Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Beech, John V Chainey, John Dyke, Jon Gleeson, Dave Greene, Brennie Halse, Jenny Kenton, Pauline Lock, Ian Martin, Roy Mills, John Richardson, Ros Roderigo, Kim Turner, Andrew Turpin and Rina Singh (Strategic Director).

To approve and sign the minutes of the previous meeting held on Thursday, 21^st August 2014.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 21^st August 2014, copies of which had been previously circulated, were approved as a correct record of the meeting and signed by the Chairman.

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.

Councillors Michael Best, Tim Carroll, Peter Gubbins, Anna Groskop, David Norris, Peter Seib, Angie Singleton and Linda Vijeh all declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Agenda item 8: Non Domestic Rates (NDR) – Discretionary Rate Relief Policy, as Trustees of charitable bodies who benefitted from the Policy.  They confirmed that they would leave the room during discussion of this item.  

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.

The Council were addressed by J Drayton, J Cook, C Cobb, S Shayler, M Rowsell, M Sampson, K Andrews, D Lilley, A Rossiter, K Beaton, J Poole, C Sunter, and A Freeman relating to Agenda Item 7: Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Policy.  Their comments included:-

·         A policy requiring that 50% of all taxis be wheelchair accessible would deplete the type of vehicle used and would be at the expense of comfort for the travelling public.  

·         The policy was welcomed by the South Somerset Disability Forum.

·         People find getting wheelchair accessible taxis very difficult and there is often confusion as to where a guide dog should be allowed in a vehicle. 

·         The taxi rank in Silver Street, Yeovil should be relocated as it was dangerous for users.

·         As a wheelchair user it is difficult to book a wheelchair accessible vehicle at the time needed which is a barrier to employment. 

·         Often customers have to wait a long time at the Yeovil Shopmobility shop for an appropriate vehicle to be available to take them home.

·         More wheelchair accessible vehicles would be an advantage to taxi companies as the population ages. 

·         There is not the demand for the wheelchair accessible taxis which we already have.

·         Many elderly customers ask us not to send wheelchair accessible taxis to them.

·         A wheelchair accessible vehicle is often ignored on the taxi rank on a Friday and Saturday night.

·         Other councils in the UK have only 5 or 6% of their taxis as wheelchair accessible.

·         The increased costs of wheelchair accessible vehicles would be passed onto the customers, particularly Somerset County Council who have contracts with local taxi companies to transport children to school. 

·         There has been a lack of communication between the Licensing department and taxi operators.

·         Would the council offer any financial assistance to taxi operators towards purchasing wheelchair accessible vehicles.

·         The taxi ranks in Yeovil are unsuitable for the loading or unloading of wheelchairs as they are on slopes. 

At the time the item was discussed, the Committee was addressed by Mr B Hartley relating to Agenda Item 6: Further Main Modifications to the Local Plan – Submission to Planning Inspector.  He said that many of the submissions put forward in the consultation asked that landscaping be included as part of the proposed development to the south of Yeovil as well as to the Northern site.  He felt that both the Landscape Architect comments and evidence in landscape studies of the site provided evidence of a need for this and he asked that the recommendations be amended to reflect this.  

The Chairman congratulated Councillor Nigel Mermagen on being elected 1st Vice President (Deputy Chairman) of the main committee of the Congress of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.  He said it was the first time anyone from the UK had held the position.  Members joined the Chairman in congratulating Councillor Mermagen on his appointment. 

The Chairman reminded Members that the new Ranger Station at Ninesprings in Yeovil was now open and he encouraged all Members to visit to view the new facility. 

The Chairman presented Councillor Patrick Palmer with an engraved pewter salver and framed certificate to commemorate his 40 years service as a District Councillor for Yeovil District Council and subsequently South Somerset District Council.  Members joined the Chairman in warmly congratulating Councillor Palmer’s long service in Local Government. 

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Spatial Planning introduced the item, saying that following the second period of public consultation there had been two amendments to the text of the proposed modifications. If all the amendments were agreed by Members then they would be submitted to the Planning Inspector the following day and it was hoped that he would report on the whole Plan by the end of the year.  He confirmed that he would circulate the Inspectors report to all Members when it was received. 

The Principal Spatial Planner outlined the two Main Modifications to the Local Plan which it was proposed to change before submission to the Planning Inspector: the simplification of wording to Main Modification 9 and the early review of Main Modification 12 to be completed within 3 years of adoption of the Local Plan. 

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

·         The Planning Inspector had particularly sought further landscaping protection for the North Eastern development proposal, but not for the Southern development and so to put forward a landscaping protection scheme now would be unjustified and would risk the plan being found unsound.

·         The issue of anthrax was considered by the Planning Inspector but not pursued.  Two investigations had been carried out at identified sites and no anthrax spores had been found therefore further investigation work would be carried out at the development stage in agreement with the landowner and developer.

·         With regard to flooding, there was a requirement that any development should create no greater or lesser impact than at present.

During discussion, some Members urged for the retention of a buffer zone at the southern development in Yeovil, however, the Portfolio Holder reiterated that as the allocation of houses in that area had reduced from 2,500 to 800 it was no longer sustainable to support it.

At the conclusion of the debate, each recommendation was voted in turn and the majority of Members were content to agree the recommendations of the report. 

