DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting Association of Community Councils (ASCC)

Telephone: 01595 743828 CCLO email: [email protected]

Minute of the ASCC meeting held on Saturday 24th March 2018, 11.00 am, at Town Hall Chambers

Present Jim Gear ASCC Chair Jim Anderson ASCC Vice Chair Alistair Christie-Henry CC Edna Flaws CC Amy Garrick-Wright Gulberwick, & Cunningsburgh CC Frances Valente (clerk) CC Ian Walterson Sandness & Walls CC John Hunter CC Douglas Anderson Skerries CC Stephen Simmons Tingwall, Whiteness & Weisdale CC Gordon Thomson CC David Hughson CC Laurence Odie Yell CC

In Attendance Jan Riise Executive Manager – Governance and Law, SIC Louise Robertson Projects Officer, Community Planning & Development, SIC (Minutes) Simpson Executive Manager – Community Planning & Development, SIC Michael Duncan Community Council Liaison Officer, Community Planning & Development, SIC

1. Introductions The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Apologies Apologies were received from Burra and CC; CC; Nesting & Lunnasting CC; & Aithsting CC, Iris Sandison, Cllr Beatrice Wishart

3. Presentation

Community Empowerment () Act 2015 The Chair invited Vaila Simpson to give a presentation on Community Empowerment in Shetland, with the opportunity for everyone to ask questions afterwards. Vaila spoke briefly about the Christie Commission, then went on to provide an overview of Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act (hereafter referred to as CEA). The CEA has also brought about some changes and requirements for community planning, such as the requirement for all Community Planning Partnerships to produce a ‘Local Outcomes Improvement Plan’ (LOIP). The Shetland Partnership’s LOIP is called ‘Shetland’s Partnership’s Plan’; Vaila provided a copy to everyone at the meeting. The Chair thanked Vaila for the presentation and welcomed any questions.

Page 1 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

Questions and Answers Alistair Christie-Henry asked whether the term ‘Football clubs’ under the CEA referred to sports clubs. It was advised that ‘football clubs’ refers to professional football clubs, and therefore would not be applicable to Shetland.

Ian Walterson queried whether the Council was intending to implement a food growing strategy. Sites have already been identified for allotments. He commented that in the past, crofts were cultivated intensively, but it is now returning to sheep and/or cattle production. Although there is a lot of land in Shetland, it is either owned or tenanted. Vaila advised that they were waiting on guidance, but there is a requirement for Local Authorities to manage waiting lists for allotments. It depends on what interest there might be.

Alistair Christie-Henry raised his concern about boating facilities in Shetland if they are to be transferred into community ownership.

Vaila asked everyone if there would be any interest in providing further training about the CEA to Community Councils (CC). Jim Anderson felt that an awareness raising session might be more appropriate.

Information about Community Asset Transfer (CAT) could be provided to Community Councils as and when required. Gordon Thomson asked whether there were any examples of Community Asset Transfer in Shetland. Vaila said that there had been one formal application received so far. There were another seven or eight applications that may or may not become formal Community Asset Transfer applications.

Gordon Thomson then asked for examples of what communities were applying to take ownership of. Vaila said that often it was an empty building, or perhaps a piece of land that the community needed to enable them to do or provide something for their community. Jan Riise added that the formal application that was going through the Community Asset Transfer process at the moment, is to make use of the former school in South Nesting. Although Community Councils will probably not be asked to front a proposal in most cases, it is likely that they will be asked for their view, and it is therefore important to ensure that Community Councils are prepared.

Jan Riise offered further clarification, advising that as Community Councils cannot own land or buildings, they are precluded from making a CAT application. However, there may be a group, such as a Development Group, that could make an application. The application has to be from a legitimate community group, and should have at least 20 members. Jan Riise was of the opinion that training would help to guide Community Councils to ensure they could get advice from the right people, especially as community groups may seek advice from their local Community Council.

Vaila Simpson will send everyone a link to the Scottish Community Development Centre’s briefing note1, from 2015, which includes key points about the CEA. Action: Vaila Simpson

4. Note of the previous meeting, held on 30th September 2017 The minute of the previous meeting was adopted. It was proposed by Ian Walterson and seconded by Alistair Christie-Henry.

1 Scottish Community Development Centre (2015), Briefing Number 2/15: The Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act. Available at: http://www.scdc.org.uk/media/resources/policy-and-practice/SCDC%20briefing%202_15_CE_Act.pdf

Page 2 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

5. Matters arising from previous minute not on the agenda

5.1 Chair’s Meeting (held 13th September 2017). Summary of key points. Laurence Odie raised the issue of the internal ferry service. The previous Marine Superintendent had agreed to Community Councils collecting fees for community run allocations which effectively enabled Community Councils to double their allocation of community runs. However following a meeting with Council officials in December it was clarified that this was not possible to charge for the allocated community runs as there were legal implications. Community Councils had their allocated number of runs and any additional ferry requests were deemed to be a charter. In the past there appeared to be two hire rates, one for Community Councils and one for commercial hires Ferries Service encouraged folk to book via its Community Council to secure the cheaper rate.

