To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Philip Massey, Councillor Rachel Massey and Councillor Aasim Rashid.

Members are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary, personal or personal and prejudicial interests they may have and the nature of those interests relating to items on this agenda and/or indicate if S106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.   

There were no declarations of interest.

To determine whether there are any additional items of business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chair decides should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

There were no items for exclusion of press and public.

To determine any items on the agenda, if any, where the public are to

be excluded from the meeting.

There were no items of urgent business received.

To consider the minutes of the Rochdale South Township Committee meeting held on 10^th November 2021.

That the minutes of Rochdale South Township Committee meeting held on the 10^th November 2021 be approved as a correct record.

Half an hour has been set aside for members of the public to raise any

issues relevant to the business of the Committee and the Township.

No members of the public were in attendance and no items were raised in the open forum.

To consider a report from the Interim Director of Economy.

The Committee considered a report from the Highways Officer to formally recognise Kingsway bridle path as a Bridleway.

The Highways Officer advised that the bridleway was built 15 years ago, however the paperwork to formally recognise it as such was not submitted at the time. The route was previously a formal bridleway but was closed for health and safety purposes whilst Kingsway Business Park was under construction with the expectation that it would be reopened. However, when the route was reopened the paperwork was not submitted to reclassify it. Members were therefore requested to authorise the Council to proceed with an application to commence with the process of formal recognition.

The Committee was advised that as a public right of way, the bridleway would be the responsibility of Environmental Management to maintain.

Members noted no objections had been raised from residents and that a public consultation process would follow. It was highlighted that the application proposed that the bridleway be returned to its previous classification prior to its temporary closure.

Resolved:

1. That the Council be authorised to proceed with a Creation Order under Section 26 of the Highways Act 1980 for the formal recognition of the Kingsway Bridleway.

2. That if no objections were received to the Order, it would be confirmed unopposed, and that if an objection was received to the Order, an application would be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for determination.

3. That following receipt of any instructions from the Head of Environmental Services, the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance be duly authorised to execute any legal documents in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

To receive a presentation from the Director of Strategic Commissioning.

The Committee received a presentation from the Director of Strategic Commissioning setting out the latest developments in relation to Integrated Care Systems, following the publication of the Integrated Care White Paper in February 2022.

The presentation outlined:

•      The National Policy: Greater Manchester was one of 42 Integrated Care Systems (ICS) in the UK. Rochdale was 1 of 10 ‘places’ within Greater Manchester. Rochdale would be split between five Neighbourhoods aligned with the Local Authority Townships.

•      Why integration is important: to address poverty, health and other inequalities.

•      What integration means for our residents; wrapping services around the needs of individual residents and dealing with multiple issues in one visit. This was challenging under the current model as services were often organised separately and this resulted in a poorer experience.

•      Rochdale Operating Model; the appointment of a Place Lead (Chief Executive of Rochdale Council– Steve Rumbelow), development of a Locality Board and One Rochdale Local Care Organisation (LCO) and further development of ‘our Neighbourhoods’ model.

•      What do we mean by ‘Neighbourhoods’; aligning with Townships to bring together the 30,000-50,000k populations with Primary Care, Community Health, Social Care and wider determinants of health. Working at smaller Township scale would enable better understanding of the community and better respond to local need.

•      What we want to achieve; sustainable outcomes such as improved services and better prevention, offering greater integration aligned with the national ambition and system priorities and services working together more effectively so there can be a greater focus on improving population health.

•      Neighbourhood plan; develop alignments with Townships and Primary Care Networks, establish Neighbourhood Boards intelligence packs, develop multidisciplinary teams between GP’s and virtual teams, including social care, mental health and third sector providers;, to include residents and communities in all stages and establish enablers to facilitate operational delivery, and to support residents to get the right care at the right place.

•      Neighbourhood progress; workshops for operational teams had taken place in Heywood and Pennines, alignment with townships mapping was underway with discussions taking place at local level and workshops arranged.

•      Next steps; co-produce boards and develop leadership, develop key priorities for each neighbourhood, develop a plan for how the Council would  deliver on  shared priorities, provide regular updates to councillors through Townships, Overview and Scrutiny, Cabinet and Member briefings.

Members sought and received clarification on a numbers of matters such as: managing demand and expectations, local intelligence to understand the different and diverse needs within individual Townships, responsibility and accountability for commissioning, workforce plan and neighbourhood model delivery timeline.

The Director of Strategic Commissioning expressed confidence that with the Place Lead and Elected Members, Rochdale had a strong position and model, and as such other local authorities were following Rochdale’s direction.

Resolved:

1.    That the presentation be noted and a further update be provided in due course.

To consider a report from the Interim Director of Resources.

