Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Mike Lewis.

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no members of the public present at the meeting.

There were no announcements from the Chairman.

There were no updates provided on the reports considered by the District Executive on 10 February.

Members considered the reports within the District Executive agenda for 17 February 2022 (Informal Consultative Meeting) and raised comments as detailed below. Responses to most questions and comments were provided at Scrutiny Committee (Informal Meeting) by the relevant officers or Portfolio Holder – except those marked by an asterisk:

Annual Action Plan 2022/23 (Agenda item 5)

·        Members noted that Scrutiny had been involved in a workshop in January, and many points that had been raised or challenged then had been addressed within this report.

·        *Page 16, bottom right corner – South Somerset Heritage collection to deliver outreach opportunities – a member sought some clarity about what this was/is please.

·        A member sought reassurance that there were adequate resources and capacity to deliver the projects.

Decarbonisation Programme Phase 2 Proposals (Agenda item 6)

·        Regarding solar panels – some members queried what these would feed into? E.g. National Grid or battery storage?

·        A member queried how the proposed spending related to the voluntary finance protocol that all the Somerset Councils were shortly being asked to agree to?

·        Some members expressed concern about the proposed borrowing (Rec B), and whether it was the right thing to be doing as we go into unitary when there was an option available that doesn’t involve borrowing? As proposing to borrow a large amount should this be deferred to the new authority rather than making a commitment at the current time?

·        Some concerns were raised about the proposals when it was unknown if the new authority may keep the assets.

·        A member queried what the risk was that government could appeal our financial decisions through a Section 24?

·        Para 12 – the text refers to ‘several buildings’ – a member queried which buildings where?

·        Para 13, table 1 – reference to solar PV at the JOD Pavilion – some members queried the proposal as it was thought solar PV for the building had been previously agreed with a prior project.

·        *Para 17 – the amount (£’s) is missing from the text.

·        Para 18 – refers to savings in energy costs – a member queried if this would still be the case given the current situation with energy costs rising? It was also queried if the proposal for heat pumps was being done solely to reduce carbon or also to get a better product?

·        It was queried if the value of the building would increase with these proposed works done?

·        Regarding air source heat pumps – a member queried if more works/retrofitting may be required in the buildings to minimise heat loss as it's understood the heat pumps won’t necessarily put as much heat into the building?

·        *Para 18 - A member queried if the solar panels could potentially feed into battery storage in order to run the air source heat pumps off grid / be self-sufficient, and so reduce running costs? Is the proposal the most technological way forward?

·        Members sought reassurance that the projects are deliverable within the next 14 months of this authority.

·        In summary,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

Members noted that the next meeting of the Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for Tuesday 1 March 2022 at 10.30am - as a virtual meeting using Zoom.