Agenda and draft minutes

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 3 June 2026 and to approve them as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

The minutes of the previous meeting were submitted for approval as a true record. Councillor Blackham identified two amendments: on page 14, paragraph 1, Minute Reference 5, where "New York" was corrected to "Yorkshire"; and on page 16, paragraph 5, Minute Reference 5, where the reference to "a Member" was amended to name Councillor Blackham as the speaker.

Subject to these amendments, the minutes were approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

Resolved: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 3 June 2026 be approved as a true record subject the amendments listed above.

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

No declarations of interest were made.

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

No questions were received.

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

There were no reasons to exclude the press or public.

Report from the Interim Director of Policy, Strategy and Engagement.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Note the overall position in relation to the Year Ahead Delivery Plan activities.

2. Note the Quarter 4 data for the Council Plan performance measures.

3. Note the updates on the Council Plan long term measures of success.

4. Note that future progress reports will be presented to Cabinet in January and July 2027.

At the Chair’s invitation the Leader, Councillor Read presented the year-end plan update for the first year of the current cycle, reporting that 82% of priority actions had been achieved, 81% of performance measures had been met, and 79% of long-term measures were moving in the right direction.

The Leader highlighted progress across a number of priority areas, including continued improvements to road conditions, completion of works at Rother Valley and Thrybergh Country Parks, ongoing play area improvements, and the opening of the Castle View Day Centre. Further updates included the securing of £75,000 in match funding for a multi-use games area in Kimberworth Park, the commencement of groundworks for new homes at Eastwood, progress on the Market Hall development, and agreement of contracts for the Whiston Flood Alleviation Scheme.

Several projects remained behind schedule. The Thriving Neighbourhoods Strategy had been split into two phases, with the first phase due to be considered by Cabinet and further work on integrated community services continuing. Works funded through the Our Places Fund were progressing in Swinton, although public realm works in Maltby had been delayed until August.

The Leader reported that investment in community facilities had progressed well overall, although further surveys at the Black Hut in Kimberworth Park had identified more extensive works than originally anticipated, with options including a potential rebuild being explored. Delays to upgrades at some business centres had largely been resolved and the programme was back on track.

An update was also provided on independent travel training for children and young people. Delivery had been affected by staff absence during the year, preventing the target from being achieved despite strong demand for the service. Finally, the Leader noted that employee participation in the staff opinion survey had reached 49%, narrowly missing the 50% target.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions, with Councillor Blackham seeking clarification regarding page 58 of the report, noting that it referred to the demolition of burnt-out buildings on High Street in February and asking which February was being referenced. In response, the Leader advised that some demolition works had already taken place and deferred to Andrew Bramidge, Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment for an update on the programme. The Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment confirmed that the demolition works referred to were scheduled to commence in September 2026 and reported that preparatory works, including the installation of hoardings, were underway and the project remained on track.

Councillor Blackham had observed that the buildings remained in place, noting that only one contractor had been erecting a fence between the Market Hall and the car wash. It was noted that there was no visible evidence of demolition works commencing other than publicity signage and questioned the reference in the report to demolition taking place in February, highlighting that this appeared to be incorrect given the update that works were now scheduled for September.

The Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment acknowledged that the reference  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

A Question-and-Answer session with the Leader of the Council regarding matters within the scope of their portfolio.

The Chair invited members to ask questions of the Leader relating to matters within his portfolio. The Vice-Chair began and raised concerns about the financial impact on smaller parish councils of requirements relating to surveys of lighting columns, noting that some councils may struggle to meet their share of the costs despite the support being offered by the Council. Clarification was sought on whether further assistance could be provided to those councils with limited precepts. Questions were also raised regarding the consultation process, with concern expressed that a number of parish councils had been unaware of the issue. The member asked what lessons had been learned and what improvements could be made to future engagement to ensure parish councils felt informed, consulted and listened to.

The Leader acknowledged that communication about the requirement for lighting column surveys had been inadequate, affecting parish councils and other users. It was explained that the surveys were required to meet legal and insurance obligations and could not be avoided.

