Agenda item

Members considered the reports within the District Executive agenda for 3 September 2020 and raised comments as detailed below. Responses to most questions and comments were provided at Scrutiny Committee by the relevant officers or Portfolio Holder – except those marked by an asterisk:

The Queen Camel Neighbourhood Plan Referendum (Agenda Item 6)

·         The ward member noted there were many local concerns regarding the settlement boundary element, and felt that the content of para 22 in the covering report may not be accepted by the local community.

·         * Members shared concerns that if the plan goes to referendum with the settlement boundary removed then the plan not be supported. This could affect our reputational risk and the risk matrix in the report.

·         Members acknowledged it was a difficult situation and that very good reasons would be needed to go against the Examiner’s recommendations.

·         * Some members queried if parishes were being advised that the environment / climate emergency element should be reflected in Neighbourhood Plans.

·         * Page 7 - Members were content regarding recommendations B and C. However regarding recs A and D, it is suggested that at Director level there is discussion with the parish to try and find a compromise before the referendum.

Disposal of Churchfields Office, Wincanton (Agenda Item 7)

·         In closed session at the end of the meeting, members raised a comment and question regarding information contained within the confidential appendix.

Investment Assets Quarterly Update Report (Agenda Item 8)

·         In closed session at the end of the meeting, members raised some questions regarding information contained within the confidential appendix.

Reconstruction & Adoption of Roadway, Chard Business Park (Agenda Item 9)

·         Some members expressed concern that full costs of the works may require substantial funding – is there a risk that this may draw money away from Chard Regeneration Scheme projects?

·         * Members asked if any costings had been done to indicate reasonable best and worst cost scenarios.

·         Some members queried if there was confidence that there is no ransom strip at the end of the road?

·         Members sought reassurance that SSDC would not be taken advantage of regarding costs and specifications.

·         * Members also sought reassurance that there we no other similar situations to this elsewhere in the district.

·         * Some members noted that SSDC had responsibility for other roads on the development – would it be possible to look at getting all the roads on the development adopted?

Shared Building Control and Somerset Independence Plus Service (Agenda Item 10)

·         Members were content the recommendations go forward.

Shared Legal Services (Agenda Item 11)

·         . Members were content the recommendations go forward.

Urgent Decision – Support for Leisure Provider (Agenda Item 12)

·         Regarding possible MHCLG funding – when would any funding or support be known?

·         Some members sought reassurance that as part of the SSDC funding support that a clause would be included regarding an expectation for the facility to remain open.

District Executive Forward Plan (Agenda Item 13)

·         A member queried if the Somerset Climate Emergency Strategy item is still scheduled for November as it was understood there was some pressure to bring the report earlier?

CONFIDENTIAL – Exclusion of the Press and Public

In accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), the Committee resolved that the press and public be excluded from the following items in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, i.e. “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

Yeovil Refresh Ring-fenced Assets and Development Opportunities (Confidential) (Agenda Item 16)

·         Members raised a question about a particular asset detailed in the confidential report.

Note: During the closed session members also discussed the confidential appendices for Agenda items 7 and 8: