Public Document Pack

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Members of Management Committee are invited to attend this meeting at Commercial Road, Weymouth, Dorset in the to consider the items listed on the following page.

Matt Prosser Chief Executive

Date: Tuesday, 31 October 2017 Time: 9.30 am Venue: Ocean Room - Weymouth Pavilion Members of Committee: J Cant (Chair), R Kosior (Vice-Chair), F Drake, J Farquharson, C Huckle, C James, R Nowak, A Reed, G Taylor and K Wheller

USEFUL INFORMATION For more information about this agenda please telephone email [email protected]

This agenda and reports are also available on the Council’s website at www.dorsetforyou.com/committees/ Weymouth and Portland Borough Council.

Mod.gov public app now available – Download the free public app now for your iPad, Android and Windows 8.1/10 tablet from your app store. Search for Mod.gov to access agendas/ minutes and select Dorset Councils Partnership.

Members of the public are welcome to attend this meeting with the exception of any items listed in the exempt part of this agenda.

Disabled access is available for all of the council’s committee rooms. Hearing loop facilities are available. Please speak to a Democratic Services Officer for assistance in using this facility.

Recording, photographing and using social media at meetings The council is committed to being open and transparent in the way it carries out its business whenever possible. Anyone can film, audio-record, take photographs, and use social media such as tweeting and blogging to report the meeting when it is open to the public, so long as they conform to the Council’s protocol, a copy of which can be obtained from the Democratic Services Team. A G E N D A Page No.

1 APOLOGIES

To receive apologies for absence.

2 MINUTES

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting (previously circulated).

3 CODE OF CONDUCT

Members are required to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and the Council’s Code of Conduct regarding disclosable pecuniary and other interests.

 Check if there is an item of business on this agenda in which the member or other relevant person has a disclosable pecuniary or the disclosable interest.

 Check that the interest has been notified to the Monitoring Officer (in writing) and entred in the Register (if not this must be done within 28 days).

 Disclose the interest at the meeting (in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct) and in the absence of dispensation to speck and/or vote, withdraw from any consideration of the item where appropriate. If the interest is non-pecuniary you may be able to stay in the room, take part and vote.

4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

30 minutes will be set aside to allow members of the public to ask questions relating to the work of the Council. 3 minutes will be allowed per speaker. The order of speakers is at the discretion of the Chair and is normally taken in the order of agenda items, questions must relate to a report which is on the agenda for consideration. Notice is not required if you wish to speak at the meeting but if you require an answer to a question it is advisable to submit this in advance by contacting a member of the Democratic Services team or alternatively, by emailing [email protected]. 5 QUESTIONS BY COUNCILLORS

To receive questions from Councillors in accordance with procedure rule 12.

6 MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ACTION PLAN

To consider the Management Committee Action Plan (to follow).

7 2018/19 BUDGET UPDATE 5 - 12

To receive an update on the latest budget forecast and to outline the process for setting the budget.

8 BUSINESS REVIEW 2017/18 13 - 78

To consider a report of the Financial Performance Manager.

9 FINANCIAL REGULATIONS INCLUDING PROCUREMENT 79 - 170 STRATEGY AND SOCIAL VALUE STATEMENT

To consider a report of the Financial Resources Manager.

10 RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION: PLANNING FOR 171 - 192 THE RIGHT HOMES IN THE RIGHT PLACES

To consider a report of the Spatial Policy and Implementation Manager.

11 WEYMOUTH TOWN CENTRE CONSERVATION AREA - REPORT 193 - 206 OF THE SCRUTINY AND PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE

To receive the report of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee.

12 COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW - CONSULTATION 207 - 334 RESPONSES AND DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LOCAL GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENT FOR WEYMOUTH

To consider a report of the Corporate Manager, Democratic Services & Electoral Services.

13 WEYMOUTH TOWN CENTRE CHRISTMAS PARKING 335 - 338 CONCESSION

To consider a report of the Parking and Transport Manager. 14 APPLICATIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF 339 - 346

To consider an application for Discretionary Rate Relief.

15 4 MONTH FORWARD PLAN 347 - 358

To consider the 4 monthly Forward Plan.

16 URGENT BUSINESS

To consider any items of business which the Chair has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to section 100B (4) )b) of the Local Government Act 1972. The reason for the urgency shall be specified in the minutes.

17 EXEMPT BUSINESS

To move the exclusion of the press and the public for the following item in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 & 5 of schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended)

18 NORTH QUAY UPDATE 359 - 366

To consider an exempt report by the Strategic Director. Agenda Item 7

Management Committee 31 October 2017 2018/19 Budget Update For Decision

Brief Holder Cllr Jeff Cant – Finance & Assets

Senior Leadership Team Contact: J Vaughan, Strategic Director

Report Author: J Vaughan, Strategic Director

Statutory Authority Local Government Acts 1972, 1988, 1992 and 2003

Purpose of Report

1 To provide an update on the latest budget forecast and to outline the process for setting the budget.

Officer Recommendations

2 That the Committee receives a report in February with the final budget proposals.

Reason for Decision

3 To enable the Council to balance the 2018/19 budget.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4 The Budget report in February 2016 set out the financial forecast for the next three financial years with estimated budget gaps. Against this background the Councils Financial Strategy focused upon three strategic options, those being:-  Plan A – Unitary Council  Plan B – Single ‘super District’ Council  Plan C – Stay as a stand-alone Council

5. The proposals for Unitary Councils in Dorset were submitted to the Secretary of State in February and at the time of writing the report we have not received the outcome of this.

Page 5 Summary of the Key Issue

6. The key issues can be summarised as:- a. The budget gap across the decade is £10.693million. b. The current year’s budget is fully balanced and the latest Business Review reports shows a predicted underspend for the year due to savings being achieved ahead of scheduled. c. The work that has already been done on the 2018/19 budget means that despite it being just under £900,000 we are very confident that will have a balanced budget for next year. d. The Council has reserves over and above the risk based level. e. The budget process will identify options for balancing the 2019/20 budget and will enable the Council to continue with its financial management approach of planning ahead and delivering savings early. f. Overall the Council is now in a relatively strong financial position despite the environment being very challenging.

Decade of Change in funding and financing

7. Although the council has faced some difficult financial challenges in the past, the current decade represents the biggest financial challenge due to the combination of the austerity measures and changes in financing of local authorities.

8. The table below is a summary of other overall financial impact upon the councils funding. The table below shows the budget gap each year that has been or needs to be closed by either increasing income or reducing expenditure.

Year Gap Cumulative Gap £’000s £’000s 2010/11 1,109 1,109 2011/12 1,212 2,321 2012/13 827 3,148 2013/14 2,265 5,413 2014/15 900 6,313 2015/16 750 7,063 2016/17 529 7,592 2017/18 1,198 8,790 2018/19 897 9,687 2019/20 1,006 10,693

9. To help put this into context the Councils Budgeted Expenditure for the current year is £50.3million however out of this £30.7million is spent on Housing benefits over which the Council has no control. This leaves only £19.6million and means that there has to be some significant changes in how the council’s finances are managed and services provided. The vehicle for doing this has been the unique Partnership between the three Councils which has delivered significant savings and increased income. Page 6 10. The decade has also seen significant changes in how Councils are funded and the introduction of 50% Business Rates retention scheme. However, with the Government still controlling the multiplier and the Valuation Office setting the values, the funding the Council actually receives is significantly less than it collects.

11. The table below shows the funding collected from business rates and the amount that the Council retains.

Total Business Rates collected £14.7m

District 40% Share £5.9m Less Tariff Payment (£4.6m) Net Income £1.3m

S31 Grant / Safety Net / Levy £0.5m

Final Total Income £1.8m % of income collected 12%

Financial Forecast

12. Part of the key to having a strong financial position is to focus on the medium term rather than just the year ahead. This enables you to make strategic decisions and understand the longer term impact of them. The Medium Term Financial Forecast has been therefore been extended to cover 2020/21. It has been updated for the latest information available and will continue to be updated as further information becomes available such as the national pay award, council tax base, Dorset Waste Partnership budget etc.

2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 £000’s £000’s £000’s Gross Budget Gap 897 1,006 537

Budget Process

13. Our approach to developing a successful and smooth budget setting process is based upon:-  Members – having involvement through various briefings and reports from September to February  Head of Service / Corporate Managers – taking responsibility and accountability for their services  SLT – taking the strategic overview and holding the Head of Service / Corporate Managers to account  Finance – providing the key information and support

Page 7 14. There are various elements to developing the budget proposals and the key ones are set out below.

Base Budget Review 15. This process has been very successful in identifying efficiency savings and increased income. It involves looking at every budget line (except pay), reviewing the outturn from 2016/17 and previous years to identify potential underspends or over achievement of income which can be built into future years budgets. As in previous years, the analysis and work will be undertaken by the Finance Team and the outcome discussed with the relevant budget holders.

Staffing Establishment Review 16. In addition to the monthly update of the establishment, a full Establishment Review will be undertaken by Finance. This generally identifies small savings, for example where a post on top of grade has been replaced by someone on a lower grade, but also provides Budget Holders with the opportunity to confirm their establishment posts and ensures that the establishment does not grow by ‘stealth’.

17. The review will also consider changes to NI thresholds, pension changes and the pay award to be applied. There is no national pay award agreement in place for 2018/19 onwards.

Review of Previously Identified Savings / increased Income Options 18. As part of producing the current year’s budget, Heads of Service spent a large amount of time both individually and collectively identifying options that could produce future savings. A number of these options were progressed and included within the final budget proposals that were approved by members.

19. These options need to be reviewed and refined. This will be completed during the autumn by SLT and Heads of Service. They will then be brought to Members as required.

Star Chamber 20. This approach will see the budget for a particular area being reviewed in detail by an ‘independent’ group with the Budget Holder being questioned about their service. This would bring together the work of the Base Budget Review, Establishment Review and previously identified options but would also look to identify any further options that might be available.

21. The Star Chamber process is good at getting ‘under the skin’ of a service and identify options that the budget holder wouldn’t necessarily put forward themselves. The process can be quite resource intensive so a proportionate approach will be taken. This process will help identify options that could be incorporated into the 2019/20 budget and will continue the process of forward planning.

Outline Timetable 22. The outline timetable for the budgetPage setting 8 process is as follows. Month Activity September  Joint Member Briefing September / October  Report to Scrutiny Committees October / November  Star Chamber sessions  Decision Making Committees consider updated MTFP and approach to balancing the budget  Joint Scrutiny of the Budget December  Joint Member Briefing January  Member Budget Briefing February  Report to Scrutiny Committee  Management Committee consider budget proposals  Full Council set the budget

Capital Budget 23. The Council has an up to date Asset Management Plan which is a key document for future planning and helps clarify the future costs of maintaining the current assets. The partnership with PSP provides a commercial vehicle for taking forward a number of schemes which are likely to produce future capital receipts. Also the future sale of North Quay will provide a significant capital receipt which the Council will need to consider how it is used once this has been received.

24. The potential Peninsula Development scheme would be a very significant capital scheme and financial analysis of this is currently being undertaken.

Reserves 25. The Council holds earmarked reserves which are funding that has been set aside for a particular purpose. In effect they are the Council’s equivalent of savings accounts but it should be remembered that they are once off sources of funding and when they have been spent they are gone.

26. General Reserves are funding that is set aside to cover unforeseen circumstances. There is a legal duty for the Chief Finance Officer (Section 151 Officer) to provide members with assurance that the level of reserves are adequate. In order to help provide this assurance, a risk based assessment of the minimum amount of general reserves is undertaken and has been set as £1,205,700.

27. The Budget Working Group has been actively reviewing reserves which has seen the following uses of them being agreed:-

Page 9 Detail £ Weymouth Community Governance Review 200,000 LGR Once off Project Costs 500,000 Grant to Portland Sculpture & Quarry Trust 20,000 Town Centre Manager 100,000 Pedestrianisation of Town Centre 5,000 Boxing Club 30,000 Accelerating home building 50,000 Weymouth Esplanade Illuminations 0 Public Toilets 400,000 Asset Management 150,000 Friends of Greenhill Garden 6,000 Radipole Park Gardens 30,000 Osprey Community Leisure Centre (Portland) 65,000 Grant to support community groups in the 50,000 Borough Information Governance 50,000 The Journey / MEMO project 50,000 Pavilion Grant - Capital 250,000 Local housing need schemes - Capital 450,000 Peninsular Development - Capital 500,000 Total 2,656,000

Weymouth Harbour 28. The Harbour Management Board has the task of producing the budget proposals for the Harbour Budget. These then come to Management Committee for approval and incorporation into the overall Council budget.

