MINUTES OF THE BRENT KNOLL ANNUAL PARISH MEETING

Held on Monday 23 April 2007 in the Parish Hall at 8.15 pm

with Councillor Miss J J M Owen, Chairman of the Parish Council,

in the Chair

Present:   County Councillor A J Ham: 9 members of the Parish Council; the Clerk: and 20 members of the public. 

The Minutes of the Annual Parish Meeting held on 24 April 2006, having been circulated, were approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman of the Meeting.

Parish Council Report: The Parish Council Report for 2006/7, having been circulated, was accepted by the Meeting.  In response a question from the floor additional information was given on issues relating to development control (particularly in the Burton Row area with regard to infill development) and the associated need to maintain the areas of trees which formed such an attractive feature of the rea.  A question was also raised on the timing of the forthcoming public inquiry into the Wind Farm Planning Appeal, and the need to maintain the momentum of opposition and to avoid apathy was stressed in the ensuing discussion.

Sedgemoor District Council Report: Cllr Filmer commenced his report by outlining his roles as Vice-Chairman of the SDC Development Control Committee, and as a member of the Scrutiny Committee, which had recently conducted an investigation into debt collection procedures and made a number of recommendations for improvement.

Cllr Filmer explained that he was also involved in local issues such as the Harp Road footway, planning queries relating to the activities of Sanders Garden Centre, the speedway at Edithmead, the Wind Farm planning application (where his role had inevitably been circumscribed), and other issues such as open space near Tesco in Burnham and the Frank Foley Parkway.  On a more local level he had also been involved with environmental problems affecting land near the Tennis Club and the Manor Ride drains, where Wessex Water had now agreed to maintain the lower run until 2010, on which date new legislative provisions concerning sewer maintenance would come into force.

Cllr Filmer stated that the Wind Farm planning appeal inquiry was being organised on the basis that it was likely to last for four days, which he considered a conservative estimate.  

He also mentioned that Brent Knoll probably had more Tree Preservation Orders than any other area of Sedgemoor, but stressed that the existence of such orders did not preclude landowners from carrying out essential arboricultural work.

Cllr Filmer then referred briefly to the Somerset unitary status bid and explained that the plan had been submitted to the Government and that “public consultation” - which did not include consulting either individual members of the public or Parish Councils - was now taking place. The District Councils had put forward an alternative “Team Somerset” approach for working together more closely.  There were already a number of areas where closer working was happening - for example Sedgemoor also operated CCTV installations for two other District Council areas.

In response to questions Cllr Filmer confirmed that there was concern about the proposals to abolish Community Health Councils, and about the increasing influence of the South West Regional Assembly, stressing the need to try and keep decision making local: outlined the arrangements for Councillors’ allowances and remuneration of essential expenses: summarised the “cabinet government” system that now applied in SDC: explained that a postal referendum on the proposed unitary status was under consideration: and explained where responsibilities lay in regard to the safety testing of gravestones.

Somerset County Council Report: Councillor Ham drew attention to the explanatory booklets which had been issued with the Council Tax bills explaining how the various charges were made up. He drew attention to the apparent drop in the County Council precept but pointed out that the Fire and Rescue Service was now charged separately, and that (comparing like with like) the County precept had therefore risen.  He also drew attention to the rise in the Avon and Somerset Police precept and explained that this was due to the authority’s decision to fund some of the additional PCSOs, originally promised to be funded by Government, when the Government funding was reduced.

The Lyons Report on local government finance had now been published: it proposed the continuation of Council Tax but with additional lower and higher bands and a re-valuation of property.  The Government had shelved any implementation until after the forthcoming elections. 

The performance of Somerset County Council had recently been assessed by Government Inspectors and assessed as “Four Star” - the highest grade.  Negotiations were in progress with IBM over the possible outsourcing of functions such as revenue, personnel, and legal.  A 10-year contract (to be let jointly with Taunton Deane District and the Police Authority) was envisaged  and savings of £20-£25m were anticipated.

Cllr Ham then summarised the history of the unitary status bid.  The case had been submitted in January: it proposed one Council for the whole of Somerset, to take up power from April 2009 with elections to a “shadow” authority in May 2008.  A government decision on the proposals had been promised by July.  Cllr Ham explained that his own view was that there was nothing intrinsically wrong with unitary authorities, but they worked best in areas with a close affinity (such as the neighbouring authorities in the former County of Avon).  There was concern that the proposed authority for Somerset would cover too wide and disparate an area: there would be a reduction in democratic access and the claimed cost savings were not proven.   A postal referendum on the proposals remained a possibility.

Turning to local issues, Cllr Ham explained that, whenever possible, he continued to press the case for traffic lights at the Fox and Goose Junction (although it had to be recognised that the scheme did not meet the Government’s current criteria for highway expenditure).   He had also  arranged that a local meeting involving all interested parties would be held to discuss the proposed Sanders roundabout on the A38 when work started on the Garden Centre expansion scheme.  He had been involved with the Wind Farm planning case and would appear at the inquiry to oppose the plans.  The County Council had a policy of encouraging wind farms generally: Cllr Ham stated that he favoured renewable energy generation but the positioning of such installations was critical.

In response to questions from the floor, Cllr Ham explained that the County Council was opposed to the permanent provision of speed indicating signs but favoured instead moveable signs which could visit locations for short periods: additional signs of this type were being obtained.  He also explained that the County had a scrutiny sub-group which had considered the requirement to maintain patients’ representation given the abolition of Community Health Councils.  Finally, he also advised that the County Council had voted 31-28 in favour of making the unitary status bid.

Presentation on Policing: this item was cancelled as the police representatives had advised, at very short notice, that they would be unable to attend.

Concluding Remarks: the Parish Council Chairman, Cllr Miss Owen,  paid tribute to the work of two Parish Councillors who were not seeking re-election.  Cllr Brian Rich had served for a total of 27 years and attended 254 meetings in that time: Cllr Sybil Rich had served for 14 years and attended 136 meetings.

Cllr Miss Owen then mentioned that she would be standing down as Chairman of the Council after the election, and Cllr Osborn thanked her, on behalf of the Council, for her period of chairmanship.

The meeting closed at 9.50 pm with thanks to the ladies of the WI who were about to provide refreshments.

Home   News & Events   Clubs & Societies   Amenities & Businesses    Walks    History   Parish Council   Useful Links

This site is provided by the Brent Knoll Parish Council. Constructed and maintained by Matthew Warnes. Last updated 08-Apr-2008

All the information is presented in good faith and is believed to be correct but no responsibility can be accepted for any errors or omissions.  Information on local businesses is similarly given in good faith but without acceptance of any liability in regard to any transaction that may be entered into by viewers of this site.