Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7th December 2017.

The minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7^th December 2017, copies of which had been circulated, were taken as read and, having been approved as a correct record, were signed by the Chairman.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Peter Seib and Martin Woods, Director for Service Delivery.

In accordance with the Council's current Code of Conduct (as amended 26 February 2015), which includes all the provisions relating to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI), personal and prejudicial interests, Members are asked to declare any DPI and also any personal interests (and whether or not such personal interests are also "prejudicial") in relation to any matter on the Agenda for this meeting.

Members are reminded that they need to declare the fact that they are also a member of a County, Town or Parish Council as a Personal Interest. Where you are also a member of Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council within South Somerset you must declare a prejudicial interest in any business on the agenda where there is a financial benefit or gain or advantage to Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council which would be at the cost or to the financial disadvantage of South Somerset District Council. 

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no members of the public present. 

The Chairman regretted the need to print the Council Tax Support Scheme document in full for all Councillors and suggested that it be circulated electronically and be available in paper only on request.

The Section 151 Officer advised that there had been some legal challenges to Council Tax Support Schemes where Authorities could not demonstrate that their Members had read the document, risking the validity of decisions taken.

The Chief Executive confirmed that the Council needed to demonstrate that Councillors had access to the relevant papers and so they should be available on-line and in the Members Room.

The Chairman advised that it was essential that SSDC needed to be involved in in this Joint Committee.  He hoped to focus on market town regeneration and for the modest costs involved, bid for growth money from the Government. 

In response to questions from the Scrutiny Committee, the Chairman confirmed that the SSDC had been asked for an initial contribution of £1,400 for 2018/19 to fund the administration and the work programme of the Joint Committee and he could give no further assurance on resources at the current time.  He said the Joint Committee would be work in progress but it was essential that SSDC were involved and part of the responses to the Government. 

The Monitoring Officer noted that the draft Inter-Authority Agreement had been amended since publication at point 11.5 as it had been agreed that each partner authority would issue press releases themselves. 

During a brief debate, Members agreed that SSDC should be involved in the Joint Committee and it was requested that the draft Inter-Authority Agreement be amended to include monitoring of the progress of the Committee.  The Chairman agreed to request this at the first meeting of the Committee. 

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to recommend the report to Council for confirmation. 

The Revenues and Benefits Manager advised that a Scrutiny Task and Finish group had reviewed Council Tax Support Scheme for 2018/19 and into 2020/21.   No significant changes were proposed for 2018/19 and he listed the minor changes proposed for working people, disabled people and pensioners, a disregard for bereavement support payments and the income for part-time firefighters.  He noted that the group had looked at ways to reduce administration costs in the future and the deadline for setting a Council Tax Support Scheme had been changed to 11^th March in future years which would give a little more flexibility and may allow the scheme to be agreed alongside the Council’s Budget report.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee thanked the Revenues and Benefits Manager and his team for their support and advice during their review meetings. 

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to recommend the report to Council for confirmation. 

The Portfolio Holder for Environment, Economic Development and Transformation advised that Phase 1 was about to go live and Phases 2 and 3 were being combined and brought forward to reduce staff concerns.  She noted that communication to Members would now be stepped up.

The Strategic Lead for Transformation advised that overall, the programme was on track and on budget.  She noted that:-

·         They had engaged with Yeovil College on a design concept.

·         They had engaged a specialist in learning and development for the new managers so they understood how to engage in the new operating model.

·         Phase 1 would go live on 23^rd January and Phases 2 and 3 were being brought forward.

·         There was resource for communication with staff and Members.

In response to questions from the Scrutiny Committee and Members, the Strategic Lead for Transformation and Chief Executive advised that:-

·         Officers had a good relationship with Civica, the software providers, and they were working closely on the development of technology.

·         Locality working was still in the development stage and feedback from a members survey would be shared in a later report.

·         The majority of vacancies were being filled internally

·         A good selection of external candidates had applied for the 4 posts which had been advertised on the external microsite.

·         Although it was recognised that some service levels could temporarily dip, the South West Audit Partnership (SWAP) were assisting with identifying pinch points and developing plans to maintain appropriate performance levels. 

During discussion, the following points were made:-

·         The Technology Implementation Manager had set up an officer group from other District Councils using the Civica software to refine their technology. 