29. There is currently some work being progressed concerning Harbour Assets and the Harbour finances which may have a financial impact and will need to be incorporated into the final budget proposals.

Implications

Corporate Plan 30. The budget allocates the financial resources of the councils and therefore directly impacts upon the delivery of the corporate plan.

Financial 31. As the legally appointed Chief Finance Officer (Section 151 Officer) I have a legal duty to the Council to ensure that the budget proposals are robust and that there is a balanced budget for 2018/19.

Page 10 Equalities 32. Any changes to Service Levels require an Equalities Impact Assessment which are considered as part of the decision making process.

Environmental 33. None directly from this report

Economic Development 34. None directly from this report

Risk Management (including Health & Safety) 35. The budget process should ensure that the budget estimates are robust. The council has general reserves to cover any unforeseen circumstances and the level of the reserves is assessed using a risk based methodology.

Human Resources 36. There are some the savings that have already been agreed and involve changes to staffing structures as a result of the partnership between the three councils. The agreed HR process for dealing with these have been followed.

Consultation and Engagement 37. There are a number of member and staff briefings on the budget. The budget proposals are subject to review by Scrutiny.

Appendices 38. None

Background Papers 39. Member Briefing to all Councillors on 6 September 2017 and report to September Scrutiny Committee.

Footnote 40. Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Jason Vaughan Telephone: 01305 838233 Email: [email protected]

.

Page 11 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8

Management Committee 31st October 2017 Business Review 2017/18 – For period ending 30th September 2017 For Decision

Briefholder Cllr Jeff Cant – Finance & Assets

Senior Leadership Team Contact: J Vaughan, Strategic Director

Report Author: Christian Evans – Financial Performance Manager

Statutory Authority

Members have a responsibility under the Local Government Act to regularly review the Council’s financial position and this report fulfils this requirement.

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To set out the Council’s performance across all services. This is broken down into financial performance, key performance indicators and risks on a service by service basis.

2. Officer Recommendations

That members:-

2.1 a) Note the predicted outturn for the 2017/18 revenue and capital budgets. b) Note the KPI’s for each service for the period and any actions being taken. c) Note the Service Plan updates provided by Heads of Service / Corporate Managers d) Note the high risks for each service area and any actions being taken.

3. Reason for Decision

3.1 The report is the key accountability tool for the performance of all the Council services. The report contains the strategic position of the Council’s finances combined with performance statistics and service risks.

Page 13 4. Background and Reason Decision Needed

4.1 This report is considered by this Committee as they have the delegated responsibility in the Constitution from Full Council to monitor the budget. The report is also considered by the Joint Advisory Audit and Accounts Committee as the year end financial position is a key component of the Annual Statement of Accounts which they adopt each year. The Joint Advisory Scrutiny Committee also consider the report and will identify any areas that they wish to scrutinise in more detail.

4.2 The budgets shown in Appendix 1 are ‘controllable costs’. This is expenditure / income where the Head of Service / Corporate Manager has influence. Capital charges (depreciation) and service recharges are not shown. The budget holder has then made an assessment of the likely outturn for the financial year, which has been compared to the budget to identify any potential outturn variances. If there is a projected variance, then the budget holder has to provide a comment explaining the reason and outline what corrective action is being taken.

4.3 Key Performance Indicators are measures of service performance that are monitored. They have been developed by each Head of Service / Corporate Manager in conjunction with relevant Briefholders / Portfolio holders and are standard across all three councils.

4.4 Each service maintains a service risk register and the summary of the number of risks in each category is included within the report. Where a risk is scored as high or very high, the full details of the risk and mitigating actions are detailed.

5. Report

5.1 The predicted year end outturn position on the revenue budget monitoring report is estimated to show a £217,971 favourable variance. This is a total variance of 2.7% against the 2017/18 budget requirement of £8,079,852.

5.2 The revenue predictions above do not include variances for the Harbour activities. The monitoring of the Harbour budget and any corrective action is the responsibility of the Harbour Board. The current predicted year-end position for the Harbour budget is £79,705 favourable.

5.3 Heads of Service and Corporate Managers produce a Service Plan every year for each of the 12 services. In Appendix 2 Managers have provided an update of achievements so far this year, as well as actions still to be completed.

5.4 Key Revenue / Performance issues to date

 Planning Development Management – The improvement plan is in full flow and performance has increased considerably since its inception.  A new Intelligent Scanning system has been implemented. For WPBC this has led to approximately 40% of payments to creditors being paid within 5 days leading to improved cash flow to local businesses that trade with the Council. Page 14  A significant amount of Tri Council Partnership savings has been achieved ahead of the 2018/19 budget.  Assets & Infrastructure has seen additional income from car parking, there are a number of vacancies throughout the service. Additional income has been received from non operational properties.  Planning income is considerably down on predicted levels given the lack of major building projects in the Borough.

Current / Future issues

 Weymouth & Portland is marginally under the 5 year target for supply of housing. It currently shows 4.9 years.  Affordable Housing – The target of 33 affordable homes has not been met by quarter 2, it is hoped that the target range of 50 - 65 homes will be met by the end of the financial year.  Land charge performance has reduced this quarter with resilience being an issue. This is currently being addressed by the Corporate Manager.

Capital

5.5 The predicted 2017/18 overall scheme variance showing on the Capital Budget Monitoring appendix 3 is £429,133 favourable against a 2017/18 scheme budget of £493,439. The delay in the Weymouth Harbour Walls Remediation project makes up the majority of the predicted under spend for the year but this will be incurred in 2018/19. The capital budget has been re-profiled to reflect this.

Key Capital issues

 Weymouth Harbour Walls Remediation Project – The design and application for consents & preparation of tender documents are progressing. Construction of Wall D will hopefully begin in autumn 2018. Wall C will be a separate contract but preparation work has started.  The compulsory purchase order scheme for a property on Portland has begun. This scheme will eventually bring the land back into housing use.

6. Corporate Plan

6.1 The service performance and targets reflects the current Corporate Plan.

7. Financial Implications

7.1 These are predictions based at the information available at 30th September 2017. Any variance at the end of the financial year will impact upon the level of General Reserves.

8. Risk Management (including Health & Safety)

8.1 High and very high risks are reported in detail in Appendix 2. Service risk registers can be found in the Councils performance system (QPR).

8.2 There is a risk the Council will overspend its budget for the year. Page 15 9. Appendices

9.1 Appendix 1 – Graph showing the predicted outturn position of the twelve services with overall commentary Appendix 2 – Overall service reviews of the performance, Service Plan update & risk Appendix 3 – Capital budget monitoring Appendix 4 – Treasury management update

10. Background Papers

10.1 The Council’s financial information system

10.2 The Council’s corporate performance system (QPR)

11. Footnote

11.1 Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Christian Evans – Financial Performance Manager Telephone: 01305 838312 Email: [email protected]

Page 16 Appendix 1 WPBC Budget Monitoring - Revenue prediction by service, Quarter 2 2017/18

Financial Services

Corporate Finance

Revenues & Benefits

Business Improvement

Community Protection

Housing

Planning Development Mgt & Building Control Page 17 Page Community & Policy Development

Economy, Leisure & Tourism

Assets & Infrastructure

Democratic Services & Elections

HR & OD

Legal Services

General Fund Net Total This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Business Review Weymouth & Portland Borough Council

Period: Quarter 2 (July to September 2017)

Head of Service/ Service Prediction (£) Corporate Manager Financial Services 20,000 (F) Julie Strange

Corporate Finance 40,070 (F) Julie Strange

Revenues & Benefits 0 Stuart Dawson

Business Improvement 28,583 (F) Penny Mell

Community Protection 88,200 (F) Graham Duggan

Housing 43,300 (F) Clive Milone

Planning Development Management & 112,000 (A) Jean Marshall Building Control

Community & Policy Development 2,300 (F) Hilary Jordan

Economy, Leisure & Tourism 27,500 (A) Nick Thornley

Assets & Infrastructure 87,500 (F) David Brown

Democratic Services & Elections 46,650 (F) Jacqui Andrews

Human Resources & Organisational 868 (F) Bobbie Bragg Development

Legal Services 0 Robert Firth

Overall predicted variance £217,971 (F)

(F) = Favourable variance prediction (A) = Adverse variance prediction

Page 19

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Financial Services Head of Service – Julie Strange

(Accountancy, Audit, Exchequer, Corporate Planning & Performance, Corporate Procurement, Risk Management and Insurance)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Jeff Cant (Finance & Assets)

Revenue summary – Financial Services

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 419,576 Efficiency savings of £15,000 made following the procurement Transport 2,475 of a new insurance contract. £5,000 of in year savings from staff turnover. Supplies & Services 153,161 Income (3,075) Net expenditure 572,137 Q2 Predicted variance 20,000 (F) Q1 Predicted variance 0

Revenue summary – Corporate Finance

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / action Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 1,211,749 Partnership savings delivered by services ahead of the Premises (413,670) 2018/19 budget Transport 3,803 Supplies & Services (84,928) Interest (578,320) Grants (9,012,433) Net expenditure (8,873,799) Q2 Predicted variance 40,070 (F) Q1 Predicted variance 0

Page 20

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Whilst the payment of invoices within 30 calendar days are currently just below the target, the introudiction of the intelligent scanning has seen the percentage of invoices paid within 5 calendar days significantly increase. The Percentage of non-disputed invoices paid within 5 calendar days (creditor payments) during quarter 2:

North Dorset = 28.08%, West Dorset = 53.40%, Weymouth & Portland = 40.39%

The intelligent scanning system is now fully rolled out across West Dorset and Weymouth and Portland with North Dorset planned to go live next month. This should see the North Dorset performance of payments within 5 days improve to similar levels.

Percentage of creditor payments by BACS Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 98.42% 99.95% 99.95% Q2 2017/18 Target 95% 95% 95% FY 2017/18 Target 95% 95% 95% FY 2016/17 Actual 94.26% 99.96% 99.94%

Page 21

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of non-disputed invoices paid within 30 calendar days (creditor payments) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 94.79% 92.91% 91.20% Q2 2017/18 Target 95% 95% 95% FY 2017/18 Target 95% 95% 95% FY 2016/17 Actual 99.04% 93.52% 93.62%

Overall General Fund predicted variances per Quarter (Favourable/Adverse) Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual £335,557 (F) £453,825 (F) £217,971(F)

Key risk areas

7 Service operational risks have been identified for Financial Services:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 1 Low Risks 6

Page 22

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Service Plan Update

The Statement of Accounts for all three councils have now been subject to external audit and received an unqualified audit opinion. Progress is well underway for the 2018/19 budget setting process and options to balance the budget for each council identified based on the information available at the current time. Standard key control internal audits are due to be undertaken during quarter 3.

The role out of intelligent scanning has been completed for West Dorset and Weymouth and Portland with North Dorset planned to go live in November. The harmonisation of cash receipting software for North Dorset is currently at the procurement stage with the implementation start up meeting planned for the end of October. This will also assist with the alignment of the bank reconciliation processes of all 3 councils.

Page 23

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Revenues & Benefits Head of Service – Stuart Dawson

(Council Tax, Business Rates, Housing Benefit, Fraud)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Jeff Cant (Finance & Assets)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 768,567 Expenditure in line with original estimates. Budget monitored Transport 100 on a monthly basis. Supplies & Services 428,885 Payments to clients 30,620,000 Income (31,798,695) Net expenditure 18,857 Q2 Predicted variance 0 Q1 Predicted variance 648 (A)

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

NDDC (SVPP): Collection rates: On a monthly basis for the last few years the collection rates appear to fluctuate, all recovery stages are at similar stage to last year with similar numbers of accounts therefore we are likely to meet outturn. SVPP are likely to follow similar recovery process as last year. Speed of processing: Days to process changes and days to process new claims are within target. The next quarter may see an increase in the numbers of days to process with the wider introduction of Universal Credit.