Laurence Odie said that the new arrangements advised by officials were considered as a backward step for the isles and Yell CC were now at a stage that they had to admit defeat. Yell CC has a demand for additional ferries with 7 requests already this year, and possibly 2 or 3 more expected. Alistair Christie-Henry advised that the ferry costs need to be examined and there is a need to search for external funding to extend provision. Alistair Christie-Henry did not accept defeat and commented that Community Councils need to work with the Council on this matter.

The Chair asked Jan Riise to investigate the legality and rules relating to community runs. Jan agreed to look into it and report back to the ASCC at the next meeting. There should also be a Council report to clarify what is permissible, legal and what can be funded. This would be applicable to all CCs with a ferry service, and it would also be useful to make Council Members aware of this too. Action: Jan Riise

Jim Anderson proposed that the minute of the Chair’s Meeting (13th September 2017) was an accurate summary of the key points; seconded by Alistair Chrisie-Henry.

6. Adoption of ASCC Constitution The Chair was keen to give everyone the opportunity to make any amendments to the revised ASCC Constitution, prior to adopting them, as they cannot be amended thereafter.

Jan Riise was asked for comments on the new ASCC Constitution. Several points were discussed, and it was agreed that the following amendments should be made to the new constitution and circulated:

 At paragraph 3.2, Michael Duncan raised concerns – on behalf of Aithsting and Sandsting CC – about the wording ‘Enable Community Councils to form a collective voice on Shetland wide issues’. It was agreed that ‘Enable Community Councils to participate in forming and expressing a collective voice on Shetland wide issues’ would better describe this aim. It was clarified that although the ASCC is a collective voice, it does not detract from CCs having their own independent view on a topic or issue.  At paragraph 3.5, spelling mistake to be corrected for ‘practice’.  At paragraph 4.1, the first sentence will be amended to read ‘Each Community Council shall be entitled to be a member or the ASCC’.  At paragraph 5.1, a further statement be added to clarify that the Vice Chair is to perform the role of Chair in the event that the Chair is absent from the ASCC meeting, or not in Shetland. Thereafter, there should be no further reference made to the Vice Chair.  At paragraph 6.2, a quorum of at least six members would be more appropriate; a quorum of 10 was agreed.

Page 3 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

 Paragraph 7.1 will be amended to reverse the delegated authority statement. The Chair is authorised to take decisions or respond to matters of urgency on behalf of the ASCC in between ASCC meetings. The Community Council Liaison Officer (CCLO) to advise where there is a need for the Chair to make a decision urgently. Views of ASCC members may be sought via email to ensure that a more collaborative approach is achieved where deemed necessary. The ASCC Chair has the option to instruct the CCLO to write to all CC Chairs on the matter, seeking their views within a short timescale.  At paragraph 8.1, it was decided that the second sentence be amended to read ‘Regular business meetings shall normally be called in March, June and September’.

Jan Riise commented that the ASCC does not have a voice for non-members. Jan Riise suggested that as this is a new constitution it be assumed that all Community Councils are automatically members of the ASCC and the Community Councils are required to formally opt out from being part of it.

It was agreed that Council officers update the draft Constitution and add in the necessary form of words to address the agreed changes above.

Action: Michael Duncan / Jan Riise

7. Adoption of ASCC Standing Orders The amended Standing Orders were considered, and the following changes agreed:

 There was further discussion about the time, date and place of ASCC meetings and the inclusion of remote participation as a potential solution to the problem of ferry timetabling issues. After a lengthy discussion it was agreed that the wording should be changed to ‘Regular business meetings shall be called in March, June and September’. This was proposed by Jim Anderson, and seconded by Alistair Christie-Henry. Jan Riise recommended that it should be stipulated that if the Chair is unable to attend in person, they cannot Chair the meeting by teleconference as it is not practical.  ASCC members joining by teleconference can vote; it contributes to the quorum and allows maximum opportunity to participate in meetings so that they are not at a disadvantage. There are alternative ways to vote, for instance by email, or augmenting decisions by telephone. There is provision to overcome such scenarios.

The Chair commented that the new Standing Orders makes no reference to the Joint Liaison Group (JLG). Michael Duncan explained that having taken advice internally it was identified that the JLG requires to be separate from the ASCC governance documents and should have its own Terms of Reference and rules. Jan Riise explained that following a review of appointments to external bodies, there were currently no Council appointments to the JLG.

