Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Special District Executive meeting held on 25^th June 2015, and, the ordinary District Executive meeting held on 2^nd July 2015.

The minutes of the Special District Executive meeting held on 25^th June 2015, and, the ordinary District Executive meeting held on 2^nd July 2015, 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 Councillors Peter Seib and Peter Gubbins. 

In accordance with the Council's current Code of Conduct (adopted July 2012), 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. A DPI is defined in The Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012 No. 1464) and Appendix 3 of the Council’s Code of Conduct. A personal interest is defined in paragraph 2.8 of the Code and a prejudicial interest is defined in paragraph 2.9.

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. As a result of the change made to the Code of Conduct by this Council at its meeting on 15th May 2014, 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.  If you have a prejudicial interest you must comply with paragraphs 2.9(b) and 2.9(c) of the Code.

There were no declarations of interest made.

Questions, statements or comments from members of the public are welcome at the beginning of each meeting of the Council. The total period allowed for public participation shall not exceed 15 minutes except with the consent of the Council and each individual speaker shall be restricted to a total of three minutes. Where there are a number of persons wishing to speak about the same matter, they should consider choosing one spokesperson to speak on their behalf where appropriate. If a member of the public wishes to speak they should advise the committee administrator and complete one of the public participation slips setting out their name and the matter they wish to speak about. The public will be invited to speak in the order determined by the Chairman. Answers to questions may be provided at the meeting itself or a written reply will be sent subsequently, as appropriate. Matters raised during the public question session will not be debated by the Council at that meeting.

There were no members of the public present.

The Chairman advised that he and the Interim CEO and Strategic Director had attended a meeting of the leaders of the Somerset and Devon Councils, Cornwall and the Scilly Isles, where there had been discussion on devolving power and authority from central Government.  Following a strong presentation, it had been concluded that the South West were not currently in a position to put forward a firm proposal at the current time, but, they would continue to work towards this. 

The Chairman reminded Members of the Somerset Rivers Authority funding meeting which had taken place on 24^th July where the six Somerset authorities had been opposed to raising funds for the new Authority through council tax, and preferred to create a new precepting body.  He noted that the report would be presented to Full Council on 17^th September before the next meeting of the partners in the Somerset Rivers Authority (SRA). 

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee confirmed that they supported the recommendations, but, questioned the impact to residents of creating a separate precepting body and requested that the findings of the review be reported back to all Members.

In response to questions from Members, the Chairman and the Interim Chief Executive confirmed that:-

·         Although it could take up to two years to set up a precepting authority, DEFRA had not raised any issues regarding this.

·         In the interim, funding for the Authority could be sought from the Government or from the partner authorities.

·         The Environment Agency had undergone a restructure in the last 18 months and a recent peer review had been very positive.

·         Focus should be on the common works programme and the enhanced works programme and not on the Government stated cost of £2.7m.

·         A list of Environment Agency responsibilities and Internal Drainage Board responsibilities would be drawn up so that it was possible to map the enhancements to be covered by the SRA.

During discussion, concern was expressed that the Internal Drainage Boards were overwhelmed despite recruiting additional Engineers and that previous Government promises of funding had not materialised. 

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) confirmed that if the SRA became a separate precepting authority then they would become a separate legal entity with their own administration and would be able to raise capital in their own right.  It would be possible for one partner authority to become the accountable body.

At the conclusion of the discussion, Members were content to propose the recommendations or the report to Full Council. 

The Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning (Place Making) advised that the Local Development Scheme had been presented at her Portfolio Holder briefing and at Scrutiny Committee.  She said it was essential that the Local Plan was continually reviewed and confirmed that finance was within the Local Plan reserve to fund any consultation or external expertise required. 

The Principal Spatial Planner outlined the new version of the Local Development Scheme which took account of the Local Plan Inspectors recommendation to take an early review of housing and employment in Wincanton, and, would include the adoption of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to dovetail with the Local Plan.  He drew Members attention to the evidence base documents listed in the report which would be kept relevant and up to date by internal staff and external consultants where particular expertise was required.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee said they had acknowledged the importance of the on-going work involved in keeping the evidence base documents current and were pleased to note there was funding for external consultants where SSDC did not have the internal expertise.