WDDC – Performance in relation to processing new benefit claims and changes in circumstances was affected by unforeseen increased workloads and staff absences over the summer months. During Q1 we were using Capita Resilience Services to help provide additional capacity. However, they were unable to provide the same level of support in Q2 due to staff absences. Cumulative performance for Q1/Q2 was 21.94 days (for new claims) and 7.91 days (for changes in circumstances). This compares favourably against the same period of last year (26.45 and 8.89 days respectively). Workloads are now up to date and it is anticipated that performance for the remaining two quarters will be better than targets.

WPBC - Performance in relation to processing new benefit claims and changes in circumstances was affected by unforeseen increased workloads and staff absences over the summer months. During Q1 we were using Capita Resilience Services to help provide additional capacity. However, they were unable to provide the same level of support in Q2 due to staff absences. Cumulative performance for Q1/Q2 was 20.82 days (for new claims) and 8.02 days (for changes in circumstances). This compares favourably against the same period of last year (26.63 and 8.99 days respectively). Workloads are now up to date and it is anticipated that performance for the remaining two quarters will be better than targets.

Business Rates collection for Q2 was affected by increased number of ratepayers who are now paying over 12 instead of 10 months. Awards under the new Discretionary Rate Relief scheme are due to be made over the next few weeks and this will have a positive impact on collection rates.

Page 24

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Average calendar days to process new housing benefit claims Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 17.00 days 23.49 days 22.12 days Q2 2017/18 Target 19 days 19 days 19 days FY 2017/18 Target 19 days 19 days 19 days FY 2016/17 Actual 19.76 days 20.45 days 16.94 days

Average calendar days to process housing benefit changes of circumstances Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 6.50 days 9.84 days 8.13 days Q2 2017/18 Target 10 days 7 days 7 days FY 2017/18 Target 10 days 7 days 7 days FY 2016/17 Actual 7.06 days 3.27 days 3.09 days

Page 25

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Number of Housing Benefit New Claims and Changes Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 4,162 3,202 3,431 Q1 2017/18 Actual 5,095 4,136 5,605 Q4 2016/17 Actual 6,478 8,551 8,945 Q3 2016/17 Actual 3,606 2,834 3,396 Q2 2016/17 Actual 4,508 4,047 4,714 Q1 2016/17 Actual 4,695 4,770 5,420 Q4 2015/16 Actual n/a 7,965 8,246 Q3 2015/16 Actual n/a 3,083 3,432 Q2 2015/16 Actual n/a 3,814 4,118

Percentage of Council Tax collected (cumulative) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 57.01% 58.69% 57.32% Q2 2017/18 Target 57.52% 58.56% 57.12% FY 2017/18 Target 98.28% 98.17% 96.57% FY 2016/17 Actual 98.28% 98.17% 96.57%

Page 26

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of Business Rates collected (cumulative) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 58.58% 57.37% 57.24% Q2 2017/18 Target 57.90% 58.58% 58.54% FY 2017/18 Target 98.39% 98.41% 97.26% FY 2016/17 Actual 98.39% 98.41% 97.26%

Key risk areas

7 Service operational risks have been identified for Revenues & Benefits:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 1 Low Risks 6

Service Plan Update

 Review of information leaflets continuing. Updated leaflets edited to PEC standards.  Action taken to improve e-access to services (e.g. e-billing take up, introduction of txt messaging, etc.).  Business case for a Pan Dorset Revs & Bens service has been paused pending outcome of LGR decision.  Review of disaster recovery arrangements deferred due to Service having to replace existing database server. Review will commence when new server installed.  Action to achieve efficiency savings is ongoing.  A number of initiatives undertaken targeted at developing our people and providing them with transferable skills.

Page 27

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Business Improvement Head of Service – Penny Mell

(Change Management implementation, Business Transformation, Customer Services, Communications, dorsetforyou.com, Graphic design & Printing, Consultation, IT Support, IT Development)

Lead Brief Holders – Cllr Alison Reed (Corporate Affairs and Continuous Improvement),

Cllr Christine James (Social Inclusion)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 773,872 Printing Section: Budgets remain since the closure of Print Premises 7,272 Room which need to be removed or an adverse variance of £70,000 will remain that cannot be recharged. A likely saving Transport 3,558 of £5,000 can be declared on material costs. Supplies & Services 717,172 Communications: The Consultation vacancy has continued Income (83,941) although it has been partly covered by an external Net expenditure 1,417,933 secondment. At the current time there is a favourable Q2 Predicted variance 28,583 (F) employee costs variance of £25,000 although this may be Q1 Predicted variance 1,124 (F) impacted by the need for any further consultation work and the result of the Local Government Review and any actions that may arise from the decision. CCC: There are a number of current staffing vacancies which are likely to result in an underspend of £23,000 at the financial year end. However, predicted underspends on salaries will be impacted by the use of temporary staff throughout the year. IT Equipment: As per enabling technology program work has commenced to move our current infrastructure off premise into the cloud environment. Savings likely to be achieved in 2017/18 are £20,000, however, this may be impacted by transition costs. IT Employee Costs: There has been staff vacancies during the year. For a time agency staff were used but we have now procured a support contract. The overall saving is likely to be approximately £18,000. Telecommunications: It now looks like the additional DPSN costs reported in quarter one are likely to be met within the existing Telecommunications budgets.

Page 28

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Complaint response times are now reported to CMT on a bi-monthly basis and service managers have been given access to the database so they can drive up compliance times within their service.

Customer services has been running with 2 vacancies during Q2 – 1 fixed term position to cover a secondment proved difficult to recruit to and we had to go out to advert 3 times before we were able to find anyone suitable. This post is now filled. A member of staff with a permanent contract who’s post on the establishment was not a permanent post gained a promotion and customer services were unable for a prolonged period to recruit to this post. We have now been authorised to fill this vacancy and we have a Digital Access Advisor on a fixed term contract starting next week.

The call centre convergence has also taken place throughout Q2. This has seen NDDC calls re-routed to our call centre which is based at South Walks House, Dorchester. This is now complete and calls for all three councils are answered by the central call centre team.

Due to ongoing service convergence work and capacity issues, teams across the councils are experiencing difficulty in meeting corporate complaint deadlines. This is not particular to one particular service. Customer services continue to provide support and guidance to services in complaints handling.

Quarter 2 complaints base data:

North Dorset 11 complaints received, 6 responded to within target response time = 54.55% within target response time

West Dorset 25 complaints received, 12 responded to within target response time = 48.00% within target response time

Weymouth & Portland 20 complaints received, 14 complaints responded to within target response time = 70.00% within target response time

Number of phone calls received by Customer Services Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 3,119 9,437 12,945 Q1 2017/18 Actual 3,179 10,145 12,027 Q4 2016/17 Actual 4,142 8,213 8,640 Q3 2016/17 Actual 3,501 7,887 8,076 Q2 2016/17 Actual 4,494 10,644 9,659 Q1 2016/17 Actual 5,100 12,802 11,607

Page 29

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of telephone calls answered by a Customer Services Advisor Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 90% 86% 86% Q2 2017/18 Target 92% 92% 92% FY 2017/18 Target 92% 92% 92% FY 2016/17 Actual 94% 88% 90%

Percentage of telephone calls abandoned Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 8% 8% 10% Q2 2017/18 Target 6% 6% 6% FY 2017/18 Target 6% 6% 6% FY 2016/17 Actual 4% 9% 6%

Page 30

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of corporate complaints dealt with within corporate target (Stage One: 10 working days, Aim Stage Two: 15 working days)  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 55% 48% 70% Q2 2017/18 Target 80% 80% 80% FY 2017/18 Target 80% 80% 80% FY 2016/17 Actual 63% 70% 77%

Page 31

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key risk areas

16 Service operational risks have been identified for Business Improvement:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 4 Medium Risks 6 Low Risks 6

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Failure to comply with the new Data Protection reforms coming in force on 25th May 2018 CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 Senior Leadership team buy in to appoint a dedicated Impact 4 Likelihood 4 Data Protection officer and initial Data Protection Likelihood 3 awareness training for some members of staff. Risk Score 16 Risk Score 12 Completion of Corporate Information asset register and retention schedule. Appoint dedicated Data Protection Officer to lead on overall compliance programme across the partnership. Conduct awareness training and campaign for everyone to equip them with knowledge of the new legislation and their responsibilities towards managing personal data. Review current arrangements for GDPR compliance e.g. Risk Rating HIGH review contract clauses, breach detection and notification Risk Rating MEDIUM procedures, review privacy notices and consent gathering mechanisms. Carry data flow mapping to understand the flow of personal data, conduct privacy impact assessments to review personal data risks and develop adequate mitigating actions, encrypt personal data and develop mechanisms for secure transfer of personal data where there is a requirement to do so.

Stronger Together team capacity and capability is inadequate to manage and implement change programme with learning from change programmes not reviewed and shared CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 As service business requirements are identified and Impact 3 Likelihood 4 defined, additional temporary resources to be procured Likelihood 3 Risk Score 16 where necessary to effectively deliver change. Skills Risk Score 9 matrix to identify current skillset against desired competencies, personal and team development plans to inform training programme. Ensure approach to Risk Rating HIGH achievements and lessons learnt are carried through Risk Rating MEDIUM during life and end of programme. Keep resources under review as scope of programmes and projects change.

Page 32

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Loss of IT Network & Systems / Cyber Attack CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 5 Implement local recovery centre. Test Disaster Impact 2 Likelihood 2 Recovery/Business Continuity plan at least annually. Likelihood 2 Risk Score 10 Ensure restoration priorities are established and Risk Score 4 understood by the organisation. Services to have local fail over arrangements.

There has recently been a significant international cyber-attack which has been targeting various organisations. Whilst DCP were not impacted by the Risk Rating HIGH cyber-attack we remain vigilant in our mitigation Risk Rating LOW techniques, specifically:

Deploying detailed security bulletins, only running supportable operating systems, maintaining system defences and raising awareness of threats amongst system users.

Loss, disruption or interception of electronic data CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 5 A range of technical solutions are in place within the IT Impact 3 Likelihood 3 infrastructure to help secure the Partnership’s data and Likelihood 1 Risk Score 15 prevent data loss. As a PSN organisation, the Risk Score 3 Partnership is also subject to annual PSN compliance regime including PEN testing. As well as these technical measures, work is underway to improve the Partnership’s Information Governance arrangements under the leadership of the Partnership’s Information Governance Risk Rating HIGH Officer. As the Partnership progresses, particularly with Risk Rating LOW SMART working, IT users and their role within maintaining data security is critical and users are being supported to understand these requirements.

Service Plan Update Our Information Governance Officer has been working to help prepare the Partnership for the introduction of the GDPR from May 2018. The Partnership has an Information Governance Framework which sets out a range of measures to help us manage the data that we collect and process. This includes specific responsibilities for individuals. GDPR familiarisation training has been organised for colleagues to attend shorty and we will continue to build on this through the months ahead. IT and Business Transformation have progressed the Partnership’s Smart Working initiative throughout this reporting period. This has included supporting Teams and Members to go mobile through the provision of mobility devices and introducing new ways of working. As part of this, we have been running an information security awareness campaign so that colleagues are aware of the risks to data when working remotely and their responsibilities regarding the same. Customer Access and Business Transformation have been working with the Nordon Programme to design the new customer access point as part of the wider changes at Nordon. This has included providing facilities for seeing customers; facilities for Duty Officers and touchdown accommodation for colleagues working remotely. We are also continuing to work on digital access to services including co-ordinating with Dorset For You, DCC and others to promote digital services and tackle barriers to delivery and access. Our Communications Service continues to focus on key areas of delivery including support to LGR and Joint Committee communications as well as continuing with providing regular communications through Connect for both staff & Members. Page 33

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Community Protection Head of Service – Graham Duggan

(Environmental Health, Licensing, Community Safety, CCTV, Parks & Open Spaces, Bereavement Services, Waste & Cleansing – Client role)

Lead Brief Holders – Cllr Francis Drake (Community Safety), Cllr Ray Nowak (Environment and Sustainability),

Cllr Kate Wheller (Community Facilities)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 1,616,165 3 shared service posts are being held vacant ahead of re- Premises 325,205 structure in Q3/4. Transport 204,386 Shortfall in income in Greenspace & Bereavement Services Supplies & Services 3,271,338 being off-set by vacant posts. Posts likely to be filled through Payments to clients 32,249 re-structure to reduce agency costs and income will be closely Income (2,070,630) monitored through Q3/4. Net expenditure 3,378,713 Q2 Predicted variance 88,200 (F) Funds from DWP underspend in 2016-17 being used to renew street furniture in town centre and other related work. Costs Q1 Predicted variance 94,155 (F) will show later in year.

