Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Robin Bastable, Neil Bloomfield, Malcolm Cavill, Henry Hobhouse, Mike Lock, Pauline Lock, Graham Oakes, Wes Read, Alan Smith and Lucy Trimnell.

To approve and sign the minutes of the previous meeting held on Thursday, 25 March 2021.

The minutes of the Council meeting held on 25^th March 2021, copies of which had been previously circulated, were approved as a correct record of the meeting and would be signed by the Chairman.

In accordance with the Council's current Code of Conduct (as amended 26 February 2015), 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.

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.  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. 

There were no declarations of interest made by Members.

A local resident addressed Council. He said the information from the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) stated that their proposals for the reorganisation of local government in Somersetconsultation would close on 19^th April and he asked if Council had written to the Minister to extend the deadline to allow for the result of the proposed referendum to be properly considered as part of the decision making process.  He asked what the response had been from the Minister?  He also asked what the full cost of publicising and conducting the poll would be and what the Council hoped to achieve in conducting a poll after the current consultation had concluded?

The Leader of Council said she would provide a full written response to the resident.  The Secretary of State had been informed of the possibility of a referendum and the delay was due to the limited list of consultees listed in the Government’s consultation. 

The Chairman advised that following the death of HRH Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, the previous week, a joint statement had been released by the Leader of Council and himself and he would be representing the Council at a service of Thanksgiving for the Duke at Wells Cathedral the following day.  A two minute silence would be observed to recognise his life, service and in memory and honour of the Duke. 

A two minutes silence was observed by Council.

The Chairman also mentioned the sad passing of Ann Carroll, wife of Tim Carroll, who had been the Leader and Deputy Leader of South Somerset District Council for a number of years. 

The Chairman then paid tribute to the Director for Place, Martin Woods, who would shortly be retiring from South Somerset District Council after over 40 years of service.  He noted that he had started work in 1980 for Yeovil District Council as an Assistant Planning Officer and he continued with his career in various roles, concluding as Director for Place.  He said that many Councillors would remember working with him and wished him the best in his future.

The Leader of Council, the Leader of the Conservative Group and the Leader of the Independent Group all joined the Chairman in thanking the Director for Place for his service and wishing him well in his retirement.

Councillor Sarah Dyke, as Portfolio Holder for Environment, noted that it had been a number of months since Council had received an update on the work being undertaken as part of the Environment Strategy and she invited officers to make the presentation.

With the aid of a power point presentation, the Lead Specialist for Environment and the Leisure and Recreation Manager updated Members on some of their key achievements over the last 6 months.  They thanked Members for their support, including from the Scrutiny task and finish group to deliver on the Council priority.  Some of their key achievements over the last 6 months:

Carbon footprint -

We have previously reported that our baseline carbon footprint in 2018-19 was 1650.42 tonnes CO2 equivalent. Our annual target to get to carbon neutrality by 2030 is 105 each year. You will remember we met that last year and we are confident we will do so again for 2020-21.  We do not yet have the figures available but we are now collating energy and fuel use data and would hope to be in position to report that at our next update at June Full Council

Energy retrofit and supply -

In order to continually drive down our carbon footprint we need to find ways to cut our energy use.  In October we reported that we had received the energy audit report from Engie on some of our buildings.  After that meeting an opportunity became available to apply for a grant under the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme.  The deadlines for pulling for application together were very short but with the work we had already with Engie we were able to partner with them to submit an application for energy improvement measures across our own estate.

After some nail biting weeks were finally heard we were successful in securing £3,993,846.  Work is now underway to complete the detailed design phase of that project.  Work is due to be complete by end September this year.  There is a whole project team working on delivering this right across the organisation. The main works will involve decarbonising heating to ground or air source heat pumps, solar PV installation, LED lighting and some insulation work.

At the same time we have exploring how to switch our energy contract to a fully renewable supplier. This proved more complicated than was first anticipated and so we now have a Scrutiny Task and Finish group working on a project to assess the available options and make some recommendations.  This is a crucial part of the work to meet our sustainability and carbon target as we move away from gas use.

Community Climate Activity  -

Whilst much of our work has been around our own carbon footprint we are also looking at ways to support our community to become more carbon neutral as well.  As part of that work we also submitted an application to the Local Authority Delivery Green Homes Grant.  We were again successful in being awarded a grant of £803K  ...  view the full minutes text for item 262.

(Voting: 37 in favour, 11 against, 0 abstentions)

The Leader of Council, as Portfolio Holder for Strategy and Housing, introduced two representatives from PA Consulting who gave a short presentation on the response to the One Somerset proposal.  She outlined the history of the unitary authority proposal and the submission by the District Councils which had been agreed by Council in December 2020.  The Government were consulting on the two proposals and that would conclude on 19^th April. 

Mr Luke Muir and Clare Tew of PA Consulting made a short presentation on the response to the One Somerset proposal.  They outlined the approach to writing the response, the methodology, the evidence and the analysis.  (slides attached)

In response to questions,

·         The basis for the decision by the Secretary of State was not yet known.

·         Central Government Departments were likely to have an established process for scoring and reviewing the business cases and it was likely they would be looking at the tests sent to the District Councils and would measure the effectiveness of each in a structured and robust way.  They would also be looking for evidence to support the claims made in the business cases.

·         There would be a rational given along with the decision made but the full analysis may not be published in full.