The Township Committee considered a report that requested Members confirm its delegated decision making arrangements and appointments to the Township Sub-Committees, including the Chairs/Vice Chairs; the appointment of “lead” opposition spokespersons; and the appointment to other bodies.

Alternatives considered:

To not appoint sub-committees and for the Township Committee to retain all delegated functions. This option could have a detrimental impact on the ability to progress Township priorities or to deal with urgent items of business. The Committee could also, if it chose to do so, adopt alternative sub-committee arrangements.

Resolved:

1. That the  proposed Sub-Committee structure of the Rochdale South Township Committee comprising of the Rochdale South Township Delegated Sub-Committee and the Terms of Reference, as outlined in Appendix 1 of the submitted report, be approved;

2. That Members be appointed as follows: –

(a) Rochdale South Township Delegated Sub-Committee:

Councillors – Philip Massey (Chair), Shakil Ahmed (Vice Chair), Aisling Gallagher, Rachel Massey, Daniel Meredith, Shahid Mohammed, Aiza Rashid, Billy Sheerin, Angela Smith and Patricia Sullivan.

The opposition spokesperson - Councillor Patricia Sullivan.

(b) Ward Forums - The relevant Ward Councillors be appointed to attend their respective Ward Forum.

The area Forums included in Rochdale South Township Committee are:

a.    Balderstone and Kirkholt Community Meeting

b.    Bamford and Oakenrod Area Forum

c.    Brimrod, Marland and Sudden Area Forum

d.    Castleton Area forum

e.    Kingsway Area Forum

f.     Milkstone and Deeplish Area Forum

(c) Rochdale Regeneration Group (one Member per ward, appointees must not sit on the Planning Committee) - Councillor Shakil Ahmed (Kingsway), Councillor Stephen Anstee (Bamford), Councillor Elsie Blundell (Balderstone and Kirkholt), Councillor Shahid Mohammed (Milkstone and Deeplish) and Councillor Billy Sheerin (Castleton).

(d) Township Older Persons Champion – Councillor Billy Sheerin;

(e) Township Young Persons Champion – Councillor Aiza Rashid;

(f) Rochdale South Township Planning Panel (one Member per ward) – Councillor Mohammed Arshad (Milkstone and Deeplish), Councillor Aisling Gallagher (Castleton), Councillor Rachel Massey (Kingsway), Councillor Daniel Meredith (Balderstone and Kirkholt) and Councillor Patricia Sullivan (Bamford).

(g) Road Safety Group – Councillor Shakil Ahmed and Councillor Philip Massey.

Reasons for the decision:

The Council had established and appointed Township Committees that may exercise both executive and non-executive powers as set out in the Responsibility for Council Functions in Part 3 of the Constitution, which stated that: appointments to Township Sub-Committees, Township Working Parties, Partnership Arrangements and Local Outside Bodies shall be made at the first meeting of the appropriate Township Committee in the new Municipal Year’.

The Sub-Committee exercised either delegated powers or acted on any matter detailed in the Committee’s Terms of Reference on which it was essential to take a decision.

To consider a report from the Director of Neighbourhoods.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Neighbourhoods that asked Members to approve the Rochdale South Township Funds’ terms and conditions, and to agree delegation arrangements concerning funding decisions.

Alternatives considered:

In considering the report, the Members were asked to decide whether or not to approve the allocation of funds to funding streams and to adopt appropriate terms and conditions.

Resolved:

1.    That the expenditure, commitments and balances for Rochdale South Township revenue and capital funds at financial year end 2021/22 (as outlined at Appendix 1 and 2 of the submitted report) be noted;

2.  That the findings of the review of Township Funds

     2021/22 (as outlined at Appendix 3 of the submitted report) be noted;

3.    That the  allocation of Rochdale South Township Funds (as outlined at Appendix 5 of the submitted report) to funding streams in 2022/23 be approved, as follows:

·                Projects Fund (revenue) - £40,176

·                Members Fund (revenue) - £30,000

·                Ward Fund (revenue) - £40,000

·                Capital Fund - £103,964

4. That the terms and conditions for Rochdale South Township’s revenue and capital funds for 2022/23 (as described at Appendix 6 of the submitted report) be approved.

5. That the delegation arrangements for Rochdale South Township Funds 2022/23 as detailed at 4.6 of the submitted Report be approved.

Reasons for the decision:

The management of the Rochdale South Township Fund is a matter delegated to the Rochdale South Township Action and Resources Delegated

Sub Committee to determine. Rochdale South Township Funds are allocated to projects that benefit the Township’s community and environment, and realise the Township priorities. The decision would enable the Committee to monitor and review the use of the Rochdale South Township Funds to ensure continued efficient and effective use of those funds.

It was requested that the Committee received regular update reports from the Council’s Highways Team and Environmental Management.

Resolved:

1. That Highways and Environmental Management be requested to provide regular reports to Rochdale South Township meetings.