Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 224 KBVenue: The John Meikle Room - The Deane House. View directions
Contact: Clare Rendell Email: c.rendell@somersetwestandtaunton.gov.uk
Webcast: View the webcast
| No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies
To receive any apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors R Lees and M Rigby. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive
To approve the minutes of the previous meetings of the Executive held on 22nd January 2020, 28th January 2020 and 10th February 2020.
Additional documents: Decision: (Minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 22nd January 2020, 28th January 2020 and 10th February 2020 were circulated with the agenda)
RESOLVED that the minutes of the Executive held on 22nd January, 28th January and 10th February 2020 were confirmed as a correct record.
Minutes: (Minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 22nd January 2020, 28th January 2020 and 10th February 2020 were circulated with the agenda)
RESOLVED that the minutes of the Executive held on 22nd January, 28th January and 10th February 2020 were confirmed as a correct record. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest
To receive and note any declarations of disclosable pecuniary or prejudicial or personal interests in respect of any matters included on the agenda for consideration at this meeting.
(The personal interests of Councillors and Clerks of Somerset County Council, Town or Parish Councils and other Local Authorities will automatically be recorded in the minutes.)
Additional documents: Minutes: Members present at the meeting declared the following personal interests in their capacity as a Councillor or Clerk of a County, Town or Parish Council or any other Local Authority:-
Councillor D Wedderkopp declared a personal interest in relation to Item 8 – Gull Control Programme in Taunton Town Centre 2020 as he was a resident of the Town Centre where the programme would be carried out. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public Participation
The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.
For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue.
Additional documents: Minutes: Four members of the public had requested to speak on the items on the agenda.
A. Mr David Redgewell (South West Transport Network and Railfuture Severnside) submitted the following statement in relation to Taunton Bus Station and spoke at the meeting;
“This statement is to request that Taunton bus and coach station is kept open until alternative facilities are provided in Taunton town centre and the railway station including the possibility of turning the council station car park into a bus station.
We would therefore like to ask the following questions about the impact of the bus and coach station closure on public transport users in Taunton. At a recent Cabinet meeting and Full Council meeting Travel-Watch South West Railfuture Severnside south transport network and RMT and Unite the union raised the following concerns to the Council about alternative investment in interchange facilities within the town centre:
1. The need for warm due covered shelters for Castle way, the Parade and East Reach for good lighting and castle kerbs for disabled access to be built in the scheme. 2. Real-time information to be provided on the stops and seating. 3. That facilities are provided for national Express Coaches service within the town centre including road space to put down the wheelchair lift. 4. That full public consultation be carried out with public transport user group and passengers about passenger’s facilities within the town centre. 5. The RMT union be given an assurance that a canteen and radio room be provided within the town centre. 6. That the bus and coach station would not close until a better interchange in the town centre had been provided. 7. Because of the proposed allocation for the site to be developed for a leisure complex and upmarket waterfront housing Somerset West and Taunton council owning half the bus station site already some of the development money should be re-invested in a bus interchange in the town centre. At present no consultation meeting have taken place since though council meetings.
Which a very congested town centre and poor air quality plus the climate change emergency and the need to close the centre of town to the private car. We would welcome progress on improving the bus service network and infrastructure other than the park and ride service which we welcome your support for.
In the South West government money is being invested in new bus interchanges at Gloucester, Exeter, and Weston super mare new bus interchange near Tesco with first group bus, national Express and stagecoach west. New facilities in Bus stations in Truro, Penzance, St Ives and Newquay in Cornwall by the DFT and Cornwall Council and first group. With a new bus rail interchange at Weymouth town and Dorchester south stations.
Whilst we welcome the transport interchange at Taunton railway station it's not big enough to operate the country bus service that use the bus station now just the west Somerset service and two others. At a time when there is a ... view the full minutes text for item 121. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Executive Forward Plan
To receive items and review the Forward Plan. Additional documents: Decision: (Copy of the Executive Forward Plan, circulated with the agenda).
