Agenda item

Members considered the reports within the District Executive agenda for 1 February 2018 and made comments including:

SSDC Council Action Plan 2018-19 (Agenda item 6)

·      Para 2.9 – Members were disappointed that rural businesses, land based businesses and agriculture did not feature more prominently in the Action Plan given that so much of the district is of a rural nature.

·      Broadband – several members felt this was more a key performance indicator for County and the LEP, as broadband is something that can be promoted by SSDC rather than administered.

·      Scrutiny queried what role SSDC was playing in the iAero project.

·      Page 12, priority 1 – regarding satisfaction rates, members queried if dis-satisfaction and complaints would continue to be monitored.

·      Members sought reassurance that there will be some directly comparable performance indicators, so that we can benchmark against other appropriate local authorities.

·      Members asked if data would be available at a district level or whether, in time, it would be possible to drill down to a lower level such as wards and specific service provision.

·      Members also sought reassurance that customer service data will continue to be measured in order to facilitate improvements being made or ensuring adequate capacity. eg. How long callers waiting, calls abandoned etc.

·      It was noted that customers contacting us by telephone now receive a recorded message indicating the time to be connected to an advisor. It is suggested that if a caller chooses to hang up after the message it should be recorded differently to an abandoned call, as the customer has made an informed choice to hang-up.

·      Member suggested that a performance monitor was measured for those activities that SSDC is specifically responsible for with regard to anti-social behaviour and make it clear in any reports – what constitutes anti-social behaviour so the measure is more meaningful to residents.

2018/19 Draft Revenue and Capital Budgets and Medium Term Financial Plan (Agenda item 7)

·      Members asked for some clarity and further explanation regarding the figures relating to New Homes Bonus within the report.

·      With regard to the Government 4 year settlement, Scrutiny queried if there was still doubt about funding for Year 5 onwards?

·      Page 21, para 23 – Members found elements of the table difficult to understand. It was suggested a short narrative for sub headings in the table may be useful or possibly to see if there is any alternative way of presenting the information.

·      Page 17 - Scrutiny felt the wording of Recommendation 4b was a little confusing as it wasn’t clear if the £1.85 for the SRA is part of, or in addition to, the Council Tax increase of £5.

·      Scrutiny were content that the recommendations go forward.

2017/18 Revenue Budget Monitoring Report for the Quarter Ending 31 December 2017 (Agenda item 8)

·      Scrutiny did not raise any queries, and were content that the recommendations go forward.

2017/18 Capital Budget Monitoring Report for the Quarter Ending 31 December 2017 (Agenda item 9)

·      Scrutiny did not raise any queries, and were content that the recommendations go forward.

District-Wide Strategic Grants – Proposal for Two-Year Funding Agreements With Access for All, CASS and SPARK 2018-2020 (Agenda item 10)

·      Scrutiny sought reassurance about how the performance is measured and reviewed for each of the organisations.

·      Members endorsed comments made by the Portfolio Holder at the Scrutiny Committee, and noted the role of CASS was crucial and should continue to be supported by SSDC.

·      Scrutiny noted the grants to be awarded would be the same as previous years and so effectively the organisations were absorbing inflation, hence effectively year on year we were granting them less.

·      Some members sought reassurance that the funding to CASS was appropriate given that they were now helping more clients especially since the roll-out of Universal Credit.

Loan to Somerset Care & Repair Ltd (Agenda item 11)

·      Scrutiny were encouraged by the project as it would help to address the challenges of the new Homelessness Reduction Act.  It was also noted how the social attributes of the company complimented the aims of SSDC.

·      Members did query if once a unit was rented out to someone whether it would be on a permanent basis or for a defined length of time?

Food Hygiene Rating Scheme – Cost Recovery for Requested Re-Inspections (Agenda item 12)

·      Scrutiny sought some clarity about the scheme and queried if re-visits were just for the purposes of a business trying to gain a higher rating?

·      Members queried how the £115 fee had been derived at, and whether it would be an SSDC figure or one that would be more widely used.

Commercial Property, Land and Development – Performance Management Indicators (PMI) Report (Agenda item 13)

·      Page 140, PMI 1b – Members acknowledged that estimating the spend required would be a big unknown for some properties.

·      Members asked for clarification of how information relating to PMIs 1a - 1d would be detailed in the overarching Performance Monitoring.

District Executive Forward Plan (Agenda item 14)

·      Scrutiny made no comments.

CONFIDENTIAL – Exclusion of the Press and Public

In accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), the Committee resolved that the press and public be excluded from the following items in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, i.e. “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

Commercial Services & Income Generation Update (Confidential) (Agenda item 17)

·         Scrutiny made several comments in confidential session.