Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7^th January 2016.

The minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7^th January 2016, copes 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 were received from Councillors Shane Pledger and Sylvia Seal.

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.

There were no declarations of interest made. 

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.

Mr Geoff Cole, Chairman of Yeovil Athletics Club, spoke in support of the capital bid to upgrade the Joanna France building and the Bill Whistlecroft Athletics Arena at Yeovil Recreation Ground (Agenda item 7 – Revenue Budget 2016/17 – Medium Term Financial Plan and Capital Programme).  He said the club had been established for 45 years and they had a growing membership so there was a need to upgrade their facilities.

Mr Justin Bennett of East Coker Parish Council spoke regarding Agenda item 11 – Community Infrastructure Levy – Draft Charging Schedule.  He said the suggestion in the proposed charging schedule to have a zero Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) in the Yeovil Sustainable Urban Extensions was very concerning to them.  Although he had spoken to officers regarding the proposal, he felt that a combination of Section 106 obligation and CIL would be more binding on developers and would allow for low cost housing. 

The Chairman advised that he and the Strategic Director (Operations and Customer Focus) had attended a public event about improvements to the Sowy river and King Sedgemoor Drain the previous day.

He had also taken a drive around Yeovil in the company of the SSC Councillor and the County Highway Officer to view the potential problems which could occur during the road improvements at the Hospital roundabout.   

(Voting: 7 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

Mr Steve Read, Managing Director of the Somerset Waste Partnership (SWP), provided Members with a short presentation on the Recycle More kerbside recycling to be started shortly within the SSDC area, the renegotiation of their contract with Viridor and other waste providers as an alternative to using landfill sites, and the number of waste minimisation activities being undertaken by them.

In response to questions from Members, the Managing Director advised:-

·         The move to a 3 weekly collection of household waste had the potential to save thousands of pounds once agreement had been reached with a contractor. 

·         A new law which prohibits charging the public to use Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC’s) had recently been introduced and the Partnership had until 2020 to cease charging at Crewkerne HWRC.  Prior to this happening, local consultation would take place. 

·         It was currently possible to register two vehicles per household who could use the HWRC’s.

·         Viridor were seeking to consolidate their 11 landfill sites across the country into 3 and one would probably be at Wallpole in Somerset, so, it was inevitable that the Dimmer site would close eventually. 

·         The aging fleet of collection vehicles inevitably required more maintenance which sometimes impacted upon waste collection rounds and he would speak to the contractor regarding the impact of missed collections on Fridays. 

·         If Viridor did not secure the Somerset Waste Partnership’s contract then the site at Dimmer would still remain a commercial facility and although there would be restrictions on the tonnage of waste, it would not be restricted to receiving waste from a geographical area.

·         Transferring waste by rail was not economically viable within the Somerset Waste Partnership.

·         The Carymoor Environmental Centre provided educational waste training for school groups as budget restrictions had pared back this work by the SWP.

·         Somerset County Council arranged for the removal of fly-tipped asbestos and plaster board and they accepted this as a small risk. 

At the conclusion of the debate, the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Economic Development thanked the Managing Director of the Somerset Waste Partnership for attending and answering Members questions.  She also noted that Members could speak at their Town and Parish Council meetings to encourage more recycling in their communities.   The majority of Members were content to confirm the Somerset Waste Partnership Draft Business Plan 2016-21 on behalf of the authority.

(Voting: 7 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Legal Services introduced the report and noted that the overall budget had reduced by 28% in real time cash savings compared to the 2008/09 budget, with no reduction in front line services.  He also drew Members attention to the proposed 1.95% increase in Council Tax and the 1.25% for the Somerset Rivers Authority.

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that the impact of recent business rate appeals was affecting the Council’s reserves, however there were still sufficient balances to meet risks. 

In response to questions from the Scrutiny Committee, it was confirmed that:-

·         The Rural Service Delivery Grant was £32,000 in the current financial year and was expected to be £41,000 in the next financial year.

·         Optimising future Council income would form a central part of the new Council Plan which would be finalised following the decision to join with Sedgemoor DC.

·         The risk of business rate appeals coming forward from NHS Trusts was significant.

·         Further information on the money allocated to the transformation project would be presented at the next District Executive meeting on 3^rd March 2016.

In response to questions from Members, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) and Chairman confirmed that:-

·         The £2.5 million set aside for transformation would be funded from capital reserves.

·         Although the Motion at Council to investigate a free period of up to two hours free parking in SSDC car parks was not taken forward in the budget, the automatic number plate recognition system due to be introduced would allow more intelligent parking systems in the future.

·         There was no restriction to a list of preferred contractors on large SSDC procurement contracts. 

• SSDC was signed up to the Prompt Payment Code to pay suppliers on time.

At the conclusion of the debate, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) agreed to provide a briefing note on the Council’s Procurement Policy and to provide statistics on the Council’s prompt payments to contractors.