The Council had apologised for its communication approach and committed to improving engagement with parish councils. Support available included funding 75% of initial survey costs, joint procurement arrangements, reimbursement for independently arranged surveys, and flexibility to spread costs across budget years. A 50:50 cost-sharing arrangement was proposed for future survey cycles.

The need for formal agreements governing the use of lighting columns was also highlighted to address liability and insurance issues and ensure a consistent approach across all areas. The Council stated that it would continue working with parish councils to address challenges, particularly for smaller councils.

The Vice-Chair sought clarification on why the issue had not been identified and addressed earlier through Member oversight and briefing arrangements, noting concerns about the impact on parish councils and any associated reputational implications. Clarification was also sought on the factors that had contributed to the situation and the lessons learned.

The Leader advised that former Cabinet Members had received verbal briefings when the regulations were introduced. However, no current Cabinet Member had been aware of the requirement prior to the issue arising, and there had been no formal decision notice or published documentation highlighting the changes. It was explained that the situation had resulted from weaknesses in communication processes within the service and that Members had relied on the information provided to them.

Councillor Blackham noted that some lighting columns might fail structural testing and therefore be unable to support hanging baskets or similar displays, raising concerns about the potential impact on the appearance of local areas. It was suggested that discussions be held with parish councils on future replacement programmes, including consideration of prioritising columns in locations where such displays were an important feature, alongside ongoing inspection and testing arrangements.

The Chair noted that a scrutiny review group was already examining the issue and would develop recommendations, informed by officer advice.

The Leader advised that all options remained under consideration and that decisions would be better informed once the initial surveys had been completed and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Report from the Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Approve consultation to determine whether the Council should adopt Schedule 4 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982.

2. Approve consultation on the draft Street Trading Policy, as outlined in the report.
   
   
3. Note that, following consultation, a future report will be presented to Cabinet in late 2026, outlining the final recommendations with regard to the adoption of Schedule 4 and the introduction of a Borough-wide Street Trading Policy.

At the Chair’s invitation the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, Councillor Williams introduced a report outlining a proposed approach to regulating street trading across the borough. It was noted that street trading could make a positive contribution to local economies and high streets, but that unmanaged activity could also have adverse impacts on communities and established businesses. The proposed approach would introduce a consent-based system for street trading, supported by a new Street Trading Policy. It was explained that, subject to Cabinet approval, a two-stage consultation would be undertaken on both the adoption of the relevant legislation and the draft policy. A further report setting out the outcome of the consultation and proposed policy arrangements would be presented to Cabinet at a later date.

The Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment, Andrew Bramidge emphasised the need for a balanced approach that supported business growth while maintaining attractive and accessible town centres. It was noted that concerns had been raised by residents regarding uncontrolled street trading and its impact on public spaces. The proposed policy was intended to provide a more effective means of managing street trading than existing planning and highway powers, while ensuring that the interests of both businesses and residents were appropriately considered through the consultation process.

Councillor Blackham questioned the rationale for introducing the proposed street trading regime, commenting that the report did not clearly evidence the scale or nature of the issues it sought to address. Concerns were raised regarding the anticipated costs of enforcement, the basis for the proposed trader fees, and the lack of detail around how the scheme would operate in practice. It was suggested that the proposals appeared underdeveloped and that further clarity was needed on the objectives, costs and expected outcomes. Concern was also expressed that additional charges could discourage traders, particularly in areas with lower footfall, potentially impacting local economic activity.

The Licensing Manager, Alan Pogorzelec explained that the proposals were subject to consultation and that feedback from businesses, residents and other stakeholders would help determine whether the approach should be adopted. It was noted that concerns had previously been raised regarding uncontrolled street trading, while the absence of a formal framework also limited opportunities for new traders wishing to operate in the borough. Examples were given of situations where existing traders could operate but there was no transparent process for additional businesses to access the same locations. It was argued that the proposed framework would provide a fairer, more consistent and transparent approach to managing street trading, supporting business growth while balancing the interests of residents and existing businesses.

Councillor Blackham expressed concern about the proposed consultation period, noting that it would take place over the summer months. Doubts were also raised as to whether the proposed regulatory framework would address practical constraints on street trading, particularly in locations with limited physical space. It was suggested that the policy would not necessarily create additional trading opportunities where capacity was already restricted.