Councillors were reminded that if they had an item they wanted to add to the agenda, that they should send their requests to the Governance Team.
RESOLVED that the Executive Forward Plan be noted. Minutes: (Copy of the Executive Forward Plan, circulated with the agenda).
Councillors were reminded that if they had an item they wanted to add to the agenda, that they should send their requests to the Governance Team.
Councillor Francesca Smith asked if there was confidence the items on the Forward Plan could be delivered in the light of the Covid-19 pandemic?
James Hassett (Chief Executive) responded that he was not. Officers had undertaken a process of identifying key services to keep the Council operating and prioritising keeping people safe and well. There would be an incredible pressure on the organisation, and there may be requests from the wider public sector family such as the NHS and County Council, and that help would be willingly given. The list of those services would be distributed shortly. Overall, there were items that would be delayed due to the pandemic’s effects.
RESOLVED that the Executive Forward Plan be noted. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Approval of the Annual Pay Policy Statement 2020/2021
This matter is the responsibility of the Executive Councillor for Corporate Resources, Councillor Ross Henley.
The purpose of this report is for Executive to recommend to Full Council that the Pay Policy Statement 2020/21 is approved for publication, as required under statute. Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that the Executive recommend to Full Council that the Pay Policy Statement 2020/21 is approved for publication. Minutes: Executive Councillor Ross Henley, Portfolio Holder for Corporate Resources introduced the report and moved the recommendations, which sought approval of the Pay Policy Statement 2020/21 and its recommendation to Full Council.
Section 38 (1) of the Localism Act 2011 required local authorities to prepare and publish a pay policy statement for each financial year, approved by Full Council. He wished to draw attention to the Council’s recognising of the Living Wage Foundation and that we took our responsibilities seriously under the national minimum wage requirements. He was really pleased that nobody in the organisation was paid less than £9.74. Once we were through Covid-19 the Council could be in a position to challenge its suppliers and contractors to follow suit, with SWT being an exemplar to other organisations.
The Leader echoed Cllr Henley’s comments and was really pleased everyone in the organisation was above the National Living Wage and SWT would be looking at accreditation.
RESOLVED that the Executive recommend to Full Council that the Pay Policy Statement 2020/21 is approved for publication. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This matter is the responsibility of Executive Councillor for Community, Councillor Chris Booth.
The report requests the Executive approves the recommendations of the HPC Planning Obligations Board, for the transfer of ring-fenced monies £158,994 for Cannington from the HPC CIM Fund to Cannington Parish Council and for the allocation of £201,545 from the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey to Stogursey Victory Hall Committee for use as contingency for the Stogursey Victory Hall Project, with any unspent contingency to be returned to the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey in July 2020.
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that the Executive endorsed the recommendation made by the Hinkley Point C Planning Obligations Board (POB) as follows;
1. To approve the transfer of ring-fenced monies £158,994 for Cannington from the HPC CIM Fund to Cannington Parish Council (CPC) with the following conditions set out in a Memorandum of Understanding to be signed by Cannington Parish Council:
a) CPC must undertake evaluation appraisals of all proposals to ensure they mitigate impacts in line with the criteria set out in Schedule 1 of the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement before approval. b) CPC must report back to Somerset West and Taunton Council (SWT) via the CIM Fund Manager at regular intervals with progress updates. c) Applications for grant funding of over £50,000 must be referred to SWT and follow the decision making procedures set out in the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement to SWT for consideration by POB and SWT in line with obligations within the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement. d) Applications for grant funding by any organisation that have previously been awarded a CIM Fund Grant must be referred to SWT and follow the decision making procedures set out in the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement.
