Agenda and draft minutes

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

In relation to Minute Number 98, Councillor Baggaley declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest as he lived in one of the pilot areas in relation to Item 8, the Waste Policy Pilot and Consultation Update.

In relation to Minute Number 95, Councillor Steele declared a Non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Trans-Pennine Trail in relation to Item 6, Transport Capital Programme 2025/2026.

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

There were no questions from members of the public or press.

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

There were no items of business on the agenda that required the exclusion of the press and public from the meeting.

To consider the reasons for the call-in request relating to the Strategic community Infrastructure Levy Cabinet decision.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations:

1. That Cabinet approves the allocation of Strategic CIL funds to the following project(s):

·       Medical Centres Improvements

·       Trans Pennine Trail Community Access

2.    That Cabinet approves delegation to the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, to establish the process to release funding to the approved project(s) as set out in Section 5 of the report.

Councillor Steele declared a Non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Trans-Pennine Trail in relation to this item.

The Chair noted that this item had been brought forward on the agenda to enable the Leader of the Council to be in attendance. The Leader, Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment and the Assistant Director, Planning, Regeneration and Transport were welcomed.

At the Chairs invitation Councillor A Carter put forward the reasons for calling in this decision. It was noted that twelve projects were put forward for consideration, five were by the Integrated Care Board (ICB) and seven by the Council. It was felt that the discussion during the Cabinet meeting on 10 February 2025 did not explain the allocation of council resources in deciding which projects the council prioritised in progressing forward through the use of the strategic Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The discussion was limited to what the prioritise were. It was queried what the vision for transport was within the borough, as it was felt that places such as the Todwick roundabout were a big priority because the majority of people travel by car or bus in the more rural areas of the borough. It was felt that the Council prioritised projects that involved cycle lanes and used a large amount of funding and would not provide benefits for the residents.

The Chair invited Councillor Yasseen to present her reasons for supporting the call-in request. It was noted that CIL was not an unrestricted funding stream for desirable projects. It should be used for must-have projects such as schools and GP surgeries. The funding was intended to address the real demand of pressures from aspects such as new housing developments. There was a lack of understanding in how some of the decisions had been made. It was indicated that this was a community led selection process therefore what was the methodology behind which projects were chosen. In Councillor Yasseen’s opinion, if the gateway tests were applied to Trans Pennine Trail Community Access scheme, it would not fulfil the second test regarding responding to the impact of growth. If Councillor Yasseen were to pick a project, that was community led, it would be the Broome Lane Crossing. This project had a large number of pressures due to the school and the issue regarding children’s safety, however it was noted that it had not been selected.

Councillor Yasseen wanted to understand the distribution of benefits, for example, whilst the investment in the 5 GP surgeries were welcomed, it was queried how they were chosen and was that based upon the distribution of benefit? Was it to address the impact of growth in those communities?

Councillor Yasseen felt that CIL was very defined statutory funding, and the Trans Pennine Trail Community Access scheme did a disservice to purpose of CIL funding. There was a real impact if aspects such as school expansions, or dental practices were not funded, however it would not affect essential public services if the Trans Pennine Trail  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Note the progress made to date.

2. Approve the Modern Slavery Transparency Statement 2025/26 and its publication on the Council’s website.

At the Chair’s invitation the Assistant Director, Community Safety and Street Scene introduced the report highlighting that the Co-operative Party’s Charter against Modern Slavery was adopted by the Council on 25 July 2018. This was the seventh year of delivery against that Charter. The Charter set out standards over and above any legal or statutory requirements, in terms of actions the Council would take to seek to address issues relating to modern slavery.

The charter focused on the procurement activity of the local authority ensuring that sufficient actions were taken to mitigate the risk of modern slavery through its supply chains.

A requirement of the charter was that the modern slavery transparency statement was republished yearly. This provided the latest national picture, in terms of the number of referrals to the national referral mechanism and how it compared to previous statements. There had been 126 local referrals to the national referral mechanism.

The Council took the opportunity to strengthen its approach to modern slavery each time a policy was reviewed or updated, for example the newly developed Child Exploitation Strategy included aspects around modern slavery.

Modern slavery was discussed, and awareness raised to over 450 general practitioners and health professional who attended an open learning event and members were engaged during Safeguarding Awareness Week. In addition, the team had worked across the rented sector, social landlords as well as private rented landlords through the licensing areas to raise awareness and how to spot the signs of modern slavery and understand how to refer people on for support.

The Council continued to work with South Yorkshire Police who had a specific modern slavery and organised crime unit. In particular to enhance reporting pathways and further encourage partners, council officers and community members to provide intelligence and information that could identify modern slavery and address it.