The Licensing Manager advised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Report from the Executive Director of Corporate Services.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Note the revenue outturn position for 2025/26.

2. Note the required transfer from HRA reserves decreased by £4.3m following the revenue and capital outturn position.

3. Note the carry forward of the combined surplus schools balance of £2.395m in accordance with the Department for Education regulations.

4. Note the reserves position set out in paragraphs 2.15 to 2.16.

5. Note the capital outturn, funding position and programme variations as set out in paragraphs 2.17 to 2.25.

Report from the Executive Director of Corporate Services?.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Note the current General Fund Revenue Budget forecast overspend of £4.6m.

2. Note the updated position of the Capital Programme.

3. Approve the capital budget variations as detailed in section 2.17 of the report.

At the Chair’s invitation Councillor Alam OBE, Cabinet Member for Finance and Community Safety, introduced the report, noting that the forecast for the remainder of the financial year was based on actual income and expenditure for the first two months. As at May, the Council was forecasting an overspend of £4.6m, comprising directorate overspends of £7.6m partially offset by projected underspends within central services of £3.0m.

It was reported that the principal budget pressures remained within social care services, driven by increased market costs and a growing number of people requiring support with complex needs. The report also provided detailed explanations of vacancies across each directorate.

Members were advised that the global economic environment had remained volatile since the budget was approved, with market sentiment affected by conflict in the Middle East and ongoing energy cost pressures. It was noted that these factors carried inflationary risks and continued to be monitored through the Council’s medium-term financial planning process.

Councillor Yasseen welcomed the report’s transparency, particularly the recognition of uncertainties within directorate forecasts. Appreciation was expressed for the clear explanation of assumptions relating to areas such as home-to-school transport, which helped provide a better understanding of the financial risks and pressures facing the Council.

In response to a question from Councillor McKiernan, the Service Director, Financial Services clarified that the table set out the savings formally approved by Cabinet and Council for delivery during 2026/27. It was explained that the middle column showed the savings already secured alongside those still to be delivered during the remainder of the financial year. In relation to CYPS, it was confirmed that all approved savings had already been achieved and there were no outstanding savings proposals requiring delivery. However, it was emphasised that this did not remove the need for the directorate to continue managing expenditure within its overall budget allocation throughout the year.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board supported the recommendations that Cabinet:

1. Note the current General Fund Revenue Budget forecast overspend of £4.6m.
2. Note the updated position of the Capital Programme.
3. Approve the capital budget variations as detailed in section 2.17 of the report.

Report from the Executive Director of Corporate Services.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Note the Treasury Management Prudential Indicators outturn position as set out in Section 2 and Appendix 1.

At the Chair’s invitation Councillor Alam OBE, Cabinet Member for Finance and Community Safety, presented the final Treasury Management report for 2025/26, explaining that its purpose was to review treasury activity against the strategy approved at the start of the financial year. The report set out actual prudential and treasury indicators, in accordance with the requirements of the CIPFA Code, and confirmed that treasury management activities had been undertaken in compliance with relevant legislation, guidance and professional standards, thereby limiting exposure to financial risk.

It was noted that the actual indicators were included in Appendix 1 and that quarterly updates had been provided to the Audit Committee throughout the year. The Council had continued to follow a short-term borrowing strategy on the advice of its treasury advisers, with borrowing undertaken only when required and where repayment was expected to be financed in future years. This approach had resulted in a significant increase in the Council’s net under-borrowing position.

Reference was also made to the ongoing economic uncertainty, with inflation having reduced from the historically high levels experienced in previous years, although market sentiment continued to be affected by conflict in the Middle East. Members were advised that treasury activity, economic conditions and associated risks would continue to be closely monitored and reported through regular updates.

The Service Director, Financial Services highlighted that the changing political environment in the UK could also contribute to further short-term volatility within financial markets. In response to previous discussions on Treasury Management Strategy, it was reported that options were being considered to increase longer-term borrowing over the medium term, should opportunities arise, in order to reduce reliance on short-term borrowing and mitigate associated risks.