Page 34

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Food hygiene standards remain high across all our council areas and the new environmental health software will improve the availability of information and guidance to food business operators.

Q1 and Q2 data has not been available for environmental protection service requests as the new software is being implemented, this will be remedied by Q3.

The implementation of the new environmental health & housing software application has been a major undertaking and staff are thanked for their hard work over the past months, The new application allows staff to work more agilely and improves service to customers.

The household waste arisings (landfill & recycling) continues to underperform in North Dorset. It is hoped that the ‘Right Bin’ campaign will start to yield results in the Q2 position (when available). Otherwise, your officer will be pursuing further actions with DWP.

Weymouth & Portland’s Q1 recycling rate is significantly up on the 2016-17 full- year position.

Missed bin collection data also needs to be shown as a % of total; collected and this will be added in for the next quarter. Whilst performance is considered good, the challenge will be made to DWP to improve this further.

Percentage of catering premises achieving high levels of food hygiene (rated 4 or 5) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 93% 97% 96% Q2 2017/18 Target 90% 90% 90% FY 2017/18 Target 90% 90% 90% FY 2016/17 Actual 93.5% 96.9% 96.4%

Page 35

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Kilograms of household waste (landfill and recycling) collected per household (cumulative) Aim Latest available data is for Q1  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q1 2017/18 Actual 181 Kg/hh 149 Kg/hh 156 Kg/hh Q1 2017/18 Target 165 Kg/hh 165 Kg/hh 165 Kg/hh FY 2017/18 Target 627 Kg/hh 627 Kg/hh 627 Kg/hh FY 2016/17 Actual 702 Kg/hh 627 Kg/hh 639 Kg/hh

Kilograms of residual (landfill) household waste per household (cumulative) Latest available is Q1 Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q1 2017/18 Actual 71 Kg/hh 47 Kg/hh 65 Kg/hh Q1 2017/18 Target 80 Kg/hh 80 Kg/hh 80 Kg/hh FY 2017/18 Target 263 Kg/hh 263 Kg/hh 263 Kg/hh FY 2016/17 Actual 283 Kg/hh 263 Kg/hh 301 Kg/hh

Page 36

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of household waste sent to re-use, recycling and composting Latest available is Q1 Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q1 2017/18 Actual 61% 68% 58% Q1 2017/18 Target 60% 60% 60% FY 2017/18 Target 60% 60% 60% FY 2016/17 Actual 58% 67% 53%

Number of (justified) missed household waste collections (absolute number) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 968 667 1,152 Q1 2017/18 Actual 926 733 856 Q4 2016/17 Actual 1,090 873 963 Q3 2016/17 Actual 911 789 1,120 Q2 2016/17 Actual 916 1,058 1,406 Q1 2016/17 Actual 750 1,076 1,216 Q4 2015/16 Actual 642 1,208 1,485 Q3 2015/16 Actual 579 1,660 1,517 Q2 2015/16 Actual 548 992 3,240

Key risk areas

10 Service operational risks have been identified for Community Protection:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 3 Low Risks 7

Page 37

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

Work in progress. At NDDC there is an additional action to decide the future provision of the dog control service given that the current contract can end in Jan 18. At WDDC, work is completing to implement dog and ASB Public Space Protection Orders. At WPBC several projects are underway. It is disappointing to report that Groundwork South has pulled out of the Tumbledown Farm project however; officers are working hard to find another partner. The review of the 3GS environmental enforcement pilot will start in Q3.

Page 38

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Housing Head of Service – Clive Milone

(Strategic Housing, Homelessness Prevention, Housing Advice & Support, Housing Allocation, Private Sector Housing, Empty Homes, Home Improvement Agency, Supported Housing)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Gill Taylor (Housing)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 423,483 Favourable variance anticipated, largely composed of lower Premises 302,300 than expected net cost for bed and breakfast and rent deposit/rent in advance scheme, as well as staff savings Transport 7,069 accrued earlier in the year and from a currently unfilled post. Supplies & Services 447,514 Income (518,794) Net expenditure 661,572 Q2 Predicted variance 43,300 (F) Q1 Predicted variance 8,300 (A)

Page 39

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Number of homelessness decisions made We have seen a steep rise in the number homeless decisions in the WDDC area. There has been an increase in both WDDC/WPBC of those placed in Bed and Breakfast, due to the lack of move on temporary accommodation. We are actively engaging with private landlords to work with us.

Total number of households on the Housing Register The average number on the Housing Register over July, August and September continues to grow slowly.

Number of new applications of the Housing Register Although there is a fall in in the number of new applications for NDDC, there has been a consistent rise in WDDC and a sharp rise in WPBC. We are still waiting for the new Homechoice policy to come into force where adequately housed for WDDC/NDDC and Community Land Trust banding will see a gradual rise in these numbers.

Total number of households housed in Registered Provider (RP) stock There has been a decrease in households being housed in NDDC and an increase in both WDDC/WPBC. We do not have any control over the number of re-let properties that become available.

Average number of working days to process Housing Register applications Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 4 days 2 days 2 days Q2 2017/18 Target 9 days 9 days 9 days FY 2017/18 Target 9 days 9 days 9 days FY 2016/17 Actual N/A, new KPI N/A, new KPI N/A, new KPI

Page 40

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Total number of households on the Housing Register Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 962 1,572 1,539 Q1 2017/18 Actual 886 1,555 1,523

Total number of households housed by Registered Providers Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 42 83 62 Q1 2017/18 Actual 56 78 50

Page 41

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Total number of new applications to the Housing Register Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 218 460 478 Q1 2017/18 Actual 270 442 415

Number of homelessness decisions made Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 16 33 41 Q1 2017/18 Actual 18 15 40

Page 42

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Number of homelessness applications per quarter:

Period NDDC WDDC WPBC Q2 17/18 12 18 25 Q1 17/18 7 9 18 Q4 16/17 15 7 12 Q3 16/17 13 10 12 Q2 16/17 20 12 32

Number of households in Bed & Breakfast at the end of the quarter Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 2 7 15

Number of households placed in B&B (during each month):

Authority NDDC WDDC WPBC Sep 17/18 1 5 13 Aug 17/18 3 3 6 Jul 17/18 1 4 9 Jun 17/18 2 3 8 May 17/18 0 1 6 Apr 17/18 0 1 1

Page 43

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Number of Category 1 hazards removed due to our intervention in the last quarter Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 37 68 32

Key risk areas

13 Service operational risks have been identified for Housing:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 6 Low Risks 7

Service Plan Update

Action Plan objectives are on track.

Provided that we are authorised to appoint a replacement Empty Homes Officer in NDDC, our approach to bringing empty properties back into use will be made consistent across DCP, as well as allowing each officer to work right across the partnership.

Options for driving up standards in the private rented sector in Melcombe Regis have been considered, and we will be designing a selective licensing scheme to take back to the Melcombe Regis Board and subsequently the WPBC Management Committee in 2018.

Approval has been given for Housing to purchase two houses in Weymouth and Portland, subject to funding being available, to provide short term temporary accommodation. Discussions are taking place with RPs elsewhere in DCP with a view to leasing properties for a similar purpose. Two schemes providing temporary accommodation in West Dorset have already been brought fully under the council’s management.

Development of a single Housing Strategy that operates right across the partnership is on hold pending notification about the proposed reorganisation of local government in Dorset. If approval for two new unitary councils is given, a focus on designing a new strategy covering the new the western part of the county take priority.

Smarter ways of working have been implemented across Housing, with all customer-facing staff now being enabled for mobile working.

Page 44

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Planning Development Management & Building Control Head of Service – Jean Marshall

(Major Projects & Developments, Listed Building and Conservation, Trees, Planning Enforcement, Building Control)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Ray Nowak (Environment and Sustainability)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 551,275 WPBC income is considerably down on predicted levels given Transport 9,671 the lack of major building projects seemingly coming forwards within the Borough. Overall number of applications remains Supplies & Services 29,391 steady but do not include the larger scale income projects and Income (498,330) this is affecting both planning and building control income. This Net expenditure 92,007 could be a reflection of the current market as there are several Q2 Predicted variance 112,000 (A) large sites which could come forwards in the next few years, Q1 Predicted variance 0 some possibly sooner. Agency staff are currently being used to cover two posts on maternity leave given unsuccessful recruitment to year long posts but the cost of this is partly off set by a staff vacancy.

Page 45

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

The number of applications has remained constant, but it is evident that there is a slowing down of major development across the whole area which does reflect in the fee income and in particular has affected WPBC where income is considerably lower than predicted at this stage in the year.

There remain delays in validation of applications so the figures are a little skewed although being fully staffed up now the backlog is beginning to reduce.

Performance for applications is exceptionally good although it is important to recognise that considerable effort has gone into determining applications (rather than other work) in September as this is the end of the reporting period for DCLG’s 2 year performance criteria against which Council’s are judged for possible designation. It is believed, though yet to be confirmed by DCLG, that none of the DCP Council’s are likely to be threatened with designation as a result of the excellent performance over the last couple of months which has raised the overall 2 year averages. It is however fair to say that there is a high reliance at present on agreed extensions of time at present particularly due to the backlog in validation. The criteria for designation will look back 8 quarters from Q2 2017 and will thus include last years’ performance when we were dealing with a considerable backlog. DCLG will look at past performance during December each year to see how authorities are performing against a 2 years set of performance figures and we will not know the outcome until December.

Clarity has now been received from DCLG regarding the criteria for performance on appeals (quality decision making). The 10% threshold is for appeals overturning a refusal again the TOTAL number of decisions made, not as previously assumed as a percentage of appeal decisions. This means that performance for majors and non majors at appeal meets the criteria as now clarified with ease in all 3 authorities. Given how the figures are virtually at zero in all appeal criteria, it is considered that it is no longer beneficial in reporting these (despite these being a government benchmark) and therefore from Q3 Appeals will be reported by exception and look at appeal decisions themselves rather than quantum.

Enforcement tables have been slightly adjusted as it is most beneficial for Members to be aware of new live cases, rather than cases received only.

Building Control Nationally figures range from those similar to DCP’s right down to around 35% of market share, it is totally dependant upon the competition from Approved Inspectors and the types of development being undertaken.

Dorset also benefits from a locally poor road network without any motorway links which makes the area not so attractive to the competition coupled with the lack of large high fee earning schemes.

The service also benefits from a large number of repeat customers especially local builders which is a key market to retain, coupled with a realistic approach to fee setting & the flexible, polite approach of all staff connected with the service.

