2,000 Thank you Emma Well this puts us into a quandary, doesn't it? Because nor do we support church buildings if I recall Could you just elaborate on that one for us? Emma, our rules and regulations so we obviously... Basically, if it's open to the wider community then that has been fine in the past and not just for those members of the church and they have stated that it is open to the wider community Thank you I know from the support from the three district councillors for the ward Shobona mentions about the time bank coffee morning and once the cafe in 19 is up and running which I'm assuming is part of this whole process so yeah I'd really like to support this application but I'm very worried about the gas oven and the cost of running that over the long term which is obviously a long term investment That's my real concern here is that I can feel the shade of councillor Helaine's not wanting us to spend on gas appliances and I'd like to see this again with an application to put in an eco-friendly an eco-friendlier electric oven because that's going to be more sustainable not just in terms of the environment but in terms of the cost of running long term I think that the cost of gas isn't going to come down anytime soon this is a fantastic project it's clearly in Camborn it's essential that we support community projects as much as possible but we've got to do that in a way that is environmentally and economically sustainable in the longer term so I wonder what other members think about gas versus electric and I like gas ovens by the way I don't think they're very reliable but that's my hobby horse so I was just wondering when renewable energy was mentioned are they talking about having solar panels or something I didn't understand that bit because that the church has that but I support an electric but I don't know what they mean by using renewable energy I would just check with Emma but I would imagine that the renewable energy is through their bills so you have a green tariff so it is it's good you can have your green tariff at home you don't have any solar panels on your roof or wind farm next door but you subscribe to a company that takes their electricity from a green source so then they thank you I'll take Councillor Lenthal's point in regards to the gas but I've already explained that the electric ovens are considerably more expensive immediately cost than an electric one what's the thought Scam support or not Councillor Henry I'm really surprised that the difference is so great between the gas and the electric oven I've got to take the figures of being right but have they got to buy a particular kind of oven one that's a high volume or a large one because we had a damn good oven fitted recently and it was under too grand so I'm slightly nervous installing a gas oven it's fixing them into using fossil fuels for donkeys years and I'm not sure that's the right way to go Emma is there any I mean I have experience of an all-electric kitchen in a commercial environment and whilst I concur that some of the equipment can be pricey like a six ring range with double oven will cost you around about the four and a half to five grand so that's a given it depends what sort of as Councillor Henry has rightly said what type of appliance they're looking for if they're looking for a more domestic type piece of kit it won't be anywhere near that I'm just looking at a couple of the quotes that they've provided one of the electric ones here it's coming it's gross 5200 which is a six zone induction top oven range obviously commercial type thing obviously built to last and withstand a lot more than say your domestic one would again so we do have a quote to back that up I'm just looking at other so we've got that quote so there's a couple of quotes they've given for electrics as well the other one is quite similar um 4861 is the other one I have a question Emma one of the reasons in my experience with the commercial kitchen which I'm attached to for not using gas was because of the extractor system that you have to have the gas safety switch off or cut off switches which are in the region of three times the cost of the cooker to install and have to be serviced twice a year so if they're going to purchase a gas oven with that size could you go back and ask if there is any any leeway in going for the electric for obvious reasons the only thing I'd say is if you're going to use that size oven they're going to need a three phase supply because it takes it's about a six kilowatt oven with electric so that might be the other reason why they're not doing it as well because it's a pipe of gas or it's a new install for electric we need some details please if that's okay so essentially we defer that one for information to a next one okay next one please the next one is the first of our deferred applications for community centre events if you remember this was deferred from June's grants advisory committee so basically this is the oak tree and the plaque if you remember and it was deferred pending details on the long term community care plan for the tree the applicant I've spoken to the applicant they've confirmed that they have the means to ensure that the tree thrives in the long term through an external provider they use green acres to ensure that they are limited also members of the parish council and they've also said that they're happy to purchase the tree around October to ensure the best chance of survival that was brought up as well as one of the points I've checked that on the quote the tree size was an 80 litre pot size which is 3.5 to 4.25 metres in height which would be propagated and grown in the UK and this was 528 pounds Councillor Peter McDonnell's confirmed he's in favour of the application Thank you Emma Clues We're in support of this one I said yes please Great Onto the next one which is if you remember the Cambron Lawn Tennis Club again deferred from last month so we've just since because obviously the rule about getting all local member support we've now also apart from Doctor Sharona Bata-Cherry we've also got councillor Helene Leaming she's very pleased to support the bid which she said would be an asset to the town and she would like to congratulate the club on their fundraising so far councillor Stephen Drew as well he says that he supports the application and the application was deferred pending details on the number of years left on the lease provided so the lease began in 2016 when the courts were built and there are 19 years left on the lease that's that first bit of information and also details of who will be the owners of the new clubhouse where they've said that the clubhouse will be owned by the town council and whilst the tennis club are the lease holders of the site the town council are the owners of the sites and just some extra additional information that they provided they said that in the past the cost of capital expenditure such as the construction of the original courts and their two new tennis courts was commissioned by the town council who recovered the VAT the club also pay a fee of £500 a year per court for the use of the tennis courts and this money will go to the cost of court resurfacing and fencing oh sorry the fencing replacement over time the town council will commission and make the payment for the construction of the new clubhouse and they can recover the VAT like I said previously so yes it's owned by the town council that's there are 19 years left on the lease and that's £2,000 that they're requesting Thank you Emma John I'm not sure if my alarm bell was ringing in my head for any reason or not but if this community group is getting funding from us yet the parish council is paying for it to reclaim the VAT is there is that an okay process? Well it indicates that actually it's the town council that are benefiting I have a great difficulty with this one because all intents and purposes it is the town council building town council facility that's leased to the tennis club for them to use so I think if it cracks like a duck and it looks like it probably is a duck and so I'm not happy with this I'm sorry I'd be pleased to hear what the committee thinks The reason I raised what I just raised with you is that I think my alarm bell ringing is loud and clear Has anybody else I've got some nods from Sue and Bill and from Sunita Are you nodding? I do what I'm told Right this is a democratic process Right so basically most of the even including Dan I think are in agreement with your good self John that this is something which has given us cause for concern So I think that we are I'm looking around the room we're going to reject this one Yeah Yep, Sunita Dan Yeah that's a rejection Emma completely Okay that's a problem and just one more thing We obviously see Appendix B the criteria and application form now includes the requirements that all local district councillers are in support before funding can be made and all councillers are provided with full details of projects so that's highlighted in grey in Appendix B just in case So that's already been changed on the application form as well Thank you Bill was going to say something I just would ask that you or someone speak with three members to explain this decision is why we've taken it I don't know who it is but they need to know the reasons Absolutely Is that part of the process that you would do anyway Emma Not the district councillers know but we can do that in this instance I'll do that You'll have to do that Yeah I'll do it Thanks In that case that's it then Right, thank you very much Emma As always superb documentation and what have you Sorry about the hassle of a couple of them The alarm bells were rung so that's what we're here for Right then, in that case that concludes today's meeting The date of next meeting will be Friday the 26th of August of this year Thank you very much for Cecilia, Emma John for coming in online and anybody else who's been here Thank you to the officers for them services for running it and taking the minutes and for my colleagues here That's it, thank you very much My thanks as well to everyone Right, see you all Bye