Agenda item

Request for Scrutiny - Decision to enter into an agreement with Curb Clean Media to place Clean Media Advertisements in the City Centre

To receive and consider the attached request for scrutiny received from Councillor J Monaghan.

Minutes:

The Board received and considered a request for scrutiny from Councillor J Monaghan in respect of the above officer delegated decision.

 

In attendance at the meeting, and responding to Members’ queries and comments, were:-

 

-  Councillor J Monaghan – Headingley Ward.

 

-  Chris Gomersall – Head of Property Services, City Development.

 

-  Ann Briggs – Advertising Initiative Manager, City Development.

 

-  Graham Wilson – Head of Environmental Action and Parking, Environment and Neighbourhoods.

 

In brief summary, the main points of discussion were:-

 

·  The officer delegated decision related to an agreement entered into with Curb Clean Media company for a 12 month controlled trial period to allow the company to place ‘clean media’ advertisements in the city centre.  These advertisements comprised basically of stencilled advertisements on paving slabs in a designated area of the city centre.  This relatively new form of media advertising was not controlled by planning legislation or regulation, but as it was on the local authority controlled public highway, Highways Act rules applied, which placed a responsibility on the local authority to manage and maintain the highway.

 

·  Curb Clean Media were one of the first national operators in this field, and had agreed to work exclusively with Leeds City Council for this 12 month controlled trial period to explore the use of this new form of advertising.  The agreement gave Curb the exclusive right to place the advertisements in selected locations in Leeds City Centre.  These would all be clearly marked as Curb advertisements.  The Council approved, in advance, the subject and the wording of the advertisements, and this formed part of the wider advertising code operating in Leeds.  All advertisements were designed to show Leeds or the city centre in a positive light – for instance, the International Film Festival – and the Council had the power of veto over any proposed advertisements – two had already been refused.  In return, the Council had control over the advertising, should receive approximately £20,000 in advertising revenue and Curb had also agreed to try to identify the source of any unauthorised advertising and assist the Council Enforcement Team in its removal.  The agreement could be terminated by either side during this 12 month trial period.

 

·  Workshops had been held in March 2010 to explore the proposal, and these had been followed later by Ward Member consultation and consultation with the City Centre Plans Panel.  A list of Council Members and officers consulted as part of the process was circulated.  The final decision had been taken via an officer delegated decision, as the mater related to the awarding of a contract, which fell within the remit of the officer delegated authority scheme.

 

·  Councillor Monaghan expressed surprise at the decision, as he and Ward colleagues, in conjunction with the Council’s Environmental Action Service, had been fighting this type of illegal and unauthorised advertising in Headingley Ward for a number of years.  It was often used to advertise club or drink promotions which, in turn, could lead to anti-social behaviour.  In his view, this form of advertising was illegal, was an environmental crime akin to graffiti, and had the same effect in terms of bringing an area down.  He was therefore extremely surprised that someone thought it appropriate for the city centre, and questioned whether, in principle, the Council should, in effect, be condoning the practice in return for a share of the advertising revenue.

 

·  In response to Members’ questions, Graham Wilson indicated that he had been unaware of the agreement until November 2010, although it appeared that some Streetscene staff had been present at earlier consultation meetings.  His service had been battling graffiti for years and he was concerned regarding the precedent this agreement represented. 

 

·  Board Members expressed a number of concerns and reservations regarding the issue.  In summary, there was a lack of wider Member consultation, the fact that officers had regarded it as appropriate to utilise delegated powers in relation to such a sensitive issue, whether this agreement had, perhaps, created a precedent which might have unfortunate knock-on effects, control over, and lack of Member input in respect of, the nature and subjects of any proposed advertisements, and the prompt removal of any advertisements, especially, when, say, an event had passed.  Some Members agreed with Councillor Monaghan’s view that the decision was wrong in principle, and it was suggested that the contract should be terminated, or at least suspended, pending further consideration by the Board.

 

Councillor Driver, in his capacity as Chair of the Corporate Governance and Audit Committee, indicated that the matter raised some issues regarding the appropriate use of the officer delegated powers, and he felt that perhaps this was an area which the Committee might wish to explore.

 

RESOLVED

 

a)  That the request for Scrutiny be approved, and the Board receive a more detailed joint officer report, to include Legal Services input, at the next meeting, setting out the views of all the relevant Council Departments regarding all the issues involved.

 

b)  That, in the meantime, the City Development officers seek legal advice regarding the suggestion that the current agreement with Curb Clean Media should be suspended pending the outcome of the Board’s deliberations.

 

(NB:  Councillor M Iqbal joined the meeting at 10.40 am, during the consideration of this item.)

 

Supporting documents: