Agenda item

Briefing paper by the Economic Development Officer.

(Enclosure)

The panel welcomed Reena Fehnert, the Dial-a-Ride Manager from the county council, to the meeting, who had agreed at very short notice to attend the meeting to answer questions. 

The Service Manager of Economic Development and Town Centre Management presented the briefing paper outlining the dial-a-ride service, its performance and financial situation. Responsibility for the service had moved from property services to planning policy and now came under the service manager’s remit. He clarified that the former manager had budgeted according to the previous two year’s usage figures. The Dial-a-Ride partnership scheme had had mixed membership and the Dial-a-Ride Manager confirmed that only recently had the council been represented on it. The Resources & Assets Portfolio Holder reported that he had only been invited to one of the partnership meetings when the service was his responsibility and he confirmed that the current portfolio holder had not been made aware of them. The Dial-a-Ride Manager explained that it was management group set up by the transport board and was generally not attended by councillors. Officer attendance and how the service fitted with the priorities and the service manager’s remit debated was discussed.

The panel expressed its concerns that the mileage and fare revenue information submitted by the Dial-a-Ride operator seemed inaccurate and that revenue per mile, mileage and total fare revenue did not balance. The Dial-a-Ride Manager informed the panel that she had contacted the logistics manager at TransLinc, the operator, to clarify the information but was awaiting a response. In relation to finance, the Dial-a-Ride manager confirmed that initial funding had been received from the Countryside Agency but this had now been withdrawn. Members were concerned that the council may be charged for mileage to and from the bus depot. The officers also clarified the budgetary position of the service. It was apparent that a deficit was anticipated although this had been rectified during the gateway review process.

The chairman suggested that should the council disinvest from the service, it could face a penalty given the contract for the service. It was also acknowledged that the service did provide a valuable opportunity for vulnerable people. This would therefore need to be considered as part of any options appraisal and accurate information from TransLinc was vital.  

The Dial-a-Ride Manager was asked about her approach to the service. She explained that the exit strategy for the withdrawal of the Countryside Agency funding was that the partnership would proceed with the service. This had therefore increased costs in addition to extra costs incurred for mileage over 15,000 as per the contract with the operating company. This had been an unrealistic figure. The Manager had been making recommendations to the partnership on changes to the service to make it more efficient

Reena: I have been making recommendations to change the way we operate but it is up to the partnership to agree how we go ahead with these but any change was made on a majority vote and so far, her recommendations (based on a community transport system such as operating on a first come first served basis, being less flexible, set days for longer distances) had been rejected. She confirmed for the panel the county council was the administrative and accountable body for the service. The Corporate Head of Finance and Resources suggested she would contact the county council to ensure that financial controls and relevant systems were in place.

The panel discussed this and further financial implications in detail. The officers provided clarification where possible but it was apparent that further work was required on the information currently available.

Conclusions:

(1)   The Resources DSP expresses its grave concern about the apparent lack of financial control of the Dial-a-Ride service.

(2)   In light of the issues raised within the debate and report, the DSp recommends that the report be considered by cabinet at its next meeting as a matter of urgency.

(3)   The Resources DSP recommends that the service be reviewed to ensure its appropriate priority category and that where the service sits in the new management structure is appropriate (e.g. it may be more appropriate with concessionary travel).

(4)   Officers confirm that terms of reference and the council’s contractual rights with the Dial-a-Ride partnership and service.

(5)   The Resources DSP requests an options appraisal for the service.

(6)   The Resources DSP requests that the apparent lack of control of the budget for the service be tackled as a matter of urgency.

(7)   The Chief Executive be urged to contact Translinc to provide accurate figures for mileage and revenue of Dial-a-Ride for south Kesteven.

(8)   The Dial-a-ride management group be attended by council officers and consideration be given to appointing councillors to the board.

(9)   The S.151 officer be asked to raise concerns about the service through the Lincolnshire finance officers forum.

(10)          A further report be submitted to the panel for its meeting on 18^th January 2007.