Locally recently there has also been a slight slow down in the building industry which is most likely caused by the uncertainty surrounding Brexit

Building Control Market Share (as at 30th September 2017) Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Full Plans 34 46 22 Building Notice 59 81 43 Partnership 10 68 46 Regularisation 6 7 3 Privately Certified 51 78 35 MARKET SHARE 68.13% 72.15% 76.52%

Page 46

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Number of valid applications received – by application type – North Dorset figures for June amended to reflect updated numbers; September figures incomplete as currently still validating applications received early Sept. Month Major Minor Other Misc* TOTAL September 0 24 36 121 181 August 2 32 40 112 186 July 5 32 41 110 188 June 1 33 38 115 187 May 5 27 44 92 168 April 2 25 39 116 182 March 3 31 30 133 197 February 6 23 59 142 230 January 1 25 40 109 175

Number of valid applications received – by application type – West Dorset *figures affected by backlog Month Major Minor Other Misc* TOTAL September 0 18 56 69 143 August 4 35 71 96 206 July 5 39 79 107 230 June 4 31 111 90 236 May 4 33 99 92 228 April 7 44 89 91 231 March 3 42 110 104 259 February 2 45 86 97 230 January 2 52 131 108 293

Number of valid applications received – by application type – Weymouth & Portland *figures affected by backlog Month Major Minor Other Misc* TOTAL September 1 2 18 22 43 August 1 9 36 25 71 July 1 15 34 26 76 June 0 7 29 24 60 May 0 5 24 31 60 April 3 13 36 24 76 March 2 18 41 43 104 February 0 8 28 25 61 January 1 12 29 27 69

Fee Income Q2 figures for all 3 Authorities will be incomplete due to backlog in validation Type of Fee North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Condition Fee £3,233 £4,552 £819 Non Material Amendment £1,533 £2,173 £515 Permitted Development Case Fee £0 £1,962 £403 Planning applications £116,857 £157,517 £73,313 Pre-App £8,454 £8,463 £1,790 Enforcement Case Appeals / Fees £0 £0 £0 TOTAL £130,077 £174,667 £76,840

Page 47

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Percentage of 'Major' planning applications determined within 13 weeks or agreed extension of time Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 100% (6of 6) 100% (7 of 7) 100% (2 of 2) Q2 2017/18 Target 60% 60% 60%

Percentage of 'Non-Major' planning applications determined within 8 weeks or agreed extension Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 82% (172 of 211) 87% (209 of 239) 94% (81 of 86) Q2 2017/18 Target 70% 70% 70%

Page 48

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Total number of appeals submitted Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 7 4 4 Q1 2017/18 Actual 9 2 2 Q4 2016/17 Actual 7 1 1 Q3 2016/17 Actual 16 9 3

Appeals allowed as a percentage of all decisions on MAJOR planning applications made by the Local Aim Planning Authority  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 0% (0 of 5 ) 0% (0 of 7) 0% (0 of 2) Q2 2017/18 Target 10% 10% 10%

Appeals allowed as a percentage of all decisions on NON-MAJOR planning applications made by the Aim Local Planning Authority  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 0.9% (2 of 211) 0% (0 of 239) 0% (0 of 86) Q2 2017/18 Target 10% 10% 10%

Page 49

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18 Enforcement – Number of new live cases Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Non- Non- Non- Enforcement Level Priority Urgent Priority Urgent Priority Urgent Urgent Urgent Urgent Q2 2017/18 Actual ADV 0 0 3 0 1 4 1 2 1 Q2 2017/18 Actual DEV 0 2 21 0 8 25 0 9 4 Q2 2017/18 Actual BOC 0 8 2 0 10 5 0 2 2 Q2 2017/18 Actual COU 0 4 7 0 8 11 1 5 3 Q2 2017/18 Actual LBW 4 4 1 4 5 3 0 0 0 Q2 2017/18 Actual SEC 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 Q2 2017/18 Actual HH 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Q2 2017/18 Actual TRE 0 5 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 SUB TOTALS 4 23 34 4 40 52 2 18 10 TOTAL 61 96 30 Key: ADV: Unauthorised advertisements DEV: Development BOC: Breach of Condition COU: Change of Use LBW: Unauthorised works to Listed Building SEC: Section 215 - Untidy Land or buildings HH: High Hedges TRE: Tree complaints

This data is a quarterly update on the number of new live cases per quarter for each of the 8 enforcement categories.

Page 50

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Building Control

Building Control: Percentage of completion certificates dispatched within 7 days of inspection Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual Currently unable to report 97.14% 98.97% Q2 2017/18 Target data for North. IT system is 98% 97% FY 2017/18 Target being developed to enable 98% 97% FY 2016/17 Actual this. 95.17% 98.69%

Building Control: Percentage of Full Plan decisions deposited and notified within time limit Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual Currently unable to report 100% 99.22% Q2 2017/18 Target data for North. IT system is 100% 100% FY 2017/18 Target being developed to enable 100% 100% FY 2016/17 Actual this. 100% 99.59%

Page 51

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key risk areas

11 Service operational risks have been identified for Planning Development & Building Control:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 3 Medium Risks 5 Low Risks 3

Failure of new public facing ICT system CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 Impact 4 Likelihood 4 An importance for sufficient dedicated resource to be Likelihood 3 Risk Score 16 given and time allocated to allow for full testing prior to Risk Score 12 go live. Ensure adequate testing is undertaken and end Risk Rating High users are well trained. Risk Rating MEDIUM

Technical Systems failure used for processing information CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 As the Development Services Improvement Plan (DSIP) Impact 4 Likelihood 4 ICT project is progressed a project team of "Super Users" Likelihood 4 Risk Score 16 will be created (proposed 5 staff) which will give greater Risk Score 16 resilience with the new system but loss of existing knowledge remains high. Permanent posts have been sought but are awaiting budget approval. These would solve the more immediate issues. Risk Rating HIGH The risk still remains high as staff cannot mitigate the risk Risk Rating MEDIUM of ICT or the website link for public access failing, and with the design of the new website within the next 12-18 months there is a very high possibility this could happen.

‘Special Measures’ imposed by Government in deciding Major applications CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 A need to monitor Government thresholds which are Impact 3 Likelihood 4 rising in respect of speed in determining planning Likelihood 3 Risk Score 16 applications. Performance issues in validation are being Risk Score 9 addressed through additional staff and training but past Risk Rating HIGH poor performance could lead to being designated ‘special Risk Rating MEDIUM measures’ by Government as consideration is backdated.

Page 52

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

The service plan is primarily the Service Improvement Plan for DM (DSIP) which includes a key element affecting Building Control (and other service areas such as Land Charges).

There were 4 key elements to the DSIP; Parish and Town Council digital responses (completed), process reviews to improve and streamline to a single way of undertaking tasks – first round completed but there are limitations as to how far streamlining can go whilst still operating 3 different ICT systems, Staff restructure – DM Officer restructure completed, business support and BC staff still to be restructured and a new single ICT system procured for the 3 councils to replace the 3 separate systems. The ICT single system is now out to tender and once implemented will allow for further process reviews. However, this ongoing review of how we work is not embedded within the service and is ongoing and continuous and will not be a “completed” project.

The two outstanding areas of staff restructure should be completed within the next 6 months. Although the initial digital project has been competed, the service is seeking to channel shift as far as practical in all areas and this is again a key factor in the new ICT system procurement to allow for better public interaction and less need for paper usage within the team. The new ICT system will also include Land Charges and Building Control modules and modules for monitoring for Planning policy purposes.

Page 53

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Community & Policy Development Corporate Manager – Hilary Jordan

(Spatial planning, Urban design, Landscape & Sustainability, Community Planning, Community Development, Housing Enabling, Planning Obligations)

Lead Brief Holders – Cllr Ray Nowak (Environment and Sustainability), Cllr Christine James (Social Inclusion)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 328,148 The Development Plan budget is overspent by £20,000 but Premises 1,039 this is partially offset by savings in other areas, and will also be covered by the identified reserves for local plan preparation. Transport 1,601 There have been some staffing savings due to posts being Supplies & Services 93,915 temporarily vacant. Payments to Clients 2,000 Income (31,000) Net expenditure 395,703 Q2 Predicted variance 2,300 (F) Q1 Predicted variance 0

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Affordable Housing: The contractor Titan going into administration has caused delays on affordable housing developments in Stourpaine, Gillingham and Holwell. In West Dorset homes affordable homes were completed in Lyme Regis, Sherborne and Poundbury. Further developments in Chickerell, Lyme Regis and the Extra Care scheme in Dorchester are due to complete soon. No affordable homes in North Dorset have been completed this quarter but affordable homes are under construction in Winterbourne Kingston and Marnhull. In Weymouth and Portland one affordable home was secured which was a shared ownership property for people with long term disabilities. There are affordable homes now being developed at Pemberley, Curtis Fields and the Waverley Arms. New affordable homes are also being purchased as part of the off-site provision for the Lorton Lane development.

Housing Land Supply: As at April 2017, none of the councils has a five-year housing land supply. North Dorset, which previously had a five-year land supply, now has only 3.42 years’ supply. This change is due to the very low number of housing completions last year, and slower than anticipated progress on major development sites including the strategic site allocation at Gillingham. West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland (which have a joint target) now have 4.94 years’ supply. This is an increase on last year’s 4.6-year supply. Where there is no five-year housing land supply, relevant local plan policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up to date and so cannot be given as much weight in decisions.

Page 54

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Number of affordable homes (gross) delivered (cumulative) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 0 25 1 Q2 2017/18 Target 34 50 33 FY 2017/18 Target 50-68 70-100 50-65 (Range) Projected Year End 16 123 41 FY 2016/17 Actual 50 82 41

Five Year Supply of Housing This is a national requirement that has a significant impact on planning decisions.

West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland have a joint one, as they have a joint local plan. The formula for calculating it includes factoring in any shortfalls from previous years, so the target is adjusted each time the supply is assessed.

The base date is 1 April each year, when a full survey is undertaken, however there is a time lag due to the processing involved to calculate the target and outturn, so the latest figures are not available until a few months later.

April 2016-based figures for all areas are:

Target Actual North Dorset 2,219 1,517 (3.42 years – target not met) West Dorset and 6,244 6,163 (4.94 years – target not met) Weymouth & Portland Combined

The April 2017 surveys indicate that neither North Dorset nor the West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland joint local plan area has a five-year housing land supply, though West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland’s position is an improvement on last year and is very close to the five-year requirement .

Page 55

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key risk areas

10 Service operational risks have been identified for Planning Community & Policy Development:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 1 Medium Risks 5 Low Risks 4

Council has inadequate supply of development land and so risks losing planning applications on appeal CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 4 Five year land supply is monitored annually and falling Impact 3 Likelihood 4 below target is always a risk if development sites fail to Likelihood 2 Risk Score 20 come forward. Currently, none of the councils has a five Risk Score 6 year land supply: West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland have a 4.94 year supply and North Dorset has 3.42 years’ supply. When we are without a five-year supply then less weight can be given to local policies in decisions – this will potentially mean more applications Risk Rating HIGH being allowed and supply being increased. In the longer Risk Rating LOW term the local plan reviews provide an opportunity to increase supply. We are also taking a proactive approach to increasing delivery through the 'Accelerating Home Building' programmes agreed by all three councils.

Service Plan Update

The Issues & Options consultation on the West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan took place early in 2017, a summary of the consultation responses has been published and it is intended to bring the next, Preferred Options, consultation document through committees in the new year and undertake the next stage of consultation in late spring 2018.

The Issues & Options consultation on the North Dorset Local Plan is due to take place from November 2017 to January 2018.

The Government is consulting on a new method for calculating district level housing requirements: all three councils will be responding and the final methodology will need to be used in the local plan reviews.

As part of the Accelerating Home Building programme, 4 funding bids have been made to the Housing Infrastructure Fund to support infrastructure provision enabling housing development sites to come forward.

Revisions to the ‘Working With You’ action plans for the areas of multiple deprivation in Weymouth & Portland have been completed. Arrangements for the continuation of community capacity-building support in Melcombe Regis are being made.

The new joint equalities working group meets for the first time in November and will be overseeing the revision of the corporate equalities policy.

Page 56

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Economy, Leisure & Tourism Head of Service – Nick Thornley

(Economic Regeneration, Business Support, Tourism & Visitor management, Leisure & Cultural Development and Facilities, Events Management, Beach Management, Harbour Management)

Lead Brief Holders – Cllr Richard Kosior (Tourism and Culture and Harbour), Cllr Kate Wheller (Community Facilities),

Cllr James Farquharson (Economic Development)

Revenue summary (Excluding Harbour budget & prediction)

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 473,820 Adverse variance likely at year end in part due to reduced Premises 98,295 income from deckchairs (£7500) – weather related. Other budgets in this area on or close to budget. Transport 2,411 Supplies & Services 268,987 Payments to clients 0 Income (494,068) Net expenditure 349,445 Q2 Predicted variance 27,500 (A) Q1 Predicted variance 0

Revenue summary (Weymouth Harbour) – Reference only

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 321,973 There are a number of improvements in income in the Premises 457,431 following areas: new rental income at the Commercial Area (formerly the Port area), back dated rents applied, a good Transport 979 summer season for visiting yachts and visiting fishing vessels. Supplies & Services 203,727 Higher than normal occupancy at the Marina is expected to Income (1,110,104) return a favourable Income position at year end. Energy costs Net expenditure (125,994) at the Commercial Area have been reviewed to reflect the Q2 Predicted variance 79,705 (F) responsibility and ownership of buildings in the area. There is Q1 Predicted variance 71,007 (A) also a decrease in recharges (both of these variances should be reflected in Property Services budgets). Staff costs are higher than originally predicted due to the retention of 3 staff and associated costs employed at the Commercial Area of the Harbour and also administrative costs in 13 Custom House Quay. There are some savings against employee costs as a member of the team is on maternity leave and a saving against agency seasonal staff. The operation of the harbour, including staffing levels, is being reviewed by an external consultant. Other increased costs relating to Legal Expenses. The net effect of this is a favourable prediction at year end.

