Agenda item

Members considered the reports within the District Executive agenda for 6 February 2020 and made comments as detailed below. Responses to most questions were provided at Scrutiny Committee by the relevant officers except those marked by an asterisk.

SSDC Council Plan 2020-2024 (Agenda Item 6)

·         *Page 12, bullet point 1 – following the recent press release regarding the independent audit of the Transformation process at Somerset West and Taunton Council – members asked if a similar independent review would be undertaken at SSDC.

·         *Page 13 – members noted there were references to the ‘Digital Strategy’ and asked how the strategy had come about as the committee had no recollection of such a strategy. The budget for the digital strategy was queried as a significant budget was being requested that had not yet been formally approved.  Scrutiny Committee noted they were usually informed when a strategy was being formed, but at the current time felt the strategy had not been discussed or approved.

·         Page 17 - Priority project 5: Scrutiny members requested that updated milestones are taken back through committee once drafted..

·         Page 20 – priority project 8 – last bullet point under Q4 milestones – some members felt the wording should possibly include reference to delivery or installation.

·         Page 20 – priority project – some members queried if SSDC were looking further into the possibility of investing in ‘green’ projects / investments.

·         Page 23 – Area Chapter South under Environment theme – members felt reference to the example of Yeovil Rivers Community Trust should be removed.

2020/21 Draft Revenue and Capital Budgets and Medium Term Financial Plan (Agenda Item 7)

·         Scrutiny Committee made a general observation that the finance reports had not been published until the Wednesday prior to the Scrutiny meeting which had given members little time to fully read and consider the reports.

·         Cllr John Clark’s name is spelt incorrectly throughout the report and appendices.

·         *Page 29, para 15 – members noted the wording seemed to imply there may be a new strategy, but the wording didn’t seem to be ‘hard and fast’.

·         *Page 29, para 16 – there is mention again of the digital strategy – see comments raised under the Council Plan item.

·         Page 42, para 75 – Scrutiny Committee requested for the government guidance regarding investment activity by local authorities be circulated to members for information. Some members queried if the likelihood of government limiting commercial investments was known?

·         Page 30, para 23 – members queried if the move to a targeted approach aligned to planning performance would have a big impact for SSDC?

·         Page 53 – members sought clarity about what the Enforcement & Compliance function included, and particularly what budget was specifically allocated for planning enforcement.

·         Various pages – a member noted there were multiple references to Birchfield Leachate Pumping Station in several appendices, and highlighted that there was a project group but it had not met for a considerable time. Given the funding being requested it was felt the group should reconvene. (it was generally agreed that the suggestion to reconvene the project group should be highlighted to Area South Committee).

·         Page 114, 1c – members sought clarity about whether new parking machines were proposed or upgrades to the current machines.

Capital, Investment and Treasury Strategies 2020/21 to 2022/23 (Agenda Item 8)

·         Page 131 – table 3 – members noted the position of the S.106 monies,but queried why the figure for CIL was showing zero as it was understood CIL monies were now being actively collected?

·         Members noted that Audit Committee had already considered the report – Scrutiny members felt it would be useful in the future if they could have sight of the Audit Committee comments for information.

2019/20 Revenue Budget Monitoring Report for the Period Ending 31 December 2019 (Agenda Item 9)

·         Page 184 – table 1 – Car Parking - some members sought clarity for the reasons for the decline in car parking income. Acknowledging that less use of car parks may be a factor, some members queried if work was being done to look at the impact of decreased use?

·         *Page 185 – table 1 – Building Control – members queried the status / progress of the business plan following the peer review.

·         Page 185 – table 1 – Development Management – members queried what is being done to recruit permanent staff to reduce  agency costs in the future?

2019/20 Capital Budget Monitoring Report for the Period Ending 31 December 2019 (Agenda Item 10)

·         No queries were raised except points of detail which were answered by the Interim S151 Officer at the meeting.

Corporate Performance Report 2019-20: 3^rd Quarter (Agenda Item 11)

·         Members sought reassurance that in the future there would be indicators for planning enforcement and planning validation times.

·         Page 227 – members queried if there was any progress regarding the sourcing of figures at a district level, as the footnote suggested this was still being explored. If the figures would not be available it was suggested that the footnote be removed.

·         Page 223 – PCS9 – supporting information column – members sought clarity regarding the days specified – was it working days or calendar days?

·         Some members commented that the figures for planning under protecting core services looked quite good on paper, however, in practical terms it wasn’t what they were experiencing as ward members judging from communications with parishes and the public etc. It was felt the targets may be painting the wrong picture.

·         Scrutiny Committee noted that at several previous meetings additional indicators had been suggested. Members asked if future potential new indictors could be discussed with Scrutiny Committee prior to going to live, in order to ensure requested information is captured and monitored.

Time Extensions to Public Space Protection Orders for Dog Fouling, Dogs on Leads and Dog Exclusion Area (Agenda Item 12)

·         *Members sought clarity as to how the Orders are enforced, and that there are adequate resources available for enforcement.

Future of Local Government in Somerset (Agenda Item 13)

·         *Some members made a general observation that there seemed to be an assumption that only two tiers of local authority involved – district and county. They felt further research should be undertaken regarding the impact and opportunity for involving  third tier local authorities such as large town councils.

·         *Scrutiny Committee recommend that the wording of recommendation C be amended to include that the Project Board give consideration to involving third tier authorities in discussions.

District Executive Forward Plan (Agenda Item 14)

·      No comments.