2. To allocate £201,545 from the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey to Stogursey Victory Hall Committee for use as contingency for the Stogursey Victory Hall Project, with any unspent contingency to be returned to the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey in July 2020. Minutes: Executive Councillor Chris Booth, Portfolio Holder for Community introduced the report and moved the recommendations, which sought to present the recommendations of the Hinkley Point C (HPC) Planning Obligations Board, for the transfer of ring-fenced monies £158,994 for Cannington from the HPC CIM Fund to Cannington Parish Council. The report also presented recommendations of the HPC Planning Obligations Board for the allocation of £201,545 from the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey to Stogursey Victory Hall Committee for use as contingency for the Stogursey Victory Hall Project, with any unspent contingency to be returned to the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey in July 2020.
Councillor Kravis congratulated the Portfolio Holder and the officers for picking the issue up and running with it, and putting the work into make sure the effects of HPC were mitigated.
RESOLVED that the Executive endorsed the recommendation made by the Hinkley Point C Planning Obligations Board (POB) as follows;
1. To approve the transfer of ring-fenced monies £158,994 for Cannington from the HPC CIM Fund to Cannington Parish Council (CPC) with the following conditions set out in a Memorandum of Understanding to be signed by Cannington Parish Council:
a) CPC must undertake evaluation appraisals of all proposals to ensure they mitigate impacts in line with the criteria set out in Schedule 1 of the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement before approval. b) CPC must report back to Somerset West and Taunton Council (SWT) via the CIM Fund Manager at regular intervals with progress updates. c) Applications for grant funding of over £50,000 must be referred to SWT and follow the decision making procedures set out in the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement to SWT for consideration by POB and SWT in line with obligations within the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement. d) Applications for grant funding by any organisation that have previously been awarded a CIM Fund Grant must be referred to SWT and follow the decision making procedures set out in the HPC Site Preparation Section 106 agreement.
2. To allocate £201,545 from the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey to Stogursey Victory Hall Committee for use as contingency for the Stogursey Victory Hall Project, with any unspent contingency to be returned to the HPC CIM Fund ring-fenced for Stogursey in July 2020. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gull Control Programme in Taunton Town Centre 2020
This matter is the responsibility of the Leader of the Council, Councillor Federica Smith-Roberts.
This report concerns the implementation of a Gull Control Programme for Taunton Town Centre to reduce the associated noise nuisance and aggressive behaviour along with long-term population reduction. Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVEDto implement a gull control programme in Taunton Town Centre to reduce the associated noise nuisance and aggressive behaviour along with long-term population reduction. Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report and moved the recommendations, which sought supportto implement a gull control programme in Taunton Town Centre during the 2020 gull breeding season.
Discussion took place on;
· The noise was just one element of the nuisance, seagulls could also be quite aggressive and attack people for food. · Councillors had seen the replacement eggs at a Member Briefing which had been impressive and were delighted steps were being taken to control seagulls. · Similar methods had been undertaken in an industrial estate in West Somerset which had proven effective. · A query was raised as to whether this work could be undertaken in light of the Covid-19 pandemic? · The intention was to still proceed this year. · The problem had become noticeable to people outside of the District and the mess they created was unsightly. · It was requested that replacement bins had lids put them on to stop the birds pulling out the waste, particularly in the parks. · Councillor D Wedderkopp was a resident of the town centre and felt the situation had gotten out of control. He had raised the issue previously but had been told they were a protected species and there was nothing that could be done. · The Leader thanked Councillor Wedderkopp for his comments and clarified that the Council had obtained the relevant licenses to enable this work to be undertaken as they were still protected species. It was felt to be the most humane way to limit their impact, which the Council received a lot of complaints about.
RESOLVEDto implement a gull control programme in Taunton Town Centre to reduce the associated noise nuisance and aggressive behaviour along with long-term population reduction. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
South West Audit Partnership Transformation Audit - Lessons Learnt
This report is the responsibility of the Leader of the Council.
The Executive is recommended to note the report.
The draft minutes of the Joint Committee of Scrutiny and Audit, Governance and Standards held on 12th February 2020 are included for information.
