Agenda and draft minutes

To consider and approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 10 March 2026 as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

Resolved:-  That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 10 March 2026 be approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.

To receive declarations of interest from Members in respect of items listed on the agenda.

Councillor Sheppard declared a personal interest in Minute No. 61 (Allotments Annual Update 2025) on the grounds that they held a Board Member position on the Rotherham Allotment Alliance Ltd and therefore would not ask any questions on this item or vote on any recommendations.

To receive questions relating to items of business on the agenda from members of the public or press who are present at the meeting.

The Chair advised that there were no members of the public or representatives of media organisations present at the meeting and there were no questions in respect of matters on the agenda.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any part of the agenda.

The Chair advised that there were no items of business on the agenda that would require the exclusion of the press or public from the meeting.

To receive an update on the continued progress toward the long?term self?management of Council?owned allotment sites in Rotherham and the work of Rotherham Allotment Alliance Ltd, as set out in their Annual Reports for 2024 and 2025.

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Marshall, Cabinet Member for Street Scene and Green Spaces (Cabinet Member), introduced the item and welcomed Charlotte Evans from the Rotherham Allotment Alliance Ltd (RAA) and Councillor Steele, Chair of the RAA, to the meeting.

Councillor Steele explained the background to the RAA, a co-operative, non-profit organisation. The RAA was established as a limited company in 2020 and took over the management of council-owned allotments on behalf of the council from this date.

Councillor Steele reported that the RAA was still waiting to complete the lease arrangements associated with the transfer of allotment sites into long-term self-management by the RAA. This delay had been due to legal complexities but officers at the RAA and the council had been working with solicitors to try and resolve outstanding issues.

It was explained to Members that the RAA managed its own budget and expenditure and all administration associated with the letting of allotments was managed by Charlotte Evans. There were 10 directors on the Board of the RAA, two of which were specialist directors and two were RMBC councillors. The shareholders of the RAA were the allotments holders and £1 of their first rent payment entitled them to a share in the RAA and allowed them to attend and vote at the RAA’s annual general meeting and other shareholders meetings.

Councillor Steele further explained that the RAA had two different types of allotments – those that were directly managed by the RAA and those which were managed under “Societies”, which managed the allotments on the RAA’s behalf. Each Society had a small committee, a Chair, a Secretary, a Treasurer and two other members and would manage the site and collect rents themselves. These Societies received a reduction in their rents to reflect the cost-saving to RAA in them managing these issues themselves.

Jon Hinchcliffe, Green Spaces Manager, reiterated to Members that the delays experienced in completing the lease were due to technical legal reasons rather than operational reasons, and assured Members that all sites continued to be effectively and safely managed by the RAA in the meantime. Whilst responsibility for management sat with the RAA, the council retained oversight and ongoing assurance through annual reporting and monthly meetings. Once the lease was finalised, the long-term self-management of allotments by the RAA across the borough would be fully embedded.

The Chair invited Members of IPSC to raise questions and queries on the Allotment Annual Update 2025 and in the ensuing question and answer session the following points were raised:-

Councillor Allen referred to the difficulties in filling vacancies on the Board and asked how the RAA approached the recruitment of new directors. Councillor Steele responded that the allotment holders themselves generally came forward to sit on the Board. There were two spaces on the Board for members with more specialist knowledge, in areas such as Finance and Health & Safety. The Board had recently lost its Health & Safety specialist, but Councillor Sheppard had stepped up to take  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

To receive the presentation on the work with the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority on the South Yorkshire Local Nature Recovery Strategy.

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Marshall, Cabinet Member for Street Scene and Green Spaces (Cabinet Member), introduced the item and explained that in2021, the new Environment Act had introduced a statutory requirement for the preparation of local naturerecovery strategies. South Yorkshire was one of 28 areas in England that had worked on producing a strategy, led by the South Yorkshire MayoralCombined Authority (SYMCA).

The Cabinet Member explained that the South Yorkshire Local Nature Recovery Strategy (Strategy) sought to identify existing valuable habitats, priority species, priorities for nature recovery and opportunities for enhancing biodiversity across the sub-region. The Strategy had been developed collaboratively with the four South Yorkshire local authorities and the Peak District National Park Planning Authority, alongside voluntary and public sector partners and would provide a strategic evidence base for nature recovery.

The Strategy would not place legal obligations on landowners but would inform planning, support funding bids, influence wider policy, and would help to attract public, voluntary and private sector investment into South Yorkshire's green environment.

Kevin Burke, Principal Officer - Creative Programming & Visitor Experience (Principal Officer) took Members through the update presentation, highlighting the following points:-

·       The origin of the Strategy could be traced back to the 2015 Paris Agreement, where European and world countries agreed to aim for 30% of all land to be under positive management by 2030. The current level in South Yorkshire was reported to be around 15%.

·       The Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) had been leading on the introduction of Local Nature Recovery Strategies, with the aim of identifying locations to create or improve habitats and provide the greatest benefit for nature and the wider environment.

·       The Strategy was intended to be community-centred, with the aim of helping communities map out what actions they would need to take to enjoy and interact with their local environments fully.

·       It was a statutory requirement for South Yorkshire to produce a Strategy and whilst there was no statutory requirement to implement it, the local planning authority would have to have regard to the Local Nature Recovery Strategy when preparing its next comprehensive local plan, and in taking decisions on planning applications once the Strategy had been approved. The Strategy would provide a basis to build upon. The Principal Officer explained that SYMCA had been working closely with the Planning and Green Spaces teams. Planning would be central to how the Strategy moved forward and there would be a need to consider the existing Local Plans that were already in place in order to try and align priorities.

