Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Charlie Hull, Oliver Patrick and Jeny Snell.

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.

This is an opportunity for Members to question the progress on issues arising from previous meetings.  However, this does not allow for the re-opening of a debate on any item not forming part of this agenda.

There were no issues raised from previous meetings.

The Chairman welcomed Councillor Karl Gill who is a new member on Scrutiny Committee.

The Chairman advised members that the Scrutiny Chairmen had now attended all four Area Committees and gave a brief overview of what had been discussed. It had been suggested that the Scrutiny function could be more transparent, and so going forward, a trial would take place whereby responses from District Executive members and officers to comments raised at Scrutiny Committee would be circulated to all members for information.

There were no updates on reports considered by District Executive members at the May meeting.

Members considered the reports within the District Executive agenda for 3 June 2021 (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 with an asterisk.

Relocation of Emergency Accommodation (Agenda item 5)

·        Regarding the Homes England grant – is there any update about the outcome or when the outcome may be known? Also would the outcome of the Homes England grant impact the funding figure detailed in the recommendation at paragraph 5?

·        Members sought clarification about provision of emergency accommodation for females and also provision for anyone with pets.

·        Financial implications - Members asked if agreeing this funding would impact on other projects coming forward?

Dealing with Planning Applications: Our Approach to Negotiation (Agenda item 6)

·        Members queried the suggestion that amendments to planning applications would result in an extension of time, and is the intention of this to ensure applications stay within the 8-9 week timeframe and amendments are discouraged.

·        Members sought clarification about charges for pre-application advice – do charges apply to small applications as well as larger ones?

·        One member expressed his frustration with the planning service provided which he felt was poor. He felt the whole situation with the planning service was very concerning with little on the ground seeming to change.

·        Another member noted that he felt things were getting better and that supportive comments were being expressed by some parishes.

·        A member noted that it was important at the pre-application stage for officers to be candid about the information being provided.

·        Members asked if there was a replacement Lead for the planning service?

·        Members noted it was acknowledged by the team and officers that the planning service isn’t fixed and work was ongoing to streamline processes and improve the service.

·        The Chairman noted that new processes were being trialled and it would be good to receive some feedback at a later date about how effective the changes have been or the lessons learned.

The ‘Making’ of the Queen Camel Neighbourhood Plan (Agenda item 7)

·        No comments.

The ‘Making’ of the Martock Neighbourhood Plan (Agenda item 8)

·        A member asked how many other neighbourhood plans were currently going through the process.

Investments Assets Update Report (Agenda item 9)

(Scrutiny did not go into confidential session)

·        Members acknowledged an update from the Commercial Property, Land & Development Manager that the graph ‘20/21 Performance Against Budget’ would be moved from the confidential appendix into the public report.

·        Para 9 in confidential appendix – referring to the coloured table, it was observed that there are a number of investments that seem to be showing as a nil or negative return in the future, members asked for some further explanation on the reasons for these assumptions.

·        Some members suggested a briefing or workshop for members to help understand in more detail the approach for our investments (what and where) would be useful

·        Members sought clarification about  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

The Chairman provided a brief verbal update on the progress of Task and Finish groups including:

Productivity Analysis – no update.

SSDC Environment Strategy – the Specialist (Scrutiny & Member Development) is meeting with the budget manager shortly to discuss the switch to R.E.G.O (Renewable Energy Guarantee of Origin), based on the recommendations from the task and finish group members.  This would mean our current provider will only source electricity from renewable sources for the rest of the contract.

The Chairman reminded members that meetings would continue to be held virtually until the end of July.

During a brief discussion about the Work Programme, members made the following suggestions for items to be included in the future:

·        There had recently been a major technical issue with members accessing their tablets and emails. A report was requested about what had happened, why, rectification and lessons learned etc.

·        Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – a date needs be confirmed. It would be useful to have an update on funding received and distributed, and whether the scheme is as effective as Section 106 obligations.

·        Broadband – the item has featured on the work programme for some time – a date needs to be confirmed for an update.

At the end of discussion, the Chairman advised members that there would also be a discussion with the Performance Specialist at the next Scrutiny meeting regarding Key Performance Indicators.

Members noted that the next meeting of members of the Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for 10.30am on Tuesday 29 June 2021, and was likely to be held as an informal virtual meeting using Zoom.