The Chairman noted that the SSVCA were one of two organisations grant supported each year as they provided services to the community which SSDC did not.

The Assistant Director (Communities) advised that a review of the funding options for the SSVCA had taken place and it was proposed that SSDC now only provided core funding for the organisation in the future.  A new funding report for 2017/18 would be presented to District Executive in January 2017 with a reduced funding figure. 

In response to a question from the Scrutiny Committee, the Assistant Director (Communities) advised that the work of the SSVCA differed from the Community Council for Somerset who provided an excellent village hall advisory service within the SSDC area. 

Ms Catherine Nolan of the SSVCA thanked Members for their support to the organisation.  She said the voluntary sector was facing a challenging time as statutory services started to rely upon them.  Small groups often operated on less than £10,000 per year and the SSVCA gave them the skills and support to continue and to access funding.  They also held a database of voluntary groups to which potential volunteers could be matched to and they also acted as a conduit at a strategic level to build links between unrelated groups. 

The Third Sector and Partnership Co-ordinator said it was crucial to keep the SSVCA as they were the infrastructure behind many voluntary groups and although this was an important organisation, its reliance on local authority funding should be reduced.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members were content to confirm the proposed allocation of funding to the SSVCA for 2016/17.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Legal Services introduced the report, noting that the Section 106 deposits by developers was likely to change as building projects were completed.

In response to a question, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that there was an agreement with the Joint Cemetery and Crematorium Committee where SSDC retained the crematorium income in return for funding their capital programme. 

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee noted that they had the ability to review the outstanding capital projects on a quarterly basis.

At the conclusion of the debate Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report. 

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Legal Services introduced the report, noting that there was a small underspend forecast and the recommendations were to be noted. 

In response to questions, the Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that:-

·         The loss of car parking spaces at Horsey Lane would equate to a cost of approximately £5,000p.a. income.

·         The Council Tax collection rate had exceeded the previous years rate which was due to the four additional Revenue staff employed.

·         Members could decide when the budget outturn report was presented if they wished to retain the SSDC Flood Reserve in light of the Somerset Rivers authority precept.

At the conclusion of the debate Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report. 

The Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning (Place Making) emphasised that the proposed draft charging schedule was for consultation and any changes would be evidenced based and subject to examination and approval by an independent inspector. 

The Principal Spatial Planner drew Members attention to the proposed Draft Charging Schedule on page 278 of the agenda which proposed a zero levy of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on development at the Yeovil Sustainable Urban Extensions and the Chard Eastern Development Area.  All other residential development would attract £40 per sqm.  He also noted the proposed draft instalment policy which would allow both SSDC and developers to manage the CIL payments due.  The consultation period would be 6 weeks in line with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement. 

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

·         Larger development sites with significant on-site construction costs and on-site infrastructure costs could be rendered unviable by CIL contributions therefore it was proposed to have Section 106 for these sites.

·         Self-build developments were exempt from CIL but they would have to go through a process to prove that they were self-builders. 

·         The purpose of CIL was to help mitigate the impact of development in an area and the concept of Community Benefit from development did not exist.

·         The two development sites proposed for Yeovil were so significant that the imposition of CIL would make them unviable and so they would not occur.

It was noted that the consultation responses would be presented to the District Executive and a further debate could be held then.  It was also requested that Plain English be added to the document wherever possible.  At the conclusion of the debate Members were content to confirm the Community Infrastructure Levy Draft Charging Schedule for public consultation.

The Assistant Director (Leisure and Culture) advised that the Chairman of Finnmeccanica was expected to sign the lease agreement with SSDC imminently.   Grant funding was almost secured from Sport England and Badminton England to refurbish facilities at the site and discussions were taking place with the England County Cricket Board to refurbish the cricket pavilion.  The Heads of Terms and Business Plan would be presented to District Executive in March 2016 as there had been some changes to the terms previously agreed. 

During discussion, it was noted that:-

·         It was disappointing that Brympton Parish Council had declined to contribute to the project.

·         SSDC would apply for a license for the site at the appropriate time.

·         A further update report was due to be presented at the Area South Committee in March 2016.

·         A press release should be issued when the lease agreement was signed which would also provide an update to local clubs and societies and could give an indication when the sporting facilities were likely to re-open.

·         If energy saving measures were introduced at the site during the refurbishment there would considerable savings in energy. 

At the conclusion of the debate Members were pleased to note the progress report.

The Chairman introduced the report and asked if Members had any questions.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee confirmed they were pleased to see the reuse of the building.

There was no debate and Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised the report proposed the transfer of licences and land to the Langport Town Council.

There was no debate and Members were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.

Members were content to note the monthly news snapshot information.

Members noted the following additions and amendments to the Executive Forward Plan:

•      Westland Leisure Complex update – March 2016

•      Somerset Waste Partnership New Waste Collection Model – move to April 2016

Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the District Executive would take place on Thursday 3^rd March 2016 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 9.30 a.m.