Agenda item

The Scrutiny Committee considered the reports contained in the District Executive Agenda for the 4 February 2016 and made the following comments:

Somerset Waste Partnership – Draft Business Plan (Agenda item 6)

·         Members

·         were reassured that SSDC would be continuing with the current local arrangements for a discounted rate if a green waste bin was purchased for two years.

·         Members suggested that there could be a more high profile publicity campaign to promote higher recycling rates and noted that social media campaigns are generally better received than mass mail outs.

·         Members were concerned about the potential impact of the new service delivery model proposals on families with young children – especially in relation to the disposal of nappies etc. Members were reassured that SSDC would continue to offer individual solutions to such issues but asked that due consideration be given to the issue by the Board prior to any final decisions being taken.

·         Members sought assurance that adequate Equalities Impact Assessment information would come forward prior to members being asked to approve any new Service Delivery Model.

Revenue Budget 2016/17 (Agenda item 7)

·         Members queried what proportion of the RSG had been made up by the Rural Support Grant?

·         Members noted the increased risk levels facing the authority and were reassured by the s151 officer’s actions to mitigate these risks and the judicious use of Volatility fund and other balances.

·         Members in particular noted the risk represented by the potential for NHS Foundation Trusts to be given charity status and therefore the ability to claim up to 80% mandatory relief – back dated!

·         Members sought clarification that the 4 key projects mentioned at paragraph 13 were sufficiently resourced?

·         Regarding the Transformation fund of £2.5 million, members sought clarification as to how this reserve would be allocated and what return on investment is expected?

·         Best practice states that effective budget Scrutiny should look to ensure adequate resources have been allocated for the delivery of Corporate priorities – in the absence of an updated Corporate Plan members sought clarification as to when a refreshed Corporate Plan would be produced?

·         Members thanked the 151 officer and her team for all their hard work in the challenging circumstances.

Funding for SSVCA (Agenda item 8)

·         Members noted the proposals for SSVCA to incorporate both Mendip’s and Sedgemoor’s VCA’s and sought assurance that both Mendip and Sedgemoor District Councils would continue to provide current levels of funding going forward? Members were concerned that SSDC could in future be asked to contribute increased funding to a larger organisation, providing services in other districts.

·         Members were concerned that there is potential duplication with the work of Community Council for Somerset and the SSDC Area Development Teams.

·         Members noted the considerable amount of work that had been undertaken in order to review the current arrangements and thanked the officers involved. They noted that it is vital that accurate evidence regarding the impact of the SSVCA is captured before any future funding decisions are made, with particular focus on ensuring there is no duplication with SSDC services, to prevent SSDC effectively paying twice.

·         Members were pleased to note the intention to work towards a managed reduction in funding to the SSVCA.

2015/16 Capital Budget Monitoring Report for the Quarter Ending 31 December 2015 (Agenda item 9)

·         It was noted that Scrutiny Members have the ability to review outstanding Capital projects on a quarterly basis and this needs to be a robust process to ensure the best use of capital.

2015-16 Revenue Budget Monitoring Report for the Quarter Ending 31 December 2015 (Agenda item 10)

No comments

Community Infrastructure Levy – Draft Charging Schedule (Agenda item 11)

·         The Committee noted that the consultation document would be amended to make it clear that developments of less than 6 dwellings would be liable for both the CIL and payments under HG3/4 as viability studies have shown such an approach is feasible.

·         Members also queried if the definition of ‘self-builder’ could be clarified within the document?

Westland Leisure Complex – Progress Report (Agenda item 12)

Before considering this item it was proposed and seconded that the Committee move into confidential session.

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 this item 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).

·         Members noted the amount of work that has been done to progress this project and that the project is on course to be delivered on time and within budget.

·         Members asked if the Project Board had given consideration to incorporate PV installation in the design of the venue, members appreciate that a separate PV business case would need to be brought forward but feel significant savings could be made if PV installation and building works were done concurrently?

·         Members noted that whilst it is disappointing that Brympton Parish Council have declined to make a financial contribution to the project, it has not affected the viability of the project.

·         Members also noted the assurance from the Assistant Director that the Sport England bid is looking promising and if successful, will cover the risk of unbanked s106 monies in phase two of the project.

The Proposed Leasing of 72 South Street, Yeovil (Agenda item 13)

No comments.

Transfer of responsibility for Pathways and Footbridge at Cocklemoor, Langport (Agenda item 14)

No comments.