To receive apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies for absence were received from the following Members/Officers:-

Councillor N Clarke

Councillor K Edwards

Councillor R Stirman

Councillor J Williams

P Beaman

G Smith

To receive declarations of personal and prejudicial interest (if any) from Members/Officers in accordance with the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct adopted by Council from 1 September 2008 (including whipping declarations)

Councillor R Shaw declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4. as he  offered advice (unpaid) to Pontycymer Bowling Club on a proposal to transfer assets to them from the Council.

Councillor P Davies declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4. as Director of Caerau Development Trust, who were considering taking over the land adjacent to the Caerau Community Centre. This proposal however was currently on hold.

To receive for approval the minutes of the meeting of the 11/07/19

RESOLVED:                      That the Minutes of a meeting of the SO&SC 3 Minutes dated 11 July 2019, be approved as a true and accurate record.

Invitees:

Mark Shephard, Chief Executive

Cllr Richard Young, Cabinet Member - Communities

Zak Shell, Head of Operations Community Services

Guy Smith, Community Asset Transfer Officer

Kevin Mulcahy, Group Manager - Highways Services

Philip Beaman, Green Spaces and Bereavement Services Manager

Andrew Thomas, Group Manager - Sports and Physical Activity

The Chief Executive Officer submitted a report, the purpose of which, was to present Committee with the outcome of the consultation on proposals for the Council’s provision of the above, in order to support a more financially sustainable provision, as well as to update the Committee on current Community Asset Transfer (CAT) progress.

The Head of Operations – Community Services gave an outline of the report, following which the Chairperson invited questions from Members.

A Member referred to children’s play areas being taken over by any organisation independent of the Council. He asked Invitees if the Council would enhance the equipment in play areas in any way, prior to such a process taking place.

The Head of Operations – Community Services advised that in situations such as this, each area would be looked at on a case by case basis. He added that some Town/Community Councils have/were in the process of taking over the running of children’s play areas either independently or through CAT. The Council wherever possible, were looking to hand over equipped children’s play areas with the equipment included therein, being in the best possible condition they could be in. To this end, any minor maintenance of such equipment that did not prove that expensive, could be carried out prior to any takeover. He further added, that other groups and organisations could take over these facilities, not just Town/Community Councils.

A Member asked if a Town/Community Council took over any children’s play areas equipped or otherwise, then would they have powers to ban dogs from such areas much the same as the County Borough Council could.

The Head of Operations – Community Services advised that he would have to check this point out with the Legal Department.

A Member made the point that on occasions when an accident occurs in a children’s playground and there’s any negligence which is proven, i.e. through broken equipment etc., the liability for this would fall on BCBC and a claim could possibly be made, through their Insurers. He asked how this would work if a Town/Community Council took over a play area, as this could prove to be quite expensive, i.e. ensuring that adequate cover is in place, to cover any such accidents and subsequent claims arising from this.

The Head of Operations – Community Services advised that issues such as this, were looked at when any Expressions of Interest were made, i.e. any hidden costs, and these formed part of subsequent negotiations. The Council always carried out an annual audit of equipped children’s play areas to ensure the equipment there is in satisfactory condition. The transfer of these facilities were being sought, so that the Council can avoid costs and make the necessary savings aligned to the MTFS, therefore the future maintenance of such areas would become the responsibility of the organisation who took over the facility. If the equipment was kept in reasonably good condition, then this would prevent any such accidents taking place, and in turn then, limit any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

The Head of Legal and Regulatory Services submitted a report, the purpose of which, was to present to Members the feedback from the previous meeting of Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3 for discussion, approval and actioning.

RESOLVED:                      That the Committee considered the attached feedback and Officer’s responses as shown at Appendix A to the report and agreed that the response to the recommendation be classed as green in the RAG status reflecting that the issue has been adequately and fully responded to.

The Head of Legal and Regulatory Services submitted a report, that:

a)    Presented the items prioritised by the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee, including the next item delegated to Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3;

b)    Presented the Committee with a list of further potential items for comment and prioritisation;

c)     Asked the Committee to identify (if any) further items for consideration using the pre-determined criteria form.

Attached at Appendix A to the report was the overall FWP for the Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committees, which included the topics prioritised by the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the next set of Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committees in Table A, as well as topics that were deemed important for future prioritisation at Table B.

A Member referred to Appendix A and the next scheduled meeting of Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3, where the subject of Enforcement was due to be considered as an agenda item.

In terms of the suggested Invitees for this meeting, Members felt that a representative from the Legal Department attend, in order to clarify the process of fixed penalty notices issued by Enforcement Officers and/or Police Officers (and if PCSO’s are allowed to issue them). Members were also interested to know, what course of action was subsequently taken, i.e. through the Courts, in respect of any fines that remained unpaid. Committee further felt that consideration also be given to inviting a representative from 3GS to the meeting. This was a body that supports environmental enforcement for local authorities.

Members also felt that it would be useful, for information purposes, to receive the number of fixed penalty notices that are issued over a 12 month period and any further data regarding this that may be available   

RESOLVED:                       That the report be noted.

To consider any item(s) of business in respect of which notice has been given in

accordance with Part 4 (paragraph 4) of the Council Procedure Rules and which the person presiding at the meeting is of the opinion should by reason of special circumstances be transacted at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

None.