Page 57

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Weymouth harbour

Increased take up of berths/moorings. Visiting boats figure good despite mixed weather. New promotional initiatives have helped to achieve this.

Visit Dorset

Website continues to perform well - a partnership involving 6 councils and approximately 500 businesses.

Weymouth Harbour - Percentage of berth occupancy Aim  Authority Weymouth & Portland Type of Berth Inner Harbour Marinas Commercial Berths Chain and Sinker Moorings Q2 2017/18 Actual 77% 87% 100% Q2 2017/18 Target 80% 80% 80% FY 2017/18 Target 80% 80% 80% FY 2016/17 Actual 68.95% 82.83% 90%

Page 58

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Number of visiting yachts/powerboat nights (cumulative) Aim  Authority Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 4,806 FY 2016/17 Actual 5,064

Number of visits to VisitDorset.com (cumulative) Aim  Authority Dorset Council’s Partnership (DCP) Q2 2017/18 Actual 1,279,651 Q2 2017/18 Target 1,200,000 FY 2017/18 Target 2,000,000 FY 2016/17 Actual 1,931,849

Page 59

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key risk areas

11 Service operational risks have been identified for Economy, Leisure & Tourism:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 3 Low Risks 8

Service Plan Update

Stronger Local Economy New strategic plan adopted for 4 councils promoting economic growth. Supported by Dorset LEP. Visit Dorset tourism partnership progressing well as partnership of 6 rural/western local authorities and businesses, integrating with the Dorset LEP/Dorset Tourism Association. New ways of working for 2 of the 4 West Dorset TIC in place.

Thriving and Inclusive Communities New arrangement for Weymouth Swimming Pool now in place. Other centres under review. Sustainable future for arts and sports services being developed. Museum projects supported leading to significant investment from Heritage Lottery Fund. Potential for more.

Good quality of life and high quality environment Improved financial performance at Weymouth harbour and plan being prepared for the long term with no ferry service. Funding for wall repairs still to be identified. New extension to Lyme harbour office progressing well (planning permission secured).

Successful Partnerships Good partnership with Gryphon School on sports centre management. Similar arrangements being progressed in Blandford. Successful working with Planning Policy team on distribution of section 106 funding, particularly in Dorchester.

Page 60

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Assets & Infrastructure Head of Service – David Brown

(Harbour & Coastal Infrastructure, Land Drainage, Emergency Planning, Capital Works, Property Development, Property & Facilities Management, Parking, Transport & Fleet Management)

Lead Brief Holders – Cllr Colin Huckle (Transport and Infrastructure), Cllr Ray Nowak (Environment and Sustainability),

Cllr Jeff Cant (Finance and Assets)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 814,345 Income is higher than expected due to a rates rebate and Premises 2,191,045 addional car parking income. Transport 22,462 Savings have been achieved in car parking through vacancy Supplies & Services 563,471 management. Income (4,064,843) Net expenditure (473,520) The cash collection outsourcing has meant additional costs to Q2 Predicted variance 87,500 (F) the service. Q1 Predicted variance 25,000 (A) Addional rental income has been achieved within Property Services.

Page 61

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

The actual percentage return on property asset value is better than target.

Working on developing more meaningful set of key performance indicators across car parking, estates management, building and facilities, engineering and emergency planning.

The operational property in terms of empty floor area does not include the North Quay site.

Percentage of operational council property in terms of floor area that is empty Aim The WPBC data does not include North Quay offices which are vacant pending sale.  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 0% 0% 0% Q2 2017/18 Target No target 0.25% 1.75% n/a FY 2017/18 Target No target 0.25% 1.75% FY 2016/17 Actual 0% 0% 0%

Key risk areas

11 Service operational risks have been identified for Assets & Infrastructure:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 7 Low Risks 4

Page 62

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

The main achievements in this quarter are that  The backlog of toilet inspections and repairs has been reduced by proactive management.  New car park pay and display machines have been installed across the 3 council areas, which accept the new pound coin. Some are enabled to take credit card payments but not all due to broadband restrictions  Whilst the sale of North Quay has failed to complete this has led to additional expenditure for the property, there are plans to re-open the car park to increase income.  PTC sale completed, Bond St toilet complete, Chantry under offer

Next quarter  Work continues to transfer Weymouth hotels to full repairing leases with some due to complete by the end of the financial year  Continue with asset disposal process across all 3 councils  Project to improve toilet facilities in Weymouth seafront  Process will continue of asset transfer to Bridport Town Council & discussions to continue with other town & parish councils  Hub works are due to complete at Nordon

Page 63

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Democratic Services & Elections Corporate Manager – Jacqui Andrews

(Democratic Support, Electoral Registration & Elections)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Alison Reed (Corporate Affairs and Continuous Improvement)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 186,435 Register of Electors - Salaries - it is not proposed to appoint to Transport 11,026 the Electoral Services Manager post at the current time Supplies & Services 434,662 therefore there will be a predicted saving on the salaries Income (36,961) budget. This will be reviewed once there is a decision on local Net expenditure 595,162 government reorganisation. There has been a change in Q2 Predicted variance 46,650 (F) processes within the electoral registration function, so there is a further anticipated saving on the casual staff budget. Q1 Predicted variance 0 Even with digital registration, there is likely to be an overspend on postages due to the additional forms required to be sent under the individual electoral registration process.

Key performance data

No Democratic Services & Elections performance measures are reported in this document.

Key risk areas

7 Service operational risks have been identified for Democratic Services & Elections:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 2 Low Risks 5

Page 64

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

Updates on the activities/actions in the Service Plan for Democratic & Electoral Services:

1. Promotion and integration of the ModGov workflow process for officers – a pilot officer group is currently trialling the use of ModGov for report workflow to ensure that the system is working correctly. Once any issues have been resolved, this will be rolled out across the Partnership by the end of the year with report authors submitting their papers directly through the ModGov system that will facilitate the appropriate sign off for all reports prior to publication. This will ensure that we are working efficiently and effectively taking full advantage of digital services wherever possible.

2. Promoting digital electoral registration throughout the year – this year the incentive of being entered into a prize draw during the annual canvass has been used again to try to promote response channels other than Royal Mail. Residents have been able to respond to the annual electoral canvass form by internet, telephone or text, with each response saving £2.27 per form if not sent via Royal Mail. Targeted social media messaging was used this year to publicise the annual canvass and encourage responses. Work has also been carried out directly with the nursing and care homes across the Partnership.

3. A Community Governance Review is underway looking at the local governance arrangements for Weymouth, should the Borough Council be abolished as part of local government reorganisation. The Borough Council has consulted residents and businesses on its preferred option, and will be undertaking a further public engagement exercise in respect of its proposed recommendations at the end of the year.

Page 65

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Human Resources & Organisational Development Corporate Manager – Bobbie Bragg

(HR Policy, Recruitment, Workforce Planning, Staff Performance, Health & Safety)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Alison Reed (Corporate Affairs and Continuous Improvement)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 219,117 A predicted saving of £3,570 on B1468 All Staff Event is Transport 1,707 expected, but this may be subject to a possible planned event. On B1550, a predicted overspend on salaries of about Supplies & Services 25,669 (£21,369) is anticipated. Although there is likely to be a very Net expenditure 246,493 small saving at year end, this will be swallowed up redundancy Q2 Predicted variance 868 (F) costs. A predicted saving of £12,000 on workforce Q1 Predicted variance 0 development is expected. However, training budgets are under review, so some of the saving may not come to fruition. Other predicted savings are anticipated on Occupational Health of £4,000, and Legal Expenses of £6,500. Predicted overspends on Job Evaluation (£2,477) and Consultancy (£1,356) are expected. Overall, the savings and overspends on net off to about £200 as per the budget report.

Page 66

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Average FTE figure is based on a comparison of data supplied for the ONS Quarterly surveys as at March and Sept 2017. The Q2 figure of 3.71 days per FTE employee compares with a corresponding figure of 3.46 days for last year. 52% of days lost were for long term absence and 48% for short term. This is broadly in line with the Q1 distribution.

Total days lost in Q1 & Q2 was 2,000 (1,847 in same period last year). The number of absence periods was 420 (387 last year). Long term absence amounted to 50.5% of all absence.

28 employees had a long term absence in Q1 & Q2. As at the end of Q2, 16 had fully returned, 8 were still off and 4 had left their employment.

Average number of working days lost to sickness per employee (cumulative) Aim  Authority Dorset Council’s Partnership (DCP) Q2 2017/18 Actual 3.71 days Q2 2017/18 Target 3.50 days FY 2017/18 Target 7 days FY 2016/17 Actual 7.63 days

Key risk areas

6 Service operational risks have been identified for Human Resources & Organisational Development:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 0 Medium Risks 3 Low Risks 3 Page 67

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

HR & OD Business Partnering Model - The HR & OD Team has redesigned the way it needs to deliver its services for the future. It has been structured to align itself to proactively advise the Directorate’s Strategic Directors, Heads of Service, Managers & Team Leaders with all workforce related matters to include meeting the development needs of the Partnership. See the intranet for more information about the Business Partnering model and HR & OD team structure.

Recruitment and Selection Review - People are our most important resource; therefore an effective and efficient recruitment process is essential. This enables managers to find the right people with the right skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours for the right roles, at the right time. In order to create a more modern and efficient recruitment and selection process, and to properly introduce new employees into the DCP the HR & OD Team is reviewing current recruitment practices and processes to ensure that the recruitment and induction experience for each new employee is a positive one.

Learning and Development – a Learning and Development Business Partner has recently been appointed, who is now creating a wide range of diverse, modern and diverse L & D programmes that will provide professional and personal opportunities to upskill and motivate the DCP.

This includes working collaboratively with the DCP business Improvement team, The DCC Learning and Development team, ACAS, South West Councils, Bournemouth and Poole Skills Agency, Yeovil, Weymouth and Kingston Maurward colleges.

HR goes digital - As part of streamlining and improving the way in which we deliver our services, the Team has now created an HR Help Desk facility to replace the generic HR & OD Inbox.

HR & OD Collaboration - The acting Head of DCC HR & OD and the DCP Corporate Manager HR & OD are using every opportunity to work collaboratively on a range of initiatives to create efficiencies. These include: Apprenticeships (Pan Dorset apprenticeship forum), a new Wellbeing portal & Dorset e-learning portal.

DCP Apprenticeships - The partnership is pleased to announce that we now have 10 apprentices placed throughout the organisation, who are doing really well, some are nearing completion of their NVQ’s and two individuals have successfully been through the recruitment process and have now secured trainee roles in the partnership. They meet once a month as a self-organising group and have participated in many corporate initiatives using their IT & Media skills. All other HR&OD Service actions are on track.

Page 68

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Legal Services Corporate Manager – Robert Firth

(Legal, Deputy Monitoring Officer, Land Charges)

Lead Brief Holder – Cllr Alison Reed (Corporate Affairs and Continuous Improvement)

Revenue summary

Subjective analysis Full Year Current Comments / actions Budget 2017/18 (£) Employees 281,200 In NDDC Land Charges the main cost pressures are fees Transport 788 payable to DCC in relation to aspects of CON 29 searches which are appreciably exceeding the budgeted amount as well Supplies & Services 69,373 as a shortfall of search income against budget. Inevitably Income (144,714) these vary according to actual searches received and any Net expenditure 206,647 shortfalls or surplus at the end of the year will be factored in as Q2 Predicted variance 0 part of fee setting for next year. For Legal Services the Q1 Predicted variance 0 primary cost pressure arises from the on-going use of locums with particular focus on property work. The recruitment process as part of the restructure continues; the future need for locums is being assessed in conjunction with this exercise and this will feed in to forecasting any potential overspends attributable to this situation.

Page 69

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key performance data

Exception Report from Head of Service

Land Charges

Q2 was not expected to be as challenging for land charges as Q1; unfortunately, unforeseen vacancy and absence issues had, and continue to have, a material impact on search turnarounds across all three councils. The significant deterioration of performance in Q2 in relation to North and Weymouth is essentially attributable to these factors. Measures are already in place to help tackle this short term issue with a provisional appointment already made to the vacant post. For West, the impact of these circumstances is reflected more in the speed of progress of reducing the backlog rather than a significant increase in turnaround times. This is largely reflective of the overall ability to move resources within the unit having regard to knowledge of different land charges systems.