It was noted at an additional section had been included in the safeguarding children’s partnership manual, specifically at children from abroad, those that may be victims of modern slavery, trafficking and exploitation.

The Council continued to operate a number of single points of contact across the organisation, within different directorates. Eight officers had been trained and provided with additional information in order to support colleagues to continues to raise awareness within their directorates in relation to modern slavery.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries on the points raised earlier. Councillor Yasseen welcomed the policy and noted that training was being delivered. How the Council was working with the police to dismantle the root causes of modern slavery was queried along with asking if the policy was helping to contribute to that? The Assistant Director, Community Safety and Street Scene indicated this was an excellent example of where members established a policy and the policy drove the activity both within the Council and across the partnership, more widely. The report highlighted the unit that sat within South Yorkshire Police, which worked across the regional footprint. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1.    Approves the schemes and allocations of funding outlined in Section 2 of this report.

2.    Delegates authority to the Strategic Director, Regeneration and Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, to determine the type and location of pedestrian crossing to be designed per paragraph 2.2.4 following the prioritisation process.

3.    Approves the reprofiling of £175,000 previously allocated to the Collision Investigation & Prevention workstream, to enable these funds to be allocated, subject to subsequent Cabinet decision, in the 2026/27 Transport Capital Programme as set out in paragraphs 2.2.11 and 2.2.12.

4.    Delegates authority to the Strategic Director, Regeneration and Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, to determine the schemes to be delivered with the Structures and Minor Works allocations.

5.    Delegates authority to the Strategic Director, Regeneration and Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, to determine new schemes for delivery in Rawmarsh West and Wath wards, within budgets approved in March 2024, as part of tranche 2 of the Local Neighbourhood and Road Safety programme.

At the Chairs invitation the Assistant Director, Planning, Regeneration and Transport introduced the report highlighting this was the annual update on the Transport Capital Programme. It was year four of a five-year programme which had £6 million allocated between 2022 and 2027 and was the local neighbourhood complimentary transport programme. This was the year-to-year programme of local schemes which included projects such as the pedestrian crossing programme, minor works programme and the local neighbourhood’s road safety programme, which was developed in consultation with local member to identify local road safety and traffic projects in each ward.

The report sought to allocate the funding for 2025-2026 as indicated in table one. This would leave just over a million pounds to be allocated in the final year, 2026-2027. The report mentioned other stands of funding, £426k for highway structures plus some elements of RMBC capital and Section 106 contributions that had previously been allocated.

The report reflected upon some of the successful delivery, most notably, the first of five South Yorkshire authorities to complete the Transforming Cities programme and delivered two significant highway structure projects and three new pedestrian crossings.

The third recommendation was to re-profile funding for collision investigation and prevention into the following year. This was funding that was specifically for engineering improvements that would address patterns in the collision data. Recent studies had not identified any treatable patterns so that work would be reviewed over the course of the year and seeking to allocate funding to the flowing year.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries on the points raised earlier. Councillor Yasseen sought clarification on the location of the crossings identified in the report. The Assistant Director, Planning, Regeneration and Transport explained the scheme allocated for in table one was Wath Road in Brampton and there was a further £100,000 allocated to identify a further crossing in 2026-2027. This would go through the prioritisation process to assess new crossings. Councillor Yasseen felt it was hard to understand the prioritisation process. The Assistant Director, Planning, Regeneration and Transport explained there were two stages in terms of identifying and prioritising crossings. The first stage was identification, which came from requests from members of the public, sometimes suggestions came forward as a result of planning applications with Section 106 contributions. The new requests for crossings were then assessed and prioritised according to a set process, which could be shared with members. The next element was the budget considerations, which inevitably there were far more requests for crossings that budget provision, which was where the prioritisation process and appraisal heled to formulate the recommendations.

Councillor A Carter raised concern that the recommendations to delegate authority to the Strategic Director, Regeneration and Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy did not lead to enough transparency and democratic oversight of the decision. Councillor A Carter felt the process how the requests were submitted, how they were assessed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendation:

That Cabinet approve the draft Licensing Act Statement of Licensing Policy attached to this report as Appendix 1 for consultation in accordance with the requirements of the Licensing Act 2003.

