Meeting documents

Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a disclosable pecuniary, prejudicial or other (personal) interest to declare in any items on this agenda.  Details of any interest must be declared at the start of the meeting or as soon as any interest becomes apparent during the meeting.  The attached form must also be completed. Any advice required should ideally be sought before the day of the meeting.

 

There were no declarations of interest received.

Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the committee.

 

Three public questions were received, all in relation to item 4 on the agenda, Yorkshire Coast Destination Business Improvement District (YCBID). The Chair of YCBID, Clive Rowe-Evans, had provided advance written responses to all three questions, as detailed below:

   

Question 1: Sue Anderson Brown

Sue Anderson-Brown has submitted the following question:-

 

As required, please see below my question I would like to put to the Audit Committee. My one question is in 3 parts, all related to the same issue of potential financial exposure and risk.

 

In addition, please see attached a report that was commissioned by several Levy Paying businesses that, I understand, has already been submitted to Robert Goodwill MP and Greg Knight MP.

 

My question focusses on flag 20 (that provides a more detailed background of the issue I am raising).

 

The DBID is a Private Limited entity, with little or no financial scrutiny nor surety about the £5 million income it is set to demand from levy payers.

 

1     i.  How was the BID allowed to file unaudited, abbreviated accounts for its first financial year (18 months 2019/20), given the fact that there are 3 council officers appointed  to the BID board of directors, representing SBC, ERC and NYCC,  and that there are actually two sets of unaudited accounts in existence which are not quite the same?

 

Furthermore, 5% of levy payers had demanded an AGM within this same financial year where questions over the finances were uppermost. This request was refused on the premise that ‘the members have not required the company to obtain an audit of its financial statements for the period ended 31^st July 2020’, demonstrating a total lack of transparency surrounding this organisation, that many would say is ‘not fit for purpose’.

 

ii. Why was this fundamental right of levy payers denied under the rouse that ‘members registered’ could be the only individuals to seek such a request?

 

iii. Why did the accountancy firm, Moore Accountants (of no coincidence, the same accounts employed by the BID chair from his previous numerous businesses) decline to verify the unaudited BID accounts, passing back the responsibility to the BID board? (given the fact that significant financial income was being contentiously demanded from levy payers).   Note, Government guidance is clear: BID accounts should be audited and Companies House also holds a firm general view on accounts transparency.

 

AUDIT COMMITTEE RESPONSE: 

 

Thank you for the question.  It is noted but it is not relevant to the matter under consideration today.   The Council’s Places and Futures Overview and Scrutiny Committee has however a report from the Yorkshire Coast BID Company on its work programme following their attendance at the November 2020 meeting of the former Overview and Scrutiny Board.  With your permission these questions will be passed on to the Scrutiny Committee Chair for consideration at that meeting.

 

 

A1. Response of the Chair of YCBID

 

In response to the questions put forward during Public Question Time on 22^nd April 2021 

 

1     I give below the response  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

To approve as correct records and sign the Minutes of the meetings held on 15^th and 27^th October, 2021. ATTACHED

 

The minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 15^th October, 2021 (including restricted minute 21/192) and 27^th October, 2021 be approved as correct records and signed by the Chairman.

 

To receive a verbal update on progress from the Chief Executive and Chair of the YCBID further to their attendance at the 11^th November, 2020 meeting of the former Overview and Scrutiny Board.

 

The Chair introduced representatives of the YCBID, Clive Rowe Evans, Chair, and Kerry Carruthers, Chief Executive.

Ms Carruthers provided to the Committee a presentation that is summarised below:-

Ø  Investment Summary

 

2021 Projects Supported:                47

Investment allocated to date:                     £ 1,884,533

Total collected to date:                                £ 2,095,454

Direct investment with SBC:                      £ 191,861

Direct investment with ERYC:                    £ 25,000

Ø  Project timeline

 

She also outlined some of the 47 projects, aided by a slide that showed the Projects titles and dates from April 2021 through to December 2021, and the booked activity for 2022. She continued to give brief descriptions of each project in the slides, respective of their location, and pointed out that more information could be found on the YCBID website.