Ian Walterson pointed out that the JLG has been a useful group in the past and could gather at relatively short notice. The Chair advised that the JLG only meets when it has business to discuss. Discussion followed as to whether or not the JLG was needed and what was its added value. Jan Riise suggested the concept of the JLG needed to be explored, and needed more debate. There were other options available such as the ASCC appointing a subcommittee.

The Chair asked that a report be prepared to the next ASCC meeting to set out options for the JLG.

Action: Michael Duncan / Jan Riise

Page 4 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

Jim Anderson pointed out that text changed in the Constitution would need to be mirrored in the Standing Orders. It was agreed that Council officers will update both documents accordingly. Discussion followed about when the documents would be implemented. Ian Walterson commented that the ASCC new governance documents should be adopted subject to the agreed amendments, and implemented immediately.

The above changes were proposed by Jim Anderson, seconded by Ian Walterson.

Michael Duncan asked once necessary changes had been carried out on the Constitution and Standing Order whether the ASCC would wish to open a bank account. It was agreed that the ASCC should open its own bank account. Ian Walterson proposed that the Chair and Vice Chair should be signatories, along with Alistair Christie-Henry and John Hunter who also volunteered. Amy Garrick-Wright seconded this.

Jan Riise put forward a suggestion; he recommended carrying out the various amendments (which were agreed at the meeting today) to the Constitution and Standing Orders, and circulating the document before getting assent. Everyone agreed to this.

Action: Michael Duncan / Jan Riise

8. External Ferries – response from Transport and Islands Minister The letter of response from Humza Yousaf was noted.

9. Future Air Traffic Provision – Sumburgh Airport Edna Flaws explained that a member of Dunrossness Community Council, Rick Nickerson, also sits on the Sumburgh Airport Consultative Committee. There has been discussion and a strategy produced about Highland and Islands Airports Limited’S (HIAL) proposal for air traffic control to be done remotely in future. Dunrossness CC has great concerns about this, and it affects the whole of Shetland.

Frances Valente said that she had spoken to a friend about this issue recently; her friend had been a Military Air Traffic Controller. Her friend’s opinion was that there should be no problems with remote air traffic control at HIAL airports, except in the case of Sumburgh Airport for the following reasons:

 Not all air traffic at Sumburgh Airport is scheduled.  There were no guarantees that the system could not be hacked into.  There could then be serious problems if the system goes offline.  Sumburgh Airport is unusual in that there are roads going over the airstrip so CCTV is not enough; you need “eyes and ears” to see what is there.

The Chair added that HIAL’s proposal seems to presume good, unbroken broadband links. However, these links do not yet exist in Shetland.

Edna said that Dunrossness CC feels strongly that there has not been enough consultation carried out on this issue and far stronger Broadband links would be required with dedicated lines. There has been a lack of detail shared to date, and the paper produced lacks alternative options. Edna advised that there are a lot of other issues which need to be considered and discussed. It is hoped that Dunrossness CC can be part of that consultation and that dialogue is open and Dunrossness CC are pushing for this.

At this stage, Edna said that she wanted to let the ASCC know that if any other CCs had concerns about this issue, Dunrossness CC Member, Rick Nickerson would be willing to take these to the Sumburgh Airport Consultative Committee. A letter of support from the ASCC may be needed at a later stage.

Page 5 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

Jim Anderson commented that the lack of consultation by HIAL was concerning and Alistair Christie-Henry said the ASCC should lend support to this matter. There has been a lack of consultation by HIAL with regards to recently announced car park charges, and in relation to Air Traffic control proposals.

Jan Riise suggested that, given the new ASCC Constitution and it represents the views of a large proportion of Shetland communities, it would be good to invite HIAL to the next ASCC meeting in June to discuss these concerns. Michael will send an invitation to HIAL to attend the next ASCC meeting.

Action: Michael Duncan

Edna Flaws was thanked for alerting the ASCC to this issue and thanks were also extended to Dunrossness CC for offering to represent the views of CCs at the Sumburgh Airport Consultative Committee meeting(s).

10. Collection of Scrap Cars Gordon Thomson explained the current situation in Unst, concerning the collection of scrap cars. He asked if any other CCs had experienced similar difficulties. Other CCs in the isles confirmed this was the case, and as a result, there is often a backlog of vehicles waiting to be collected.

Douglas Anderson said that, in Skerries, where feasible they load the car onto a trailer then deliver it to the scrap yard. Volunteers undertake this, and the CC pays for the return journey of the car and trailer transporting the vehicle. Douglas Anderson also commented that vehicle owners should be responsible for disposing of scrap cars.