·       The Strategy would provide an opportunity to co-ordinate the response to bio-diversity loss across the South Yorkshire area. It would also encourage action through highlighting opportunities for targeting investment in wildlife creation and could help to guide private investment in nature and carbon markets.

·       The Strategy would not provide the ability to force landowners or managers (including the council itself ) to make changes to an identified piece of land, nor would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

To receive the presentation providing an update on progress and developments on the Pride in Place programme for both the Rotherham Central and Maltby areas.

At the Chair’s invitation, the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs & the Local Economy, Councillor Williams (Cabinet Member), introduced the update presentation and reminded Members that Rotherham had been awarded two schemes under the government's Pride in Place programme – Rotherham Central and Maltby, both of which had been awarded £20 million of funding over the next 10 years. The Rotherham Central area covered the geography around the town centre and the surrounding built-up neighbourhoods and communities on the edge of the town centre.

The last update to IPSC in October 2025, had been brought just prior to the council submitting its regeneration plan for the Rotherham Central scheme to government. Councillor Williams confirmed that the regeneration plan had been endorsed and that the approach which the council had taken in carrying out significant engagement and consultation work with the voluntary and community sector had been held up as an example of best practice.

The next step for the Rotherham Central scheme would be to progress on defining exactly how the funding would be spent within the first investment period, working alongside the local MP, Sarah Champion. It was hoped that a Chair would shortly be appointed to the Neighbourhood Board, which would oversee the progress of that funding.

The second Pride in Place scheme in Maltby had been awarded by government in Autumn 2025. This scheme covered a much smaller geographical area but would receive the same level of funding of £20 million over 10 years. As one of Rotherham's principal towns, the Cabinet Member welcomed this extra investment and opportunity for the Maltby area.

The Cabinet Member explained that the government guidance on the Pride in Place programme had changed over the last few months and that this this had prompted internal review within the council with regard to the council's role as the “accountable body”. As a result, it had been decided that it would be more appropriate for the leading service within the council to be the Neighbourhoods Team rather than the Regeneration & Environment Team.

Megan Hinchliff, the Regeneration Programme & Strategy Manager, took Members through the update presentation, highlighting the following points:-

There would be a strong partnership approach and it was imperative that all elements worked together as one to successfully deliver the schemes under the programme:-

·       The Neighbourhood Board would be responsible for co-producing the Pride in Place plan and delivering it in the interests of local people, to improve the physical and social infrastructure of their communities.

·       The local communities would shape the priorities under the programme and hold the Neighbourhood Board and local authority to account.

·       The local MP now held a larger role in supporting the Chair and the Neighbourhood Board to inform the work and engage the community it represented.

·       The local authority would support the Neighbourhood Board to develop and deliver the plan and would act as the “accountable body” and ensure compliant, legal and effective use of the public funds granted under the scheme. The “accountable body” would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

To consider and endorse the outline schedule of scrutiny work for the 2025-2026 municipal year.

The Chair introduced the Work Programme item and updated Members on the recent site visit to the new Waterfront café development at Rother Valley Country Park, which the Chair and Councillors Thorp and Taylor had attended. The Chair commented that Members had been very impressed by the development and were excited by what it offered to residents of the borough.

The Chair confirmed that discussions with officers on-site had led to some scrutiny questions being asked and Members had explored with officers, challenges that had been experienced with procurement and HR processes in the run up to the centre opening. The Chair had raised some of these issues at the April Overview & Scrutiny Management Board meeting and was looking into the procurement issue further.

Councillor Thorp echoed that the Waterfront Centre was an impressive addition to Rother Valley Country Park. Councillor Thorp mentioned a particular procurement difficulty shared by staff regarding the sourcing of supplies of fresh chicken. Councillor Thorp also stressed the importance of ensuring adequate staffing levels at the Waterfront café, as a recent experience at Thrybergh Country Park café had demonstrated that there were not enough staff at that location, to manage demand.

Councillor McKiernan mentioned that the Waterfront Café would have a Head Chef on-site and that Members had been told that if this worked out well, it was hoped that the Head Chef could work across other catering sites across the borough, such as Thrybergh.

The Governance Advisor drew Members’ attention to the following other Work Programme updates:-

·       Neighbourhood Leadership Workshop 27 April 2026

The Governance Advisor reminded Members that a workshop on the draft Neighbourhood Leadership Strategy was due to take place on Monday 27 April 2026 and asked Members to confirm attendance.

·       End of the Municipal Year 2025-26

The Governance Advisor thanked Members for their support and input for the 2025-26 municipal year.

·       Next IPSC Meeting Tuesday 23^rd June 2026 at 1.30pm

The next IPSC meeting in June would be the first meeting of the new municipal year and the Governance Advisor confirmed that Members would receive the Work Programme for 2026-27 at that point for discussion and consideration.

The Governance Advisor further advised Members that for the upcoming municipal year, pre-meetings would be introduced to enable IPSC Members to discuss potential questions and key lines of enquiry prior to the formal meetings. This had been requested by Councillor Steele (as overarching Scrutiny lead) and the Monitoring Officer to ensure consistency of practice across the different Scrutiny commissions. These meetings would take place via Teams and were likely to occur around 5pm on the Thursday evening before each Tuesday meeting. Invites would be sent out for these pre-meetings in due course.

The Governance Advisor explained to Members that the calendar invites for IPSC meetings would also be increased from 2 hours to 3 hours. It was hoped that the majority of meetings would be completed within 2 hours, but where there was a busy agenda, it was important to ensure that this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To consider any item which the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

The Chair advised that there were no urgent items of business requiring the Commission’s consideration.