Ø  Whitby

 

Annual income projection:              £ 70,500

Income to date:                                             £ 134,103

Y1:                                                      81%

Y2:                                                      53%

Y3:                                                      43%

Investment Allocated:                                  £ 108,641

Ø  Scarborough

 

Annual Income Projection:             £ 218,500

Income to Date:                                            £455,826

Y1:                                                      86%

Y2:                                                      58%

Y3:                                                      43%

Investment Allocated:                                  £ 374,809

 

Ø  Filey

 

Annual Income Projection:             £ 20,350

Income to Date:                                            £ 54,090

Y1:                                                      90%

Y2:                                                      77%

Y3:                                                      64%

Investment Allocated                                   £ 46.090

 

Ø  Villages

 

Annual Income Projection:             £ 76,000

Income to Date:                                            £ 182,105

Y1:                                                      90%

Y2:                                                      53%

Y3:                                                      43%

Investment Allocated                                   £ 138,221

 

Ø  Coastal Summary

 

Annual Income Projection:             £ 420,042

Income to Date:                                            £ 989,576

Investment Allocated                                   £1,046,016

 

Ø  Useful Links

 

Board Decision and Discussions: www.yorkshirecoastbid.co.uk/about-us/

Bid Timeline: www.yorkshirecoastbid.co.uk/latest-updates/

Example of Project Update: www.yorkshirecoastbid.co.uk/project/welcome-ambassadors-review-2021/

Example of Project Update: www.yorkshirecoastbid.co.uk/project/the-odyssey-trojan-wars/

Business to Resident Communications: https://loveyorkshirecoast.co.uk

 

Ø  Communications Update: Press Outreach

 

Press exposure achieved on behalf of project organisers throughout 2021

153 pieces of local regional and national pieces achieved to highlight supported projects and the organisers

Combined reach of 143 million

Ø  Communications Update: Business Engagement

 

Example of Business Participation in Projects:

Route YC:                              256

Odyssey:                                400+

Disc:                                       57

Scarborough Gift Card:                   100

Electric Vehicle Charging: 15

Bike Repair Station:             21

MHS:                                      60

Shopappy:                             85

 

Example of Engagement Numbers with Businesses:

Email Update:                                   22

In Person/Phone:                            1104

 

The Chair thanked Ms Carruthers for her interesting and informative presentation, and asked how projects such as Cycle Repair Hubs and Electric Vehicle Charging Points would be publicised throughout the area. Ms Carruthers explained that the two projects would be built into Route YC and would have an in-built map. It would then be determined by those in charge of Tourism to publicise the project as a whole.

The Chair asked further whether businesses in the YC (Yorkshire Coast) area have the means to promote their partnership with the scheme, and in turn promote the impact YCBID has had. Ms Carruthers indicated this was in the New Year Plan. She shared that YCBID had spoken to businesses about what they would prefer to display to which YCBID are now looking to roll out in 2022. After, the Chair observed that Welcome to Yorkshire only featured members in their brochures, he asked whether there would be the same relationship between the YCBID and levy-paying  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider a report of the Director (MC) (Reference 21/238) ATTACHED to be supplemented by a presentation at the meeting

 

The Committee considered the report of the Director (MC), (Reference 21/238) which provided the Committee with an update on the activities of the Better Borough team.

 

Liam Bamforth, Community Regeneration and Support Officer, Better Borough Team attended the meeting and introduced the report.  As a background to the report, he reminded the Committee that the Better Borough Team had been launched early in 2021 as part of a wider corporate objective to improve communications and engagement with local communities.  The team was made up of 16 volunteers across the Borough and was supported by a full time Development Officer in the Community Regeneration Team.

 

The remit of the Better Borough Team was to enhance the quality and scope of the Council’s consultations and engagements with local residents through the adoption of community led peer to peer approach.  This process had emerged in response to suggestions raised in the 2019 LGA Peer Review and was endorsed by the Council’s Executive Management Team.

 

Along with the introduction of the Better Borough Team, the Council had also attempted to streamline and rationalise its consultation and engagement framework through the introduction of a Corporate Communications and Engagement Group as part of its internal reporting procedures.

 

In regards to the current 16 Better Borough Team volunteers, they had been recruited from a large list of potential candidates.  It was explained that volunteers were selected to provide a good representation of the Borough, both in terms of demographics and personalities.  Whilst there was currently a good geographical spread of volunteers across most of the Borough, further volunteers were needed in the north of the Borough (Whitby area).  The Committee was further informed that all the volunteers undertook training in a variety of different qualitative research and consultation methods and techniques.