·         The One Somerset business case at point 6.5 on page 78 proposed 100 councillors in their new unitary authority, but, this would be subject to the Boundary Commission for England review to determine.

·         In the One Somerset business case, the intention was to base the Local Community Networks around the existing Primary Care Networks, but a localist approach would involve talking to local communities about the projects they wished to take on and base the Local Community Networks around those.

·         There was an appendix to the One Somerset business case which detailed the methodology and findings but this was not available in relation to the public consultation survey conducted. 

During discussion, the Leader of Council confirmed that:-

·         the full report and appendix would be submitted as the response to the MHCLG. 

·         It was evident that there was no ambitious devolution deal in the One Somerset business case which was part of economic growth. 

·         Part of the Stronger Somerset business case was the two unitary authorities joining with others to form a combined authority.to achieve a devolution deal. 

·         North Somerset and BANES may be interested in joining a combined authority.

·         All the Somerset District Councils were considering the same report and some had already agreed it, therefore any changes proposed would need to be checked with the other authorities.

During discussion the following points were made:

·         There were a number of errors in the report on the One Somerset proposal.

·         The Conservative Group would be making their own representations to the Secretary of State on the consultation proposals.

The Leader of Council thanked the two representatives from PA Consulting for attending the Council meeting and for answering Members questions.  She proposed the recommendations and they were seconded by Councillor Peter  ...  view the full minutes text for item 263.

This item was deferred to a later meeting of the Full Council.

The Leader of Council, as Portfolio Holder for Strategy and Housing, advised that in light of the Secretary of State’s letter received late on 12^th April and the specific and detailed legal issues raised therein, it was necessary to obtain further legal advice by means of Leading Counsel’s opinion to ensure Members had full and thorough legal advice when reaching their decision on such a significant issue.  Therefore in relation to the proposed District Executive and Council decisions to hold a local referendum on the proposals for the future of Local Government in Somerset, the item would be deferred to a future date to consider the matter further with the benefit of legal advice.  A separate meeting would be convened when the complete legal advice was available. 

It was noted that the item was deferred to a later meeting of Council.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Legal Services advised that the report was brought forward due to the significant difference to the Medium Term Financial plan from the expected financial position.  Some provisions had been made in the budget but the market responses received were different and it would provide a stronger recovery after the initial investment to provide a better service.  The additional finance was affordable, and the funding needed in the first two years could be funded from the MTFP Support Fund, which was a reserve set aside for pressures such as this.

The Portfolio Holder for Health and Well-Being introduced the report and advised that the process had started over 12 months ago, but due to the COVID-19 pandemic it had been delayed.  He thanked the Specialist for Strategic Planning and her team for the work they had completed to bring the proposal forward.  Under the previous contract, the maintenance liability of the leisure buildings had previously been the responsibility of SSDC but this was being passed to the new leisure provider which would result in efficiencies in officer time and savings to the revenue budget.  Support would be provided to the new operator through the COVID-19 process but this should result in income to SSDC in year 3.  The capital investment at the sites would be necessary for the operator to achieve the revenue returns projected and would significantly improve the customer experience, with new exercise equipment, and improved group exercise facilities.  The operator would deliver active programmes in target areas outside the centres and they would support the physical and mental health needs of the community as it recovered from the pandemic and years beyond.

The Specialist for Strategic Planning stressed this was a different contract to the previous one as it specified delivery of active programmes outside the centres.  It would help to address some inequalities across the district.  Investment was planned for the 3 centres of Wincanton, Goldenstones and at the Westland sport and fitness centre.

In response to questions from Members, the Specialist for Strategic Planning advised:-

·         The successful leisure provider had committed to hold their prices and would review this in line with inflation in January 2022.

·         When centres were closed due to the pandemic in 2020, the previous operator had suspended customer’s direct debit payments.  Any membership credits would be carried forward and honoured by the new operator.

At the conclusion of the debate, the recommendations were proposed by Councillor Mike Best and seconded by Councillor Peter Seib and when put the vote, were unanimously confirmed by all Members.

(Voting: 45 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

The Leader of Council noted that a case was being presented to the High Court by Lawyers in Local Government and the Association of Democratic Services Officers to preserve the right for local authorities to continue to be able to make decisions via remote meetings beyond 6^th May 2021 when the current legislation (Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panel Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020)expired.  She noted that theCouncil had previously agreed to allocate certain executive and non-executive matters to others, and it was important that these changes were made clear on the face of the Constitution.  She proposed that the Council’s Constitution be amended to allow remote meetings to function as consultative bodies and delegate decisions, including Executive and Quasi-Judicial decisions, that would have been taken by those meetingsto the Chief Executive (or the relevant Director in the Chief Executive’s absence).  This delegated authority would expire on 31 July 2021 unless continued by a future decision of this Council.

She proposed the recommendations with the amendment that the Annual Meeting date be changed to be held on 5^th May 2021.  This was seconded by Councillor Adam Dance. 

There were no questions from Members and a named vote was taken.  The recommendations were confirmed by 44 in favour, 0 against and 1 abstention.

(Voting: 44 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

There were no Motions submitted by Members.

There were no Motions submitted by Members.

There were no questions submitted under Procedure Rule 10.

There were no questions submitted under Procedure Rule 10.

Members noted that the Annual meeting of the Full Council would take place on Wednesday 5^th May 2021 commencing at 6.30pm as a virtual meeting via Zoom meeting software.