COMHAIRLE CONTAE ÁTHA CLIATH THEAS
SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL
MEETING OF SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL
Monday, April 11, 2011
HEADED ITEM NO.3 (c)
STANDING COMMITTEES - ORGANISATION, PROCEDURE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
c) Report on ACM Pilot
The following report was considered at the ORGANISATION PROCEDURE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE Meeting held on 24th March 2011
REVIEW OF PILOT FOR CLONDALKIN AND LUCAN AREA COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Background:
The review of Area Committee Meetings commenced in 2009 and items pertaining to this issue have been considered at numerous meeting including OP&F, County Council and Lucan Clondalkin ACMs, as well as informal discussion with Area Chairs, Meetings Administrators and Members over a prolonged period of time.
The attached report was considered at the September 2010 OP&F meeting at which time it was agreed to conduct a pilot for a period of three months, of two separate Area Committee Meetings in respect of Lucan Electoral Area and Clondalkin Electoral Area (on a similar basis to the Rathfarnham Area Committee). This pilot was to be effective from November 2010 to February 2011 following which a further analytical report would be submitted to the members for consideration at the March 2011 OP&F meeting and at which an ultimate recommendation would be made to full council in April on whether
· To continue along line of Pilot with possible amendment of SOs
· Revert to original L / C ACM
· New alternatives as recommended from review
The Clondalkin Electoral Area is represented by 6 members and the Lucan Electoral Area by 5 members. Since November 2010 individual single monthly meetings have taken place for both the Clondalkin and Lucan Electoral Areas. A full listing of all business (in line with Rathfarnham Area Meetings) is considered at each meeting.
Catalogue of business conducted:
A catalogue of meeting items has been recorded for each area meeting for the pilot period and the cumulative findings for the 4 months in question are as follows:
Clondalkin
| Department | Headed Items | Questions | Motions | Motions Reached | Motions Not Reached |
| Community | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Corp Services/Libraries | 4 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Environment | 1 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 0 |
| Housing | 0 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 0 |
| Planning | 6 | 1 | 7 | 7 | 0 |
| Parks | 1 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| Roads | 6 | 18 | 10 | 10 | 0 |
| Development | 1 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 0 |
| 21 | 47 | 51 | 51 | 0 |
Lucan
| Department | Headed Items | Questions | Motions | Motions Reached | Motions not reached |
| Community | 2 | 3 | 11 | 11 | 0 |
| Corp Services/Libraries | 4 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 0 |
| Development | 0 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Environment | 0 | 13 | 10 | 10 | 0 |
| Housing | 1 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| Planning | 5 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 0 |
| Parks | 3 | 19 | 14 | 14 | 0 |
| Roads | 8 | 22 | 18 | 18 | 1 |
| 23 | 91 | 81 | 81 | 2 | |
*Motions not reached because Councillor was absent
It appears that considerable differences still exist between the levels of business items being considered by each of the two pilot committees, particularly in relation to business submitted by members as set out hereunder. However there does not appear to have been any great difficulty getting through the level of items on the agendas.
Business Clondalkin Lucan
Questions 47 91
Motions 51 81
Comparisons:
For information purposes the following is an outline of the business conducted at the other Area Committee meetings
Tallaght
| Department | Headed Items | Questions | Motions | Motions Reached | Motions not reached |
| Community | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Corp Ser | 6 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 0 |
| Environment | 0 | 18 | 9 | 5 | 2 |
| Housing | 6 | 7 | 9 | 7 | 1 |
| Planning | 8 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 4 |
| Parks | 3 | 7 | 18 | 12 | 4 |
| Roads | 8 | 18 | 16 | 9 | 4 |
| Development | 2 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| Emergency Motions | |||||
| TOTAL: | 38 | 63 | 71 | 43 | 16 |
*Motions not reached because Councillor was absent
Rathfarnham
| Dept | Headed Items | Questions | Motions | Motions Reached |
| Community | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Corp Services/Libraries | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 |
| Environment | 0 | 12 | 5 | 5 |
| Housing | 10 | 6 | 2 | 2 |
| Planning | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Parks | 7 | 12 | 8 | 8 |
| Roads | 7 | 20 | 15 | 15 |
| Development | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Total | 36 | 56 | 35 | 35 |
Establishing Review Criteria:
It was agreed that criteria would be established for undertaking a comprehensive review of the pilot initiative, and that this criteria would not be based exclusively on business items. Accordingly Corporate Services officials consulted at length with the Area Chairs and Meeting Administration personnel, and individual meetings were held with both. The Area Chairs in turn consulted with their area members and the following is a summary of sentiments expressed and reported:
- Generally pilot has produced more effective meetings with individual opportunity to fully discuss issues within reason, and without over emphasis on time limits.
- Support for the permanent division of the Lucan /Clondalkin Area Committee into 2 individual Area Committees in accordance with provisions outlined in Section 50 the Local Government Act 2001
- Support for the continuation of the pilot for an additional number of months, say to June 2011
- Input of all members, incl new co-optees into formulating a formal submission on future operations
- Request for alteration (of Standing orders) to vary the number of members' items to be submitted
- Impact of variances in individual member’s submission of business items – some members very active, some not thereby impacting on level of business (Qs & Ms) on agenda
- Perceived difficulty in dealing with issues straddling area boundaries for which members may have heretofore made routine representation
- Difficulty / importance of maintaining quorums
- Request for changing meeting venue for Lucan Meetings
It is recognised that there may well have been an element of “peculiarity” associated with operations of both Area Meeting in question in recent months as a direct consequence of the calling of General Election 2011 with focus on pre- election activity for contesting candidates and more recently the filling of a number of casual vacancies by new members.
In light of the foregoing it might be considered prudent to allow the pilot to extend to June 2011 to allow full and active participation of all members thereby enabling a more balanced evaluation on a permanent outcome and this matter is now before the members for consideration and recommendation End of Report to OP&F
It was proposed by Councillor E. Tuffy, seconded by M. Corr and RECOMMENDED
“That the present pilot arrangement would continue for the months of April and May, and that this report be brought to the May Meeting of the Organisation, Procedure and Finance Committee for final agreement”.
This is now before the Council for APPROVAL