 

Mr Bamforth then focused on the potential project outcomes of the Better Borough team, namely to:

 

·         Achieve better "buy-in" from the public through creating an honest dialogue between the Council and residents / communities;

·         Empower local people and communities to help set the agenda and influence the direction of the Council;

·         Build a new relationship between the Council and residents built on trust, mutual respect and equality of partnership;

·         Redesign Council services or policies that were more in line with the aspirations of local communities; and

·         Build the confidence and capacity of local people to influence decisions and priorities in their community.

Mr Bamforth then invited and responded to the Committee’s questions and comments on the work and future aspirations of the Better Borough Team.  

 

A Member talked about local government reform and the potential of developing neighbourhood forums and how better links could be forged between the many groups and volunteers in an area in conjunction with the work of the Better Borough Team.  Mr Bamforth offered to set up a meeting with the Member and interested parties in the Member’s ward in early 2022 to progress the matter.

 

RESOLVED: that the update on the work, challenges, progress to date and future plans/ aspirations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider the report of the Director (LD), (reference 21/233), attached.

 

The Committee considered the report of the Director (LD) (Reference 21/233) which provided the Committee with information as to progress against the Council’s Corporate Plan as at the second quarter 2021/22.

 

The Committee asked a number of challenging and robust questions in its monitoring role on the effectiveness of the progress of performance against the corporate aims of Better Places and Brighter Futures.  A more detailed summary of the performance monitoring information and the key areas monitored for the second quarter 2021/22 was set out in Appendix 1 to the submitted report.

 

Sonya Daines, Performance and Governance Officer attended the meeting and responded to questions raised.  A Member asked a question regarding planning and the planning application levels received.  The Performance and Governance Officer responded she would need to ascertain that information from the planning service and to provide the Committee with a response following the meeting.

 

Another Member asked a question regarding waste recycling and some technical information on waste that was contaminated.   The Performance and Governance Officer said she would need to ascertain that information from the waste recycling service and would provide the Committee with a response following the meeting.  

 

The Committee concurred with the report summary that the overall delivery of the Council’s Better Places and Brighter Futures aims had been assessed to be performing well or satisfactorily.

 

RESOLVED: that following consideration of the performance information, the Committee concurs with the report’s findings that the overall delivery of the Council’s Better Places and Brighter Futures aims had been assessed to be performing well or satisfactorily.

 

To consider, agree and/or amend the current Places and Futures Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s programme of work (reference 21/234), along with a copy of the latest published version of the Cabinet’s Forward Plan for consideration.

The Assistant Democratic Services Officer presented the Committee’s current work programme (reference 21/234) for Members’ consideration, along with the most recent copy of the Cabinet Forward Plan.

 

The Committee discussed the current work programme and Cabinet Forward Plan.

 

A Member requested that an additional topics be added to the Committee’s work programme for consideration on the North Bay masterplan and also improvements to the tree walk area of Peasholm Park.

 

The Committee agreed that following the recent decision of the Planning Committee on 9^th December, 2021 not to grant planning permission for the Scarborough Town Centre Regeneration Scheme (Student Accommodation Scheme), the need for further special meetings was now redundant. Two meetings, the first on a date yet to be determined and the second scheduled on the 23rd February, 2022 were therefore removed from the Committee’s work plan.  In doing so, the Committee added the caveat that should at any time in the future any planning application or relevant information is received the Scarborough Town Centre Regeneration Scheme (Student Accommodation Scheme), the matter be re-instated back on to the Committee’s work programme for consideration.  

   

RESOLVED: that the work programme, as presented, subject to the deletion of the items on theScarborough Town Centre Regeneration Scheme (Student Accommodation Scheme), with the caveat as detailed in the pre-amble above; and the addition of items on North Bay Masterplan and also improvements to the tree walk area of Peasholm Park be approved.

 

To consider the following motion:-

 

"that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (and subject to consideration of the public interest under Paragraph 10 of Part 2 of Schedule 12A of the Act) the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information (as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act), namely information;

 

(a) relating to any individual;

 

(b) which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual; and/or

 

(c) relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)".

 

Since item 9 below, Restricted Minute (21/192) was approved without comment (see Minute 3 above), this motion was not considered.

  

ATTACHED

This item was not considered as restricted minute (21/192) had already been considered and approved as a correct record at Minute 3 above.