(Voting: 36 in favour, 8 against, 2 abstentions)

The Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Democratic Services introduced the item and addressed the issues raised by members of the public during public question time.   He asked that Members consider only the Policy relating to the vehicles, the drivers and the operational requirements and not the physical location of taxi ranks or the raising or lowering of kerbs.

During a lengthy discussion, varying views were expressed.  Some Members felt that whilst the consultation process appeared to be robust, the proposal that all new vehicle applications be restricted to purpose built wheelchair accessible vehicles (WAV’s) until 50% of the total hackney carriage fleet were wheelchair accessible was particularly onerous.  It was also suggested that there should be a transition period for single owner/operator taxi drivers. 

It was proposed and seconded that the percentage of wheelchair accessible vehicles be reduced to 20% (rather than the proposed 50%) of the total hackney carriage fleet, and, that a review of this element of the policy be conducted in a years time or before if the target (20%) was achieved to check whether the policy had achieved the aim.

It was also agreed to look at the possibility of assisting single operator drivers with loans to purchase wheelchair accessible vehicles.  The Leader of Council confirmed that any dispensation from the scheme for single owner/operator drivers could be dealt with through the Licensing Sub Committee process. 

At the conclusion of the debate, the majority of Members were content to agree the introduction and implementation of the South Somerset Taxi Licensing Policy and Guidance (as amended) with effect from 1^st April 2015.

(Voting: 36 in favour, 8 against, 2 abstentions)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(At this point Councillors Michael Best, Tim Carroll, Peter Gubbins, Anna Groskop, David Norris, Peter Seib, Angie Singleton and Linda Vijeh all having previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item, left the room.  They took no part in the debate or voting on this item).

(Councillor Carol Goodall in the Chair).

The Leader of Council thanked the members of the Scrutiny Task and Finish Group who had spent a great deal of time ensuring the policy was fit for purpose.  He drew Members attention to the changes in the Governments contribution to the scheme,  the key principles of the policy, the organisations and businesses who must now apply with justification for relief and the Hardship Scheme which had been set up to address exceptional cases.

In response to a question, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that at the current time, there was no mention of animal welfare in the Council Plan and therefore the Scrutiny Task and Finish Group members had found no policy reason to extend the scheme to cover support to Animal Trusts, however, they were eligible to apply to the Hardship Scheme if required.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members agreed to adopt the draft Discretionary Rate Relief Policy and Schedule 1 at Appendix A to the Agenda report.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: 36 in favour, 1 against, 0 abstentions)

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Spatial Planning advised that the waste collection vehicles had always been kept outside the Somerset Waste Partnership agreement in case of any default issues, so the partner councils could retain the ability to continue the waste collection service.  He also confirmed that Taunton Deane BC had agreed to advance half the funding towards replacing the waste vehicles and the loan would be repaid over seven years at 3.5% interest, which was a good rate of return in the current climate.

Councillor Derek Yeomans, as Chairman of the Somerset Waste Partnership, confirmed that a new design of waste vehicle would be purchased with an anticipated working life of seven years.

One Member felt that more cost effective ways of reducing packaging and so reducing waste should be sought and regretted that she could not support the recommendation.

On being put to the vote, the majority of Members were in support of the recommendations.

(Voting: 36 in favour, 1 against, 0 abstentions)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

Councillor Derek Yeomans, as Chairman of the Audit Committee, advised that the report had been presented to the Audit Committee and had received positive comments from the Council’s auditors.  He confirmed that the Council’s investments were being carefully scrutinised by officers.

There was no debate and Members unanimously approved the revised Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy for 2014/15. 

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Democratic Services advised that as the public and press were now able to record council meetings, it was sensible to have a policy in place and also for the Council to hold their own record of proceedings.  An audio recording was for the protection of Members, for information for the public unable to attend, and as a reference to offices after the meeting.  Webcasting of council meetings had been investigated but was considered too expensive at the current time.  

During discussion, Members welcomed the policy though some felt that all SSDC meeting should be webcast. 

In response to a question, the Assistant Director (Legal and Corporate Services) advised that although the policy encouraged the public to notify the Chairperson if they intended to make a recording, there was no requirement in the Act to compel them.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to agree to adopt the policy on audio/visual recording and photography at Council meetings

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Leader of Council advised that the proposed amendments to the Officers’ Scheme of Delegation were minor amendments to job titles to reflect organisational changes to service delivery and changes to legislation.

There was no debate and Members were content to agree the recommendations as proposed.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Assistant Director (Legal and Corporate Services) confirmed that the proposed recommendations of the review would be subject to a second short period of consultation and the results would be presented to Council in January 2015.

There was no debate and Members were content to confirm the recommendations for further public consultation.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The report of Executive decisions was noted.

The report was noted.

Councillor Derek Yeomans, Chairman of the Audit Committee presented the report of the Committee. 

The report was noted.

The report was noted.

Councillor Sue Steele, Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee presented the report of the Committee.  She noted that they had been very busy holding a number of Task and Finish reviews.

The report was noted.

The list of Chairman’s Engagements was noted.

The list of Chairman’s Engagements was noted.

There were no Motions submitted by Members.

There were no Motions submitted by Members.

There were no questions submitted under Procedure Rule 10.

There were no questions submitted under Procedure Rule 10.

There were no questions submitted under Procedure Rule 10.

Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the Full Council would take place on Thursday, 11^th December 2014 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 7.30 p.m.