To put questions, if any, to Cabinet Members and Committee Chairpersons (or their representatives) under Council Procedure Rules 11(1) and 11(3).
Minutes:
There were 21 questions:
1.
Councillor C Carter: From reviewing the letter sent to parents and
guardians regarding school admissions it does not make clear the
schools which are in catchment and the map on the council website
to find this information is very clunky. Why is this?
The Deputy Leader
and Cabinet Member for Children and Young People explained
that, while the mapping tool was widely used, recent feedback
suggested that it could feel clunky for the end user, and so
officers would review the tool and consider how to add clearer
guidance to improve the user experience.
In her supplementary, Councillor C Carter stated that some other
local authorities included the catchment schools on the letter sent
to parents. She asked if this could be done in Rotherham.
The Cabinet Member agreed to hold a meeting with Councillor C
Carter and officers to look into this proposal. She also encouraged
all members to contact her if they came across any similar
issues.
2.
Councillor Bower: Which performance indicators will be used to
measure the effectiveness of the new Street Safe team?
The Cabinet Member for Finance and Community Safety explained that
the team was now deployed across the Town centre and Principal
towns and would be
operating between 8am and 8pm from the beginning of February now
that recruitment and onboarding was almost complete, with just one
post remaining vacant.
The team's most valuable work could not be captured by numbers
alone: already in the short time they had been deployed, the teams had supported
victims of domestic abuse, responded to individuals in mental
health crisis, and provided early intervention and signposting for
many, to prevent harm. These actions built trust, improved
wellbeing, and strengthened community resilience. The Council would
capture these impacts through case studies and feedback from
residents and partners, ensuring the full picture of the
team’s contribution was understood.
The effectiveness of the new Street Safe team would be measured
through a mix of related performance indicators and wider
impacts. Specific indicators of
relevance were the levels of:
· anti-social behaviour
· enforcement outcomes such as fixed penalties, legal notices and legal action,
· footfall, and levels of community engagement.
The Council would continue to monitor public confidence through
surveys and feedback, and review partnership outcomes with agencies
like the police and housing services.
In
his supplementary question, Councillor Bower stated that some of
the impacts referenced could not be related directly back to the
Street Safe Team. He was concerned that scrutiny was being
conducted on a “vibes” basis and not on hard data. He
asked what hard data could be used.
The Cabinet Member explained that feedback from residents, local
business and the service was vital to assessing the impact of the
team. A range of data would be used to do that.
3.
Councillor Reynolds: How many brownfield sites were actually
considered by the Whitestone solar project?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
4.
Councillor Reynolds: When did the Council become involved, informed
that consultation on this project would be happening?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
5.
Councillor Reynolds: Before the current site [Whitestone] was
identified what involvement had RMBC had in arriving that this was
the best possible solution and the only option worthy of
progress?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
6.
Councillor Reynolds: I have not found anyone who supports this plan
anywhere in Rotherham. So if the electorate is totally against it
will the Labour majority in RMBC please come back with proposals to
resolve this matter and stop the democratic process becoming
compromised to a point where people feel completely overlooked and
never listened to?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
7.
Councillor Thorp: Under Towns and Villages funding the Stag area
got £150,000 but as the project started there was a problem,
as the department running this TV funding found out there were
plans to build another much needed cycle lane, so part of the work
planned never happened, so where did this fund go to 18months on
still no answers.
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
8.
Councillor Thorp: On Thursday January the 8th another apology for
missed bin collections was sent out sighting vehicle breakdowns,
well if you don't run a waste collection along good business
practice like Biffa or any other waste company dose what do you
expect and also excessive tonnage of waste due to the festive
period, was this an early April fools joke.
The Cabinet Member for Street Scene and Green Spaces explained that
this period had been challenging, with cold-weather breakdowns and
more trips to the tip needed than usual due to Christmas waste, and
that was a problem that had been faced by other councils too. The
Council had, rightly, diverted some of their drivers onto gritting
during the particularly cold spell since Christmas. There is only
so much capacity. The Cabinet Member appreciated the frustration
this caused residents and stated that was being taken seriously.
The Council had active recruitment campaigns and were bringing in
additional staff, which was helping to restore capacity, and it
would continue to do so.
In his supplementary, Councillor Thorp asked to be provided with
the data on how many times bins had not been collected due to
excessive waste over the Christmas period for the last ten
years.
The Cabinet Member confirmed that a written response would be
provided.
9.
Councillor Thorp: Why are we considering moving changing the easter
school term break to be a fixed date instead of when the easter
Christian festival is, determined from the first full moon after
the spring equinox so, the first full moon after the 21st of March.
This has been like this for decades why change We are a Christian
country act like one.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Children and Young People
explained that Rotherham had moved to a fixed Easter holiday
calendar in 2022, in line with Sheffield and Doncaster Councils.
This change was introduced to provide greater consistency and
certainty for families, schools, and employers when planning term
dates. Under the traditional system, Easter could fall anytime
between late March and late April, which often caused significant
variation in school holiday patterns year to year. It was known
that uneven term lengths caused disruption to children’s
educational progress.
A
fixed-date approach helped reduce disruption, while still allowing
schools and communities to celebrate Easter as a religious
festival. For children and young people, this provided a more
predictable school year, supporting continuity in learning. It also
helped families plan activities and childcare well in advance,
which could contribute to a more positive holiday experience, and
on some occasions could help Rotherham families to get cheaper
holidays.