It was emphasised that there were no concerns regarding the current level of short-term borrowing, which continued to be reviewed regularly with the Council’s external treasury advisers. The approach was noted to be consistent with that adopted by many other local authorities across the sector.

Councillor Yasseen sought clarification on why the Council’s reported under-borrowing position excluded short-term borrowing, noting that the position appeared significantly different when short-term borrowing was taken into account. It was asked whether there was a legal or technical reason for this approach and whether the overall borrowing position should be a cause for concern. The Service Director, Financial Services explained that the treatment was a technical requirement of the Treasury Management Code of Practice, which defines and measures under-borrowing against long-term borrowing rather than short-term borrowing. While the Council reported both long-term and short-term borrowing positions, the under-borrowing calculation was assessed using long-term borrowing only.

In response to a further question, it was confirmed that inclusion of short-term borrowing would not materially alter the overall assessment of the Council’s financial position, which remained robust. However, it was acknowledged that short-term borrowing carried refinancing and interest rate risks, as borrowing would need to be renewed within a relatively short period. Members were advised that these risks were actively monitored by the Treasury team on a day-to-day basis,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To consider the annual update ahead of its presentation to Council on the activities and outcomes achieved in respect of Overview and Scrutiny during the 2025-2026 municipal year.

The Chair presented the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report for 2025/26 and highlighted the continued development and effectiveness of scrutiny across the Council. It was reported that scrutiny activity had become more focused, evidence-led and outcome-driven, resulting in increased pre-decision scrutiny, workshops and site visits, alongside stronger engagement from Members and partner organisations.

The report demonstrated how scrutiny had influenced key strategies and policies, including the Best Start Plan and Housing Strategy, while contributing to improved governance, transparency and accountability. Reference was also made to scrutiny’s role in reviewing issues of importance to residents, including selective licensing, neighbourhood health services, domestic abuse and sexual offences.

The Chair noted ongoing work to strengthen scrutiny arrangements and ensure a consistent approach aligned with the Council Plan and corporate priorities. Thanks were expressed to Members, co-opted members, officers and partners for their contributions throughout the year, with particular recognition given to the officers involved in preparing the report.

In recommending the report for submission to Council in September, the Chair proposed that the Chairs of the Select Commissions also provide brief summaries of their respective committees’ work over the previous 12 months to ensure wider recognition of scrutiny activity across all committees.

No additional recommendations were made. Following a vote, the Board approved the report and its submission to Council.

Resolved that: the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board:

1. Acknowledged and considered the content of the report; and
2. Approved the Annual Report for consideration by Council on Wednesday 9 September 2026.

To consider the Board’s Work Programme.

The Governance Manager presented the current work programme and provided an update on the street lighting columns scrutiny review. It was reported that the review group had met on 3 June and noted that structural testing remained necessary, with costs to be shared on a 75% Council and 25% parish basis, alongside provision for deferred payment arrangements. Progress was being made on procurement for the testing programme, with most parish councils opting for Council-arranged testing, expected to take between six and eight weeks. Members had raised safety concerns regarding the weight of hanging baskets on lighting columns and supported the development of clearer thresholds to ensure a proportionate approach. Officers had been asked to produce further guidance and draft policy revisions for consideration at the next review group meeting on 14 July. The discussion had focused on balancing safety, cost and practicality.

Members were advised that the September OSMB meeting was scheduled to consider reports on the replacement of refuse vehicles and public on-street bin collections.

An update was also provided on the Children's Takeover Challenge. The Youth Cabinet had selected its manifesto themes, although confirmation of the theme chosen for scrutiny engagement and a meeting date was still awaited from officers. It was noted that arrangements would be added to Members’ and senior officers’ diaries once confirmed, and that regular follow-up was taking place to secure dates.

The Chair advised that additional items proposed by Members for inclusion within the work programme were being reviewed. A consolidated response would be prepared, with proposals assessed through the work programme matrix and allocated to the appropriate scrutiny committee where relevant.

Councillor Yasseen asked whether one of the submitted suggestions related to the new Neighbourhood Strategy proposals.

The Chair confirmed that the matter had been considered by the Places Select Commission the previous week and indicated that an update would be provided later in the meeting as part of the committee feedback.