The impact of resource variations within the unit as identified above is evidence of a view previously expressed, namely that issues of resilience remain a key risk to the overall search performance of all three Councils. Unfortunately, simply throwing resource at this problem is of very limited immediate benefit due to training times required and for the short term can actually have a negative impact as time spent on training equates to less time actually processing searches.

It is for such reasons that the progression of projects to secure a single land charges IT system and improved digitalisation of data are vital if long term resilience is to be secured. In this respect, progress on these improvement projects over the last quarter has been positive with milestones such as digitalisation commencing of planning microfiche back to 1974, invitations to tender being sought on a single planning and land charges IT system and the recruitment of various casual staff to undertake further data preparation work all occurring during this period. Progress of these activities also provides material benefit to other Council projects including in particular work towards meeting emerging obligations under the new GDPR regime. The delivery of these and other related work streams will remain a key challenge over the next year particularly as there is already significant competing demand for limited specialist internal resource amongst different corporate projects; such demand is only likely to increase in the event of a positive decision regarding LGR.

Legal

The Legal Services Unit continues to progress its restructure and as at mid-October the Unit should for the first time have a full complement of more senior staff. This alone provides an opportunity to reduce strain on budgets as it will decrease some of the existing dependency on locum staff. Work progresses on reviewing restructure requirements for other posts within the unit.

Page 70

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Average days to process Land Charge searches (working days) Aim  Authority North Dorset West Dorset Weymouth & Portland Q2 2017/18 Actual 18 days 37 days 26 days Q2 2017/18 Target 15 days 15 days 15 days FY 2017/18 Target 15 days 15 days 15 days FY 2016/17 Actual 8 days 51 days 6 days

Page 71

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Key risk areas

9 Service operational risks have been identified for Legal Services:-

Very High Risks 0 High Risks 1 Medium Risks 6 Low Risks 2

Issues relating to historic under resourcing/ lack of resilience. Pressure to deliver a substantial change programme in condensed time frames creates a clear risk of failure to deliver effective improvement due to consequential pressures CURRENT SCORE Planned risk reduction initiatives TARGET SCORE Impact 3 Members kept regularly informed of progress and continuing Impact 3 Likelihood 5 issues. Regular on-going involvement of staff on Likelihood 2 processes. Prompt actions taken to seek to recruit Risk Score 15 Risk Score 6 replacement staff. Replacement of project support being Risk Rating HIGH progressed. Risk Rating LOW

Future Issues

Legal: Final appointments as part of phase one of the legal restructure have been made. Meetings are being scheduled with various Heads of Service to determine future service needs prior to finalising recruitment of remaining unfilled posts. Issues relating to LGR and property demands remain key capacity risk areas.

Land Charges: Progress continues on the transformation of the Land Charges Unit with current work outside the day job of outputting searches focused on the improvement of data quality and the securing of a single IT system. Resilience remains a key risk area for the unit, albeit measures are being progressed to seek to minimise current known risk exposure relating to this issue. As these associated work streams progress then resilience pressures will increase as resource in the unit has to be allocated to meet those work stream requirements. Close monitoring of performance will continue in order to seek so far as possible to identify pressure points sufficiently in advance of them becoming problems to enable remedial measures to be put in place.

Page 72

Appendix 2 Weymouth and Portland Borough Council Business Review – Q2 2017/18

Service Plan Update

1. Maintain adequate support and assistance to the Councils’ property activities Adequate provision has been maintained via use of locums. Successful appointments to posts following Legal restructure means that business as usual levels of work should largely be able to be managed in-house. On- going discussion in place with Property to enable early capture of abnormal workload peaks. 2. Restructure of legal and land charges services Both legal and land charges have now completed initial phases of their restructures. The extent of further appointments/restructure will be subject to on-going review. 3. Maintain initiatives to secure the delivery of an effective Land Charges Service Work on securing the delivery of an effective land charges services continues in a variety of way including acquisition of a single IT system, an on-going action plan for West Dorset and a project to deliver improved data. 4. Provide support and assistance to the development of reorganisation initiatives The Legal Services Unit has been active on a variety of different projects to help with the development of the partnership including various changes to Council constitutions to secure improved alignment of provision. In the event of a decision in favour of LGR conversations will take place to identify the extent of legal engagement in the initial formation project. 5. Explore opportunities to develop improving working relationships with other Councils Discussions at Monitoring Officer level concerning mechanisms to improve working relationships have been overshadowed by LGR issues. At Officer level arrangements are in place for meetings between Legal Heads to discuss on-going development issues. The Legal Services Unit has also progressed arrangements to secure the delivery of in-house training by external providers which is made available both to Officers within the partnership and externally.

Page 73

This page is intentionally left blank WPBC Capital Budget Monitoring, Quarter 2 2017/18 Appendix 3

Weymouth & Portland Borough Council - Capital position Overall scheme budget Current year budget Scheme Budget Total Predicted Estimated 2017/18 Current Year Predicted Commentary Holder Scheme Total Scheme Budget Expenditure 2017/18 Budget Expenditure Variance to 30/09/17 Variance

£ £ £ £ £ £ Environment and Sustainability - Cllr R Nowak Weymouth Bay D Brown 323,038 323,038 0 0 0 0 The Weymouth Bay Coastal Processes Study is programmed to be delivered in Coastal November 2017 and zero spending is anticipated in year 17/18 at present. There have Processes Study been a number of technical issues with the modelling & geomorphological sections and these were referred back to the Consultants for further review. The issues have nearly been rectified but have taken longer than anticipated. On completion the report will help guide the direction that flood defences are going to take in the future (i.e. flood wall defence heights and whether we need a Tidal Barrier in future) and what funding will be required. Page 75 Page

Weymouth D Brown 1,955,000 1,955,000 0 10,842 10,842 0 The design and application for consents and preparation of tender invitation documents Harbour Walls for replacement of Wall D is delayed due to problems in implementing the recommended Remediation options. We hope to begin construction in Spring 2018. Wall C will be a separate contract Project but preparation work has started. Two separate bids have been accepted onto the Capital Investment Programme by the EA for the harbour. We intend to commission the 5-yearly harbour wall condition assessment in 17/18.

Chesil Sea Wall D Brown 300,000 300,000 0 14,675 0 14,675 All 'post storm' works completed but monitoring scheme is being put in place for establishing future works. Chesil Sea Wall D Brown 110,000 110,000 0 99,771 2,300 48,471 Match funding for larger EA joint funded scheme, the intention is to spend £49,000 in Study 17/18 and then £7,000 per annum for next three financial years. Portland D Brown 6,300 6,300 0 6,300 0 4,300 The monitoring equipment is now installed and it is intended to spend £2,000 per annum Harbour North for the next three years on surveys and monitoring to determine if there is any ground Shore movement. WPBC Capital Budget Monitoring, Quarter 2 2017/18 Appendix 3

Weymouth & Portland Borough Council - Capital position Overall scheme budget Current year budget Scheme Budget Total Predicted Estimated 2017/18 Current Year Predicted Commentary Holder Scheme Total Scheme Budget Expenditure 2017/18 Budget Expenditure Variance to 30/09/17 Variance

£ £ £ £ £ £ Corporate Affairs & Continuous Improvement - Cllr A Reed/ Finance & Assets - Cllr J Cant North Quay D Brown 1,072,868 1,063,216 9,652 111,851 0 111,851 This project is to renovate premises and relocate staff from NQ. Staff have moved out of Redevelopment / NQ and the Commercial Road and Crookhill offices are now operational. Unfortunately Relocation the sale has not completed and we are still liable for expenditure on the vacant property.

11 High St, D Brown 250,000 250,000 0 250,000 164 249,836 This is a compulsory purchase order scheme, the land will eventually used to support Portland housing in the area. Compensation has not been settled for this site and no application Page 76 Page has been formally received yet.

WPBC Totals 4,017,206 4,007,554 9,652 493,439 13,306 429,133 WPBC Treasury Management Quarterly Report 29th September 2017 Appendix 4

30th Jun Average Current Portfolio 29th Sep Average 2017 Rate (%) 2017 Rate (%) £ Debt £ 17,000,000 4.46 LOBO (2) (Lenders Option Borrowers Option) 17,000,000 4.46 10,000,000 4.79 Fixed Rate Loan (converted LOBO) 10,000,000 4.79 27,000,000 4.58 Total Debt 27,000,000 4.58 Current Investments Property Funds 5,000,000 5.63 CCLA Property Fund 5,000,000 5.53

Unit Funds 1,000,000 3.92 HC Charteris Premium Income Fund 1,000,000 3.89 3,000,000 0.66 Payden Sterling Reserve Fund 3,000,000 0.72 2,500,000 4.28 UBS Multi Asset Income Fund 2,500,000 4.01 1,000,000 4.99 City Financial Diversified Fixed Interest Fd 1,000,000 4.99 2,000,000 7.26 Schroders Income Maximiser Fund 2,500,000 7.30 2,500,000 5.77 M&G Global Dividend Fund 2,500,000 3.92 1,000,000 3.25 CCLA Diversified Income Fund 1,000,000 3.41 - - M&G Strategic Corporate Bond Fund 1,500,000 3.35* - - City Financial Multi Asset Diversified Fund 2,500,000 3.19* - - Investec Diversified Income Fund 2,500,000 5.41* - - Royal London Enhanced Cash Plus Fund 1,000,000 1.33* - - Threadneedle Strategic Bond Fund 2,500,000 4.06* - - Threadneedle UK Equity Income Fund 2,500,000 4.58* Threadneedle Sterling Short-Dated - - Corporate Bond Fund 1,000,000 1.88*

Covered Bonds 2,226,844 2.12 Leeds Build. Society 4.25% (17/12/18) 2,226,844 2.12 2,211,666 2.13 Yorkshire BS 4.75% (12/04/18) 2,211,666 2.13 2,003,000 0.75 Leeds Build. Society FRN (01/10/19) 2,003,000 0.75

Deposits 1,000,000 0.15 HSBC instant access account 0 - 1,500,000 0.32 Handelsbanken liquidity account 1,500,000 0.32 7,000,000 0.10 Debt Management Office (DMO) 1,000,000 0.10 1,500,000 0.55 Bank of Scotland (13/12/17) 1,500,000 0.55

Money Market Funds 1,698,000 0.19 Standard Life MMF (formerly Ignis) 751,000 0.16 1,698,000 0.14 Deutsche Bank MMF 750,000 0.11 1,695,000 0.13 Blackrock MMF 750,000 0.09 1,698,000 0.10 Aberdeen MMF (formerly Scottish Widows) 750,000 0.08 1,698,000 0.23 Federated Investors MMF 751,000 0.20

43,928,510 Total Investments 46,193,510

16,928,510 Net (Debt)/Investments 19,193,510 *reported returns 1 year to 27/06/17

Page 77 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 9

Management Committee 31st October 2017 Financial Regulations incl. Procurement Strategy and Social Value Statement For Recommendation

Portfolio Holder(s) Cllr J Cant

Senior Leadership Team Contact: J Vaughan, Strategic Director

Report Author: John Symes, Financial Resources Manager

Statutory Authority s.151 of the Local Government Act 1972 Social Value Act 2012 Public Procurement Regulations 2015

Purpose of Report

1 To request the committee recommend the adoption and implementation of the Dorset Councils Financial Regulations including the revised Procurement Strategy and Social Value Policy Statement.

Recommendations

2 That Management Committee recommends to Full Council the approval of the Financial Regulations.

3 That the Procurement Strategy and Social Value Statement are approved.

Reason for Decision

4 Each Authority with the Dorset Councils Partnership has been operating under its own approved Financial Regulations and Procurement Strategy. A review of each has been undertaken to align any differences to ensure that it meets the targets set out, by Central Government, in the National Procurement Strategy.

5 Procurement undertaken by the Dorset Councils Partnership is governed by the Social Value Act 2012, the Social Value Policy Statement sets out how the Council will view each procurement to ensure that we deliver the requirements of the act. This will lead to the development of a Social Value Policy.