Bank holidays, including Good Friday and Easter Monday, continued
to be observed within the fixed holiday period, ensuring that
families could still enjoy traditional celebrations without
impacting the stability of the school calendar.
The Cabinet Member did state that the consultation remained open
and members had been feeding in their views.
10. Councillor Thorp:
Yorkshire Water had another water main burst at Worrygoose Island
over Christmas. The Grass and plantings that cost in excess of
£20,000 according to RMBC have been destroyed the grass is
compressed sand and tyre tracks all-over the Island and across the
planting how is RMBC going to replace the destruction to the Island
at no cost to the tax-payer.
The Cabinet Member for Street Scene and Green Spaces explained that
Yorkshire Water had recently carried out repair works on a burst
main on Worrygoose Island and caused consequential damage to the
surface planting. YW would be required to return to complete the
reinstatement of the damaged landscaping at their cost when weather
conditions allowed.
In his supplementary, Councillor Thorp asked if any of the damaged
caused by vehicles was the fault of RMBC.
The Cabinet Member explained that some minor damaged had been
caused to the grassed areas by Council vehicles when installing and
removing the Christmas tree. This had already been scheduled for
repair in early spring.
11. Councillor
Bennett-Sylvester: The Rothbiz article "Transport funding diverted
to Rotherham Gateway Station project" inferred funding was set to
be diverted from areas such as the Mushroom Roundabout. Is the
station being built at the expense of continued congestion on the
A630 in Dalton?
The Cabinet Member
for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was not present at the
meeting to answer and as such, a written response would be
provided.
12. Councillor
Bennett-Sylvester: What has been the cost of deploying parking
enforcement officers at Forge Island since October and what is the
estimated loss of revenue from parking charges since the Arc cinema
opened?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
13. Councillor
Bennett-Sylvester: It's welcome that the siting of temporary
accommodation units or crash pads is more evenly distributed across
the borough than in 2023. What has changed in the way properties
are allocated in the past 3 years to create a more even
spread?
The Cabinet Member for Housing explained that a new Temporary
Accommodation Placement Policy was introduced in 2023 to better
manage our increasing portfolio of temporary accommodation,
strengthening the framework for placement decisions and alignment
to household needs.
In
2024, the Council further increased the provision of temporary
accommodation to 173 to provide more appropriate, sustainable, and
cost-effective options for households (including families) where
temporary accommodation was unavoidable. In making these changes,
the Council had enabled a wider geographic distribution of
placements and reduced reliance on unsuitable or costly
provision.
In his supplementary question, Councillor Bennett-Sylvester stated
that he had been critical of the numbers in the past as the most
deprived areas had a disproportionately high number of crash pads
compared to other wards. However, they were now more evenly spread
across the borough. A concern that Councillor Bennett-Sylvester had
was that it was difficult to contact officers if there were any
issues with crash pads. He asked if a seven-minute briefing could
be arranged for members to set out how referrals could be made and
who could be contacted at the Council if there were issues relating
to the crash pads.
The Cabinet Member explained that use of the crash pads usually
involved multiple agencies, so she understood the difficulties in
working out who to contact. She agreed to arrange a seven-minute
briefing.
14. Councillor
Bennett-Sylvester: We are seeing several businesses in the Howard
Street using the public highway to display goods in a variety of
forms and cooking food. Is this allowed?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
15. Councillor
Bennett-Sylvester: What are the requirements for community groups
and leaders to participate in decision making for Pride in Place
funding?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
16. Councillor
Yasseen: Why did Council not require/guide the solar farm
developers to hold consultation events within the directly affected
villages (Brampton-en-le-Morthen, Harthill, and Todwick) rather
than primarily outside these communities, ensuring local residents
most impacted had accessible opportunities to engage and provide
feedback on the solar farm proposals?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
17. Councillor Yasseen: Will the Council explicitly record in its report that the solar farm proposal would take Best and Most Versatile (BMV) productive arable farmland, conflicting with:
· Government’s planning policy & ministerial guidance to avoid BMV land & prioritise brownfield/lower-grade land,
· Government’s Land Use Framework
· Local food security aims,
Therefore urge the Labour Government to better protect the borough’s best farmland?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
18. Councillor
Yasseen: Has the Council commissioned or reviewed an independent
assessment of the environmental and agricultural impacts of losing
approximately 4,700 acres of productive Rotherham farmland to the
proposed solar farm development, including effects on soil quality,
biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and local food
production?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
19. Councillor
Yasseen: What consideration has been given to the loss of local
heritage and landscape character, particularly where parts of the
proposed solar farm site are recorded in the Domesday Book and
include listed buildings and public rights of way?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
20. Councillor
Yasseen: Given Whitestone’s electricity will be sold at gas
linked market rates, offering no reduction to residents in
household bills while profits flow to overseas investors, what
concrete local benefits such as guaranteed jobs, business rates
retention, or ring-fenced community funding will the council demand
for residents to justify supporting the scheme in any form?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.
21. Councillor Currie:
With the recent government statement on pavement parking ,what will
the council be doing to ensure that the secondary legislation is
introduced in 2026?
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy was
not present at the meeting to answer and as such, a written
response would be provided.