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that the Executive noted the South West Audit Partnership’s (SWAP) Transformation Audit - Lessons Learnt Report. Minutes: The Leader of the Council, Cllr Federica Smith-Roberts introduced the report. Councillor Rigby had been leading on this report but was unavailable this evening. This report had completed by the South West and Audit Partnership and had been taken to a Joint Committee of the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee and the Scrutiny Committee where it had had a lengthy discussion. There had been nine areas identified in the report and the Leader wished to discuss how we moved forward from this point.
Discussion took place around: · It was broadly felt the report was damning. It exonerated any Council officers involved in this process as Officers advised and it was clear that potential risks of the project had been highlighted, and sadly the worst scenarios were realised. · It was stated that the previous political leadership from the last administration should be ashamed as to how this had ballooned out of control. · The report alluded that as so many staff left and the costs spiralled, that meant the new council came into being and had to employ more staff to fill the holes that had been left. · It was commented that when undertaking a transformation programme such as this risk management must be carried out, which appeared it was not. The Voluntary Redundancy Scheme for all employees was proceeded with without knowing the ultimate effect. The impact was clear and the Council still had a way to go to return. It was hoped nothing like this ever happened again. · It was commented that the report was very clearly laid out as to what happened, with programmes and projects not delivered as intended. The Council had lost a vast amount of knowledge at great cost. · Concern was raised over the lack of documentation throughout the process. By December 2018 an extra two million pounds was requested for further redundancy costs which should have been at that point a catalyst for a change in direction. · Officers were commended for their hard work in dealing with the results of this. It was clear this was a political decision. · Some Councillors had been against the merger from the beginning of the process. It was hoped this would serve as a lesson that before there were any further future attempts at mergers, collaborations or transformations in Somerset that it is looked at from a wider perspective than a political one. · Comment was made that in the light of the Covid-19 pandemic the proposals around a unitary council for Somerset were a distraction and should be withdrawn. · Some of the comments were felt to be political and it was commented that some Councillors had a misunderstanding of what Transformation was and that it had been misrepresented. The report was considered light, but it was recognised there was a need to move on and move forward. The consultation and the cross-party groups such as JPAG had been forgotten. The Council was urged not re-implement the silos that existed previously and a query was raised as to what the ... view the full minutes text for item 126. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Access to Information - Exclusion of the Press and Public
During discussion of the following item(s) it may be necessary to pass the following resolution to exclude the press and public having reflected on Article 13 13.02(e) (a presumption in favour of openness) of the Constitution. This decision may be required because consideration of this matter in public may disclose information falling within one of the descriptions of exempt information in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. The Council will need to decide whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption, outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Recommend that under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the next item(s) of business on the ground that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 respectively of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, namely information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the items numbered 11 on the Agenda as the items contained exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, and the public interest in withholding the information outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information to the public. Minutes: RESOLVED that the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the items numbered 11 on the Agenda as the items contained exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, and the public interest in withholding the information outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information to the public. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Confidential Report - Disposal of HRA Asset
This matter is the responsibility of Executive Councillor for Housing, Councillor Francesca Smith. Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that Executive;
1. Approved the sale of the freehold interest in the property identified in the confidential report for a confidential sum.
2. Delegated authority to the Assets Specialist in consultation with the S151 Officer to agree final terms and complete the sale transaction.
3. Noted the income from the disposal would be credited to the Capital Receipts Reserve within the Housing Revenue Account.
Minutes: Executive Councillor Francesca Smith, Portfolio Holder for Housing Services introduced the confidential report.
RESOLVED that Executive;
1. Approved the sale of the freehold interest in the property identified in the confidential report for a confidential sum.
2. Delegated authority to the Assets Specialist in consultation with the S151 Officer to agree final terms and complete the sale transaction.
3. Noted the income from the disposal would be credited to the Capital Receipts Reserve within the Housing Revenue Account.
|