Page 79 Background and Reason Decision Needed

6 The review and development of the Financial Regulations and Procurement Strategy has aligned the rules and processes across the Partnership and will ensure greater consistency of approach and efficiencies in its processes.

7 The Procurement Strategy is based on the vision of the National Procurement Strategy, for Local Government procurement, which encourages all Councils in England to engage with the delivery of outcomes in four key areas: Making Savings, Supporting Local Economies, Leadership and Modernising Procurement.

8 In order for the Dorset Councils Partnership to achieve the recommendations and outcomes specified in the National Procurement Strategy, for Borough and District Councils, the Procurement Team leader has developed the Procurement Strategy that will to assist the Partnership in delivering the required outcomes.

9 This work has seen improvement in the streamlining of processes including the digitalisation of paperwork with the introduction of electronically submitted and authorised contract strategies and paperless processes of submissions and opening of tenders.

10 The Public Services (Social Value) Act of 2012 requires Public Authorities to have regard to how economic, social and environmental well-being may be enhanced through the provision of Public Services.

11 Adoption of the Social Value Policy Statement will ensure that the Dorset Councils Partnership review all procurements in relation to social, economical and environmental impacts. The Statement should assist the partnership to develop a Social Value Policy.

Implications

Corporate Plan

12 Reflects current Corporate Plan.

Risk Management

13 Risk that ineffective governance arrangements will expose the council to significant financial or reputational risk and to the risk of non-compliance with statutory requirements.

Appendices

14 Appendix 1 – Financial Regulations Appendix 2 – Procurement Strategy Appendix 3 – Social Value Policy Statement

Page 80 Footnote

Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: John Symes, Financial Resources Manager Telephone: 01305 252341 Email: [email protected]

Page 81 This page is intentionally left blank Financial Regulations

Part D

Financial Regulations

Date Revised: September 2017

Date for Next Review: September 2019

Updated September 2017 Page 83 Part D – Page 1 Financial Regulations

Part D – Table of Contents Page

Status of Financial Regulations...... 4 Introduction...... 4 Financial Management...... 5 Introduction...... 5 Responsibilities ...... 5 Virements and Variations ...... 7 Contributions to or from Reserves...... 9 Setting Fees & Charges…………………………………………………………9 Treatment of year-end balances ...... 9 Accounting policies...... 10 Accounting records and returns ...... 10 The annual statement of accounts ...... 12 Financial Planning ...... 13 Introduction...... 13 Policy Framework...... 13 Budgeting - Revenue...... 13 Budget format ...... 13 Budget preparation ...... 14 Budget monitoring and control...... 15 Medium Term Planning...... 17 Budget Control – Capital ...... 18 Maintenance of Reserves...... 19 Leases...... 20 Risk Management and Control of Resources...... 21 Introduction...... 21 Risk Management ...... 21 Internal Control...... 22 Audit Requirements...... 24 Preventing Fraud and Corruption ...... 26 Assets...... 27 Stocks, Stores, Furniture & Equipment ...... 29 Buildings, Land & Property...... 29 Treasury Management ...... 30 Banking Arrangements...... 31 Staffing ...... 33 Insurance...... 34 Write off of Bad Debts ...... 34 Breaches of Financial Regulations...... 35 Systems and Procedures ...... 36 Introduction...... 36 General...... 36 Income and expenditure...... 38 Income ...... 38 Ordering and paying for work, goods and services ...... 40 Payments to employees and members ...... 42

Updated September 2017 Page 84 Part D – Page 2 Financial Regulations

Taxation...... 44 Trading accounts...... 45 External Arrangements...... 46 Introduction...... 46 Partnerships ...... 46 External Funding ...... 48 Work for Third Parties ...... 49 Accountable Body ...... 50 Contract Procedural Rules...... 51 Introduction...... 51 Context ...... 52 Before We Start...... 52 Contract Strategy (Appendix A)...... 55 How We Buy the Things We Need...... 56 Framework agreements ...... 58 Electronic Procurement ...... 59 Concession Contracts ...... 60 The EU Directives ...... 60 Receiving and opening tenders...... 61 Clarification Procedures and Post-Tender Negotiation ...... 63 Evaluating tenders...... 63 Awarding contracts and Audit Trails...... 65 Standstill Period (for all contracts over £50,000 - Bands 4 & 5)...... 65 Contract Award Notice ...... 66 Conditions of contract...... 66 Parent Company Guarantees and Performance Bonds...... 67 Disposal of Assets...... 67 Exemptions from the Rules ...... 67 Transfers of Contracts...... 68 Conflicts of Interest...... 69 Variations ...... 69 Contract formalities ...... 69 Post Contract Monitoring and Evaluation ...... 69 Prevention of Corruption ...... 70 Procurement by Consultants ...... 70 Income Generation Opportunities ...... 71

Updated September 2017 Page 85 Part D – Page 3 Financial Regulations

Status of Financial Regulations

Introduction Financial regulations provide the framework for managing the Council’s financial affairs. They apply to every Member and Officer of the Council and anyone acting on its behalf. The regulations identify the financial responsibilities of the Full Council, the decision making Committee (Management Committee/Strategy Committee/Cabinet) and members of the Scrutiny & Performance/Overview & Scrutiny Committee and Audit/Audit & Governance/Accounts and Audit Committees, the Chief Executive, the Monitoring Officer, Section 151 Officer, Senior Leadership Team (SLT) and Corporate Management Team (CMT). Members of SLT should maintain a written record where decision making has been delegated to members of their staff, including seconded staff. Where decisions have been delegated or devolved to other responsible employees reference to Members of SLT in the Regulations should be read as referring to them. All Members and Officers have a general responsibility for taking reasonable action to provide for the security of the assets under their control, and for ensuring that the use of these resources is legal, is properly authorised, provides value for money and achieves best value. The Strategic Director is responsible for maintaining a continuous review of the financial regulations and submitting any additions or changes necessary to the full Council for approval. The Strategic Director is also responsible for reporting, where appropriate, breaches of the financial regulations to the decision making Committee. CMT are responsible for ensuring that all staff in their Service are aware of the existence and content of the Council’s financial regulations and other internal regulatory documents and that they comply with them. They must also ensure that all Officers are aware of their availability on the Intranet. The Strategic Director is responsible for issuing advice and guidance to underpin the financial regulations that Members, Officers and others acting on behalf of the Council are required to follow.

Updated September 2017 Page 86 Part D – Page 4 Financial Regulations

Financial Regulations Financial Regulation A:

Financial Management

Introduction A.1 Financial management covers all financial accountabilities in relation to the running of the Council, including the policy framework and budget. A.2 All Officers and Members have a duty to abide by the highest standards of probity in dealing with financial issues. This is facilitated by ensuring everyone is clear about the standards to which they are working and the controls that are in place to ensure that these standards are met.

Responsibilities Full Council A.3 The Full Council is responsible for adopting the Council’s Constitution and Councillors’ Code of Conduct and for approving the policy framework and budget within which the Council operates. It is also responsible for approving and monitoring compliance with the Council’s overall framework of accountability and control. The framework is set out in its Constitution. The Full Council is also responsible for monitoring compliance with the agreed policy and related decision making Committee decisions. A.4 The Full Council is responsible for approving procedures for recording and reporting decisions taken. This includes those key decisions delegated by and decisions taken by the Full Council and its committees. These delegations and details of who has responsibility for which decision’s, are set out in Part C of the Constitution. Committees of the Council A.5 The decision making Committee is responsible for proposing the policy framework and budget to the Full Council, and for discharging Committee functions in accordance with the policy framework and budget. A.6 The Scrutiny & Performance/Overview & Scrutiny Committee is responsible for scrutinising decision making Committee decisions before or after they have been implemented and for holding the decision making Committee to account. A.7 The Audit/Audit & Governance/Accounts and Audit Committees is responsible for approving the Statement of Accounts and receiving reports from external and internal auditors. A.8 Functions which are the responsibility of the decision making committee can be further delegated by the Leader and as otherwise provided for in the Article 7, Part 2 of the constitution.

Updated September 2017 Page 87 Part D – Page 5 Financial Regulations

Statutory Officers Head of Paid Service (Chief Executive) A.9 The Chief Executive is responsible for the corporate and overall strategic management of the Council as a whole. They must report to and provide information for the decision making Committee, the Full Council, the Scrutiny & Performance/Overview & Scrutiny Committee and other Committees. They are responsible for establishing a framework for management direction, style and standards and for monitoring the performance of the organisation. The Chief Executive is also responsible, together with the Monitoring Officer, for the system of record keeping in relation to all the Full Council’s decisions (see below).

Chief Finance Officer (Strategic Director) A.10 The Chief Finance Officer has statutory duties in relation to the financial administration and stewardship of the Council. This statutory responsibility cannot be overridden. The statutory duties arise from:  Section 151 of the Local Government Act 1972  The Local Government Finance Act 1988  The Local Government and Housing Act 1989  The Accounts and Audit Regulations 1996  The Local Government Act 2003 A.11 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for:  the proper administration of the authority’s financial affairs  setting and monitoring compliance with financial management standards  advising on the corporate financial position and on the key financial controls necessary to secure sound financial management  providing financial information  preparing the revenue budget and capital programme  provide advice on the robustness of the budget estimates  comment on the adequacy of reserves  Treasury Management. A.12 Section 114 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 requires the Chief Finance Officer to report to the Full Council, the decision making Committee and external auditor if the Council or one of its Officers:  has made, or is about to make, a decision which involves incurring unlawful expenditure  has taken, or is about to take, an unlawful action which has resulted or would result in a loss or deficiency to the Council

Updated September 2017 Page 88 Part D – Page 6 Financial Regulations

 is about to make an unlawful entry in the Council’s accounts. A.13 Section 114 of the 1988 Act also requires:  the Chief Finance Officer to nominate a properly qualified member of staff to deputise should they be unable to perform the duties under section 114 personally  the Council to provide the Chief Finance Officer with sufficient staff, accommodation and other resources including legal advice where this is necessary – to carry out the duties under section 114. A.14 The Responsible Financial Officer must also make a report under this section if it appears that the expenditure of the authority (including expenditure it is proposing to incur) in a financial year is likely to exceed the resources (including sums borrowed) available to meet that expenditure.

Monitoring Officer (Strategic Director) A.15 The Monitoring Officer is responsible for promoting and maintaining high standards of financial conduct and therefore provides support to the Standards Committee. The Monitoring Officer is also responsible for reporting any actual or potential breaches of the law or maladministration to the Full Council and/or to the decision making Committee, and for ensuring that procedures for recording and reporting key decisions are operating effectively. SLT and CMT A.16 SLT & CMT are responsible for:  ensuring that the decision making Committee members are advised of the financial implications of all proposals and that the financial implications have been agreed by the Chief Finance Officer,  signing contracts on behalf of the Council  to promote sound financial practices in relation to the standards, performance and development of Officers in their Services. A.17 It is the responsibility of SLT and CMT to consult with the Chief Finance Officer and seek approval on any matter liable to affect the Council’s finances materially, before any commitments are incurred.

Virements and Variations A.18 The decision making Committee is responsible for agreeing procedures for virements and variations between budget headings. A.19 A variation is defined as moving a budget from one heading to another heading within the same category (employees, premises, transport etc) A.20 A virement is defined as moving a budget to a heading within a different category, therefore using the budget for a different purpose than originally intended, for example moving a budget within supplies and services to a transport heading.

Updated September 2017 Page 89 Part D – Page 7 Financial Regulations

Why is this important? A.21 The virements and variations scheme is intended to enable the decision making Committee, CMT and their staff to manage budgets with a degree of flexibility within the overall policy framework determined by the Full Council, and therefore optimise the use of resources Key Controls A.22 Key controls for the virements and variations scheme are: (a) It is administered by the Chief Finance Officer within parameters set out in A.23The overall budget is set by Full Council. Budget Holders are therefore authorised to incur expenditure in accordance with the estimates that make up the budget. The rules below cover the process of switching resources between approved estimates or heads of expenditure (b) Virement or variation do not create additional overall budget liability (c) When the virement is to increase an income budget the Chief Finance Officer may require the production of a robust business plan before the virement is approved or additional expenditure incurred (d) When determining which value category the variation or virement falls into, the cumulative value of previous variations or virements on the codes should be taken into account (e) If the Chief Finance Officer does not authorise the virement or variation, the CMT staff member may ask the matