The Corporate Director Communities provided a report to Members on the Community Asset Transfer Scheme.  He advised that since 2 November 2015, a CAT Officer had been in post to act as project manager for CAT in Bridgend to support the process and act as a single point of contact for local organisations wishing to pursue asset transfer.  He informed members that up to 11 December 2015, the CAT Officer had been approached by 26 organisations regarding 30 assets. 

A Member asked what the fall back situation was if Town and Community Councils do not accept CAT offers as some of the proposals were not realistically sustainable, however they could not afford to lose assets such as pavilions and sports grounds.   The Corporate Director Communities stated there would be a robust process put in place so that the CATs that were agreed would have the prospect to be sustainable.  He added that if the Authority did not act now there was a potential risk to public services.

A Member asked what criteria would be applied to the £1million of funding from the Capital Programme to support to CAT Scheme and how it would prioritise how it would be spent. The Corporate Director Communities stated that the Criteria would be approved by Cabinet in the first instance.  He added that prioritisation would be on the most urgent cases and before any CAT would take place, although advised that it would be advantageous for Town and Community Councils to give their Expressions of Interest sooner rather than later to ensure there would be adequate funding available to complete any essential repairs in advance of a CAT taking place.

A Member asked if sports clubs/ grounds with dual use would be jointly transferred and if the sports club would get priority of the transfer.  The Corporate Director Communities advised that there would be no obligation to take on the asset as a joint transfer; however the business case stated that the preferred solution would be for the asset to continue with its current use.  The CAT Officer added that she had already received a few similar cases where they had set a preferential user agreement in place to secure the long term future of the clubs using the grounds.  She further added that multiple applications were welcomed for assets with dual use.

A Member asked if the Authority would consider pitches as well as pavilions. The Corporate Director Communities advised this would be considered on a case by case basis and even though it was classified as Priority two, if groups expressed an interest it would be considered.

A member asked who would calculate the costs of running assets such as utilities.  The CAT Officer explained that once an expression of interest form had been received it was her role to collate as much information as possible on the running costs.  She added that it was important for Town and Community Councils to consider that they may wish to run it differently to how it had been run in the past and therefore the costs may not necessarily be what they would pay if they took over its operations.

A Member asked if condition reports would be compiled of premises that were in the CAT Scheme.  The Corporate Director Communities stated that there was not sufficient funding to complete a report for every premises, however if no up to date report was available one would be carried out if a CAT was likely to take place. 

A Member asked if BCBC had a Comfort Fund which would allow the public to use the toilets in pubs/cafes.  The Corporate Director Communities explained that the funding from WG was removed in April 2014 for this scheme.  However, Cabinet agreed to have their own comfort scheme available where public conveniences in the borough had closed.

RESOLVED:           That the Town and Community Council Forum noted the progress on Community Asset Transfer as outlined in the report.