[1.05 pm – Vaila Simpson left the meeting]

Michael Duncan read out a detailed response he had received from Patti Dinsdale (Team Leader – Environmental Health, SIC) and agreed to circulate it. Action: Michael Duncan

Jan Riise commented that this issue should be a Shetland Planning Partnership concern as scrap vehicles are a blight on the landscape. It affects all communities and there should be equality in terms of solutions to the matter. Jan Riise proposed that Patti Dinsdale should be invited to the next ASCC meeting to provide a further update on the situation. Michael will send an invitation to Patti Dindale to attend next ASCC meeting.

Action: Michael Duncan

Jim Anderson proposed that a letter be sent from the ASCC to DEFRA to state their concerns. Alistair Christie-Henry seconded this.

Action: Michael Duncan

Gordon Thomson commented that there is a cost to dispose of scrap cars which Autogreen are paid to carry out this service. However Autogreen are currently not delivering the service in Shetland and should be pursued.

Page 6 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

11. Budgets Michael informed the meeting that 2018/19 core budgets had been approved, at a cash standstill. CCs are to email Michael to drawn down funds.

The Community Development Fund (CDF) has a budget of £68k for the New Year and three bidding rounds have been set in March, April, and May. Applications that meet the CDF scheme criteria are usually funded in Round 1 because there is sufficient budget. However applications submitted in rounds 2 and/or 3 may not all be successful as the budget reduces. In the event that the fund is oversubscribed applications need to be ranked and prioritised at Round 2 and 3.

Jim Anderson asked whether the ASCC could apply for funding, for a special project. Michael confirmed that it could, if it had a specific project and met the criteria. Jim Anderson felt that, as the CC elections will take place in November, some funding could allow the ASCC to promote the elections and encourage more people to stand for election.

[1.20 pm – Laurence Odie left the meeting]

Amy Garrick-Wright said that Gulberwick, Quarff and Cunningsburgh CC was now fully populated, due to their Clerk distributing leaflets to every house. She felt that there was not enough awareness of the role of CCs; promotion online would be good to target the younger generation.

It was agreed that Jim Anderson would look into the possible costs of promoting CC elections on behalf of the ASCC, with help from Amy Garrick-Wright and Frances Valente.

Action: Jim Anderson, Amy Garrick-Wright, Frances Valente

Ian Walterson expressed concerns that if the ASCC applied for CDF funding it would be taking money away from CCs. Michael advised that the CDF fund was sometimes underspent and budget spend varied from year to year. Alistair Christie-Henry added that the ASCC would need to be wiser about how it would ask for funding, and be accountable for it.

Jan Riise suggested that the age and gender profile of CCs should be considered, in order to target promotion. If there is a significant difference at the 2018 Elections, due to increased promotion, the ASCC could seek mainstream funding from SIC to budget for promotion of CC Elections in future as there would be an evidence base (this would require a report). Jan Riise suggested Anne Cogle provide hints and target groups. Action: Anne Cogle 12. Items for decision at future meetings

Non-domestic water rates Ian Walterson brought up the issue of water rates at community halls. Although Ian was not on a hall committee he had been made aware that the community halls were being classed as public houses, and being charged the same rate. If a community hall has a bar, it precludes them from being a charity. Ian has been told that there is a review on water rates.

Non-domestic rates come under Part 11 of the CEA, but it was clarified that this refers to the non-domestic rates that the Council would take in. Jan Riise suggested that an informative paper could make a recommendation on non-domestic rate reliefs. It was decided that Michael would send an email to all CCs, seeking their views on whether non-domestic water rates was an issue for the community hall(s) in their area. Action: Michael Duncan

Page 7 of 8

DRAFT Minute – ASCC 24th March 2018 Subject to approval at the June 2018 ASCC meeting

Membership of other organisations Ian Walterson is a member (and Chairperson) of the Shetland Shellfish Management Organisation (SSMO). Elected Members of the SIC can no longer sit on the Board of Directors, therefore the SSMO are looking for another member. It was decided that Michael Duncan will ask ASCC members, by email, if anyone wants to put themselves forward to become a member of the SSMO. Michael will also attach a letter to the email, which includes details of what is required (such as number of meetings to attend).

Action: Michael Duncan

It was agreed that the Chair (or Vice Chair) will have delegated authority to decide which ASCC member to put forward for membership of the SSMO.

13. Date of next meetings The date of the next ASCC meeting is to be determined.

The Chair thanked everyone for attending the ASCC meeting, and is looking forward to the next meeting in June.

The meeting closed at 1.45 pm.

Chairperson ......

Date ......

Page 8 of 8