At the Chair’s invitation the Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene introduced the report which was regarding the Licensing Act 2003.  The report covered licensing on aspects such as bars, pubs and clubs and the sale of alcohol. It covered regulated entertainment such as music, indoor sports etc and it covered late night refreshments. The Council had to produce a statement of licensing policy. which had to be reviewed every five years.  Licencing officers had undertaken informal consultation with various partners, local license holder and taken account of feedback and information that had feed into the policy. It was an ambitious policy in terms of setting out the Councils standards and expectations for how those kinds of regulated provisions were delivered across the borough along with promoting and supporting the licensing objectives. The report was seeking approval of the draft policy for a period of consultation.

The Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene explained that in terms of the Licensing Act objectives that were embedded within the Licensing Act 2003.  This was about the prevention of crime and disorder and was about the promotion of public safety, protection of children from harm, the prevention of public nuisance.

The Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene explained the specific aspects included were around counterterrorism, such as Martins Law and the development in relation to that along with further information about the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults. The document sought to set out good practice in a range of different areas which included making adequate provision around the welfare of customers, management of issues like smoking and vaping, minimisation of waste, rehearsal of written contingency plans and enhanced safeguarding practices. The policy sought to recognise that it would cover a range of different premises and aimed to support those premises to think about their bespoke individual needs and how that related back to the policy. It was looking to promote equality and inclusion in licensed venues. It looked to further improve the experiences of communities that used licensed venues for any particular purpose.  It included aspects such as an inclusive transport policy, procedures, making sure venues were accessing regular training for staff.  It sought to promote environmental best practice. The policy sought to set out core hours that would be applicable to each individual different types of premises, but the changes would not mean that license applications would automatically be refused if it fell outside of those hours, but it provided an understanding of what the guiding principles were.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries on the points raised earlier. In response to a query from Councillor Yasseen the Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene explained the policy was trying to set a standard of expectation. It would not necessarily drive any particular enforcement against venues although it would provide a guide to the Council of what it believes was appropriate in those circumstances. On the issue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

To receive the presentation detailing the update on the Waste Policy Pilot and Consultation.

At the Chair’s invitation the Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene introduced the presentation and confirmed that engagement had been undertaken with the ward members who represented the Waste Policy pilot areas of Ferham and Waverly. Ferham was picked because it showed high levels of waste contamination with eight of the thirteen loads that were sampled as part of the data monitoring period being contaminated. Three of nine loads sampled in Waverly were contaminated. The two areas were chosen due to the differences in the nature of the urban landscapes and properties, meaning they would provide more valuable information at the conclusion of the pilot.

Information on the proposed pilot schemes would be sent out by post to all of the affected residents and would explain the intentions of the pilot scheme. During the pilot, officers would speak with resident’s face to face. Support and engagement with residents would be increased during the pilot scheme. This would entail officers working with waste colleagues and having conversations with residents to understand what contamination may have been found in the waste bin, along with the provision of education and guidance. Additional resources were available to support the delivery of these schemes.

The pilot scheme would take place over a three-month period. Recycling took place on a four-weekly cycle; therefore, the scheme would take place over three stages to understand what the impact was at each stage. There was no intention to hold face-to-face consultation events at this stage. Community groups and local media channels would be utilised as part of the consultation. 

The Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene confirmed that the maximum level of fines would be £80, which could be set lower at the discretion of the Council. The amount would be part of the consultation to ascertain what the appropriate sanction would be if residents had not been able to address the contamination issues at the end of the twelve-week cycle.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries on the points raised. Councillor Keenan queried how wide the consultation would be, and how the leaflets would be produced to work with the varied communities noting that Ferham was a diverse area. The Assistant Director Community Safety and Street Scene clarified that fines would not be issued as part of the pilot scheme. The Council would consult with schools, and it recognised the challenges in terms of diversity in the different languages spoken across the communities. Speaking with the residents face-to-face was important to understand the challenges faced as part of the pilot. Consulting through community groups and online would help to remove some of the barriers to ensure information was presented in the correct way. Councillor Keenan noted that the Council needed to ensure this service was accessible and carried out in the right way.

Councillor Yasseen raised objections regarding the areas chosen for the pilot, expressed concerns regarding the consultation. The Assistant Director Community Safety and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

To review and identify items for pre-decision scrutiny from the Forward Plan of Key Decisions covering the period from 1 March 2025 to 31 May 2025.

The Board considered the Forward Plan of Key Decisions - 1 March 2025 to 31 May 2025. The Chair urged members of OSMB to consider this document and suggest topics for future pre-decision scrutiny. 

In response to a query it was noted that a joint session would be arranged with members of OSMB and Improving Places Select Commission to consider Selective Licensing.

The Chair also urged members to attend the pre-meetings.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board:

1.    Noted the Forward Plan of Key Decisions - 1 March 2025 to 31 May 2025.

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

There were no urgent items.