·         Further explanation of the Strategic Risk Register was required before circulating to Members.

·         It would be helpful for Portfolio Holders to be made aware of key staff changes within their Portfolio.

·         It was natural there would be some loss of staff due to job uncertainty which was why Phases 2 and 3 had been combined and brought forward sooner.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was agreed that the Strategic Lead for Transformation would informally attend the Area Committee meetings to update Members on the progress of the project and with this, Members were content to note the Transformation Programme progress report.  

The Lead Specialist (Legal) said the Council had not needed to apply to the Magistrates Court to use RIPA powers since 2013 and officers were generally able to carry out their duties without resort to these powers.  The Policy and Procedures attached at Appendix A had been updated with a new Using Social Media and Networking Sites in Investigations Policy which would guard officers if they needed to use social media as evidence.  She concluded by noting that the Director of Service Delivery would be the Senior Responsible Officer in the future, supported by a member of the Legal team. 

In response to questions from the Scrutiny Committee, the Lead Specialist (Legal) advised that officers had to be alert to other legislation when considering RIPA and this requirement would be covered in the training of officers

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.

The Section 151 Officer advised that since the Agenda had been published, the Government had published the Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement and the implications for the draft budget position had been circulated in the appendix to his report.  He noted that the settlement was slightly better than anticipated and although Business Rates Retention was increased, there was a major reduction in New Homes Bonus funding which had been predicted and planned for.  The limit on the increase in Council Tax without the need for a referendum had increased to 2.99% or £5.00 and as the £5.00 was higher for SSDC, this had been built into the Medium term Financial Plan.  Using capital receipts flexibly had been extended for a further 3 years and new regulations allowed for a 20% increase in planning fees. 

In response to questions from Members, the Section 151 Officer advised that:-

·         In previous years SSDC had set aside some New Homes Bonus money into the Revenue Support fund and some of that money was now required to offset the drop in New Homes Bonus funding.

·         An update report on the Commercial Strategy and income generation was due to be presented to the Executive in February 2018.

·         An assessment of adequate reserves and robustness of the budget would be included in the Council Budget report in February.

The Chairman noted that they were still able to precept 1.25% of the 2015/16 tax rate towards the Somerset Rivers Authority although this could not show as a separate item on the Council Tax bill until the Government passed an Act allowing them to be a precepting authority.  He also agreed to raise the issue of sustainable drainage system payments to management companies and the replacement of the administrator at the next meeting of the SRA.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.

The Portfolio Holder for Area South and Yeovil Markets regretted he had not attended the Scrutiny Committee meeting and he provided answers to their questions regarding the report.  

The Area Development Lead (South) said the Yeovil Street Markets had been in decline for a number of years and despite a re-launch in 2013 with incentives and entertainment it had continued to decline.  The National Association of British Market Authorities’ (NAMBA) were commissioned to report on the market and their study concluded that either heavy investment was required, do nothing and draw the markets to a close, or, seek an experienced operator to run the market.   A Task and Finish group from Area South Committee agreed that the third option to seek an experienced operator was the way forward and MSD had been selected.  A Service Level Agreement containing performance measures and break clauses would be drawn up and the Area South Committee would receive 6 monthly updates on progress.

In response to questions from Members, the Area Development Lead (South) confirmed that no payment would be made to MSD to operate the market.  They believed they could operate the market at a profit.  The retention of part of the annual markets budget would be a contingency in case they stepped back from the agreement. 

During discussion, it was proposed that £17,000 of the annual markets budget be retained as the contingency, however, Members felt that if the market operator were able to provide useful advice to boost other markets within South Somerset then the contingency should be increased to £20,000 to fund this expertise.  This proposal was seconded and agreed.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to confirm the amended recommendations of the report. 

The following amendments to the Forward Plan were noted:

·         SSDC Operational Office Accommodation Review (Headquarters Feasibility Report) – moved to March 2018

·         SSDC Operational Office Accommodation Review (Areas and Locality Working) – moved to March 2018

The following new consultations were noted:-

• Provisional local government finance settlement 2018 to 2019: consultation

·         Fair funding review: a review of relative needs and resources

·         Business rates in multi-occupied properties

Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the District Executive would take place on Thursday 1st February 2018 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 9.30 a.m.