In response to questions, the Principal Spatial Planner advised that:-

·         SSDC had worked with neighbouring local authorities to jointly procure agency services to complete Housing Market Area Assessments.

·         The length of time taken to adopt the Local Plan had not helped future master planning for communities and there was a need for properly thought out solutions for the future.

·         If any of the evidence base documents challenged any part of the Local Plan then this would keep the Plan up to date and ensure good decision making.

·         The Local Plan quoted the minimum housing requirements for the area and a report on the Council’s 5 year land supply would be brought to District Executive shortly. 

During discussion, Members made the following points:-

·         Towns were being ruined because of a lack of master planning particularly relating to highway and new road issues.

·         Wincanton was being inundated with housing without the jobs or infrastructure to follow. 

• The Project Management Board would be reformed and would include the Area Chairmen and the Group leaders to keep the Local Plan current.

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

The Interim Chief Executive confirmed that the Asset Management Plan was the result of joint work between Property Services and Financial Services.  She drew Members attention to the proposed inclusion of the Crematorium in the Asset Management Strategy and the prioritised high and low level actioned listed. 

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee said they endorsed the inclusion of the Yeovil Crematorium in the Asset Management Strategy and noted its new layout and also asked the current position of the Car Parking Strategy. 

The Strategic Director (Place and Performance) confirmed that the Car Parking Strategy was due to be reviewed very shortly. 

During discussion, the following points were made:-

·         The SSDC Asset Register detailed all SSDC land ownership in the district.

·         The Asset Management Plan was a living document and was subject to change at any time. 

·         As some projects evolved, it could be possible to join some together. 

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were pleased to add Yeovil Crematorium to the Asset Management Strategy as one of the strategic buildings to be retained and confirm the draft Asset Management Plan 2015-16

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that the information on Section 106 deposits by developers in Appendix C was awaiting breakdown and would be available at the next quarterly report.  She also asked Members to confirm the delayed projects detailed in Appendix D.

During discussion, Members felt that as a detailed report on Section 106 deposits was provided to each Area Committee, it was not necessary to have the same level of detail in the quarterly budget monitoring reports.  It was agreed that in the future a short paragraph in the main report would be sufficient. 

In response to questions from Members, it was also confirmed that:-

·         Foundry House in Yeovil was owned by Zero C but several parcels of land lying around it were retained by SSDC.

·         Following a recent successful court challenge, government guidance in late 2014 advising local councils not to seek Section 106 contributions from smaller schemes and in particular affordable housing had been deleted and local authorities could continue to seek obligations from smaller sites.

·         The remaining budget allocated to the Reckleford gyratory project was a final retention sum.

·         The sum returned from Broadway Farm, Merriott was a successful reclaim of Homes and Communities Association (HCA) funding. 

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report, including the delayed projects detailed in Appendix D.

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that although the Council Tax collection rate had improved, the additional collection staff had concentrated on collecting debt from the previous financial year and it was anticipated that the current year collection figures would improve in the next quarterly budget monitoring report.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee confirmed they had raised no issues and as there was no debate, Members were content to note the report.   

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee questioned if there was any intention to make a charge for parking in the additional spaces provided. 

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) confirmed that a clause could be inserted in the final legal agreement to ensure SSDC received a proportion of any profit if the Parish Council decided to make a charge for parking.  However, during discussion, it was felt this was unnecessary as the returns would be very small and Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report as presented.

There was no debate and Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report. 

Members were content to note the monthly performance snapshot data.

It was noted that two new Government consultation documents had been received since the publication of the Agenda:-

·         Tackling rogue landlords and improving the private rental sector

·         Devolving Sunday trading rules

Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the District Executive would take place on Thursday 3^rd September 2015 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 9.30am.

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that a formal tender process had been conducted and consultation the Ward Members had taken place.   

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee confirmed they were content with the report and, there being no debate, Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.