Resolved That: The Overview and Scrutiny Management Board Work Programme and update be approved.

To receive updates from the Chairs of the Select Commission on work undertaken and planned for the future:

• Health Select Commission
• Improving Lives Select Commission
• Improving Places Select Commission

Update from Health Select Commission:

Councillor Yasseen provided an update from the Health Select Commission. It was reported that representatives from a local group of doctors and hospital clinicians, volunteering to promote and prioritise women's health in Rotherham, had attended the meeting. While the Commission was unable to support all of the group's proposals, support had been offered for a number of initiatives, including a local conference. The Commission had also recommended that a representative of the Women's Health Network be appointed as a co-opted member of the Health Select Commission, subject to the necessary approval process.

An update was also received on the transition to the new Castle View facility in Parkgate. Members discussed previous concerns regarding changes from former provision to the new facility, but it was reported that overall feedback from users moving to the new provision had been positive.

The Governance Advisor confirmed that the recommendation to appoint a representative of the Women's Health Network as a co-opted member of the Health Select Commission would be referred to OSMB for formal approval.

Update from Improving Lives Select Commission:

Councillor Monk reported that the Improving Lives Select Commission had considered the first phase of the SEND Reform Plan, focusing on the expert-led model intended to provide specialist support to schools at an earlier stage. Further scrutiny of the reforms was scheduled for a future meeting.

Update from Improving Places Select Commission:

Councillor McKiernan provided an update from the Improving Places Select Commission, advising that the Neighbourhood Leadership Strategy and the wider neighbourhoods policy framework would be considered as separate pieces of work. It was also reported that the Commission had considered the Local Nature Recovery Strategy during the pre-consultation stage and had recommended that correspondence be sent to the South Yorkshire Mayor and the relevant Government department regarding matters arising from the review.

Councillor Yasseen sought clarification on the proposed Neighbourhood Leadership Strategy, expressing concern that separating neighbourhood functions could create barriers between councillors and officers and potentially undermine a joined-up approach to neighbourhood working.

Councillor McKiernan explained that the purpose of the strategy was to strengthen the "One Council" approach rather than create further division. It was intended to improve accountability, strengthen the role of neighbourhood teams, enhance tracking of Member enquiries through a casework system and ensure greater involvement of ward councillors in local service decisions and activities. Members were advised that the strategy aimed to improve coordination between councillors, neighbourhood teams and Council services, including engagement at neighbourhood meetings and consultation on local projects.

To review and identify items for pre-decision scrutiny from the Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

Link to: Browse plans - Forward Plan of Key Decisions, 2025 - Rotherham Council

The Governance Manager explained that the September OSMB agenda already included reports on the replacement of refuse vehicles and public on-street bin collections. In considering future work programme items, it was suggested that the Board may also wish to review the July Financial Monitoring Report and the Social Value Annual Report, which would provide an update on progress against both new and existing social value commitments.

Members were invited to raise any questions or comments regarding the proposed items for the forward plan.

The Chair advised that the forward plan would continue to be reviewed and updated in consultation with Vice-Chair, Councillor Bacon, to ensure that the Board’s future agenda remained appropriately focused on forthcoming priorities and key issues.

Resolved: That the Forward Plan be noted.

As part of their role the Chair and Vice Chair of OSMB are appointed to the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (MCA) Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Chair of OSMB is the Vice Chair on this committee.  

This committee holds the MCA to account and ensure that all aspects of the decision-making process are transparent, inclusive and fair.   The Committee are responsible for checking that the MCA is delivering its objectives and that the decisions made in policies, strategies and plans have been made in the best interests of the residents and workers of South Yorkshire.

The published agenda packs and minutes can be accessed via: South Yorkshire MCA.

Members who have comments and queries regarding any item on any agenda should refer this to the Chair of OSMB and the Governance Manager at the earliest opportunity to ensure they’re reflected in debate during the relevant public meeting.

The Chair advised that there had been no meeting since the Board last met. Members were informed that the next meeting was scheduled to take place on the 7 July 2026 at 2.00pm.

To consider any issues referred for call-in from recent Cabinet meetings.

There were no call-in issues.

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

There were no urgent items.