Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, Brympton Way, YEOVIL, Somerset BA20 2HT
Contact: Angela Cox 01935 462148 Email: angela.cox@southsomerset.gov.uk
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Minutes of Previous Meeting To approve as a correct record the minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 6th November 2014. Minutes: The minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 6th November 2014, 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 Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Peter Gubbins, Shane Pledger and Sylvia Seal. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest 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. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest made. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Question Time 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. Minutes: There were no questions from members of the public present. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chairman's Announcements Minutes: The Chairman reminded Members that the meeting would be audio recorded. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Presentation from the Environment Agency on Flooding trigger points PDF 20 KB Decision:
Minutes: The Chairman introduced Sam Dawe and Robbie Williams from the Environment Agency, who provided Members with a short presentation on flooding trigger points on the Somerset levels. In response to questions, Mrs Dawe and Mr Williams replied:- · The levels of water held on the Levels (called pens) were higher in the summer than in the winter, although some designated areas were kept higher for wildlife during the winter and landowners were compensated for this. These levels were being checked at the moment in preparation for any future flooding. · The Scrutiny Committee at Sedgemoor DC recently challenged the Internal Drainage Boards to prove that the water levels were not having a negative effect upon flooding in their area and that report would be circulated to all Members. · The water levels along the river Sowy were controlled by man and when the sluice gates were closed there would be a short term tidal effect on that river level. · If the same volume of water fell again as in the previous winter, there would still be some flooding but the effect should be shorter due to the dredging and improved pumping. · The Environment Agency now had 3 reliable suppliers of pumps which it could call upon at short notice when required. · Due to improved drainage on farms, the speed in which water reached the rivers would have an impact, however, the pumping stations should cope with this. At the conclusion of the debate, Members noted that the Levels were historically designed to flood to cope with the winter weather in the area. The Chairman thanked Mrs Dawe and Mr Williams for their comprehensive presentation and responses to Members questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents:
Decision:
Minutes: The Chairman advised that the establishment of a Somerset Rivers Authority was moving at a very fast pace and he drew Member attention to the supplemental report and revised recommendations circulated at short notice. He said although the Government were offering funding, there was no future commitment from them and so it was proposed that he and the Chief Executive would make an urgent decision to contribute towards the 2015-16 funding of the Somerset Rivers Authority in order to draw down Government funding. The Strategic Director (Operations and Customer Focus) explained that initially it had been anticipated that the Somerset Rivers Authority would be established in April 2016, however, there was now the opportunity to lever in £2.7m of Government funding for a common works programme of ongoing maintenance for one year so there was a need to establish it much sooner. Other Authorities in Somerset had agreed their part of the interim funding. She introduced Mr Martin Buckle of the Somerset Rivers Authority Project who answered questions of detail. The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee said they were pleased to note the progress of the Somerset Rivers Authority and agreed with the proposals for its establishment, however, they expressed some concern of the title ‘Authority’ when there was as yet no legislation giving any such body any ‘authority’. During discussion, varying views were expressed. Some Members were in agreement to progress the establishment of the Somerset Rivers Authority whilst other expressed disquiet at the lack of detail of the responsibilities, set up costs and project work of the organisation. The Chairman confirmed these details were in place but were not currently published. It was proposed to amend recommendation 3 to note that an urgent decision may be taken by the Chief Executive and Leader and at the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to agree the amended recommendations of the supplemental report.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarterly Performance and Complaints Monitoring Report - 2nd Quarter 2014/15 PDF 341 KB Additional documents: Decision:
Minutes: The Performance Officer advised that there had only been one performance exception during the quarter period relating to the percentage of planning appeal decisions allowed against the authorities decision to refuse, to which the Development Manager had responded. The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee said they had received a presentation and explanation of the planning appeals process from the Development Manager and were satisfied with his explanation of the performance exception. The Committee had also been pleased to note the low number of complaints received by the Council. The Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Democratic Services advised that 98% of planning applications were determined without issue and he had requested that an update of planning appeals performance was reported to each Area Committee. At the conclusion of the debate, Members were pleased to note the quarterly corporate performance monitoring report.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non Domestic (Business) Rate Pooling PDF 390 KB Additional documents: Decision:
Minutes: The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Spatial Planning reminded Members that SSDC had investigated business rate pooling the previous year but at that time the risks had outweighed the benefits. He drew their attention to recommendation B and the possibility to make an urgent decision to withdraw from the pooling arrangement once the Government’s rate support grant figure was known and, if the risks could not be mitigated. The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) confirmed that all local authorities were investigating their options regarding business rate pooling and it was important that the Council chose the right partners. Although the Government had to agree to the pooling proposal, at the current time it appeared that approximately £1m funding would be retained within Somerset. There was no debate and Members were content to recommend the report to Full Council.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional Revenues Team Resources PDF 208 KB Decision:
Minutes: The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Spatial Planning advised that there had been significant legislative change within the Revenues and Benefits service which had created additional work. He confirmed that the Audit Committee supported the recommendations and he drew Members attention to the significant increase in the amount of Council Tax to be collected Scrutiny Committee commented that they were happy to support the recommendations to ensure the effective delivery of this statutory service. In response to questions from Members, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that:- · SSDC Council Tax arrears figure was £2.4m at the end of March 2014. · Bailiff fees were changed to the customer, not SSDC. · SSDC did have a call down contract with Capita to cope with peaks in workloads but this was more than a peak. · It took approximately 6 to 9 month to train a Revenues Officer. At the conclusion of the debate, Members were pleased to confirm the four additional officers to the establishment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Right to Bid - Assets of Community Value PDF 186 KB Decision:
Minutes: There was no debate and Members were pleased to note the report of the register of Assets of Community Value.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monthly Performance Snapshot PDF 276 KB Decision:
Minutes: Members were pleased to note the monthly performance snapshot data.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District Executive Forward Plan PDF 78 KB Additional documents: Decision:
Minutes: Members noted the following additions to the Executive Forward Plan and Consultation database:- · Review of Policy for Awarding Private Sector Housing Grants, Loans and other assistance – February 2015 · LED Contract Price (Confidential) – February 2015 · Bellwin scheme of emergency financial assistance to local authorities · Consultation from Somerset County Council to cease Housing Related Support
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date of Next Meeting PDF 17 KB Minutes: Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the District Executive would take place on Thursday 8th January 2015 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 9.30 a.m.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exclusion of Press and Public PDF 72 KB Decision:
Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Delivery of the Car Parking Strategy (Confidential) Decision:
Minutes: The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Spatial Planning advised that the Car Parking Strategy identified a shortfall of car parking and the proposal would allow an extension to the existing car park. At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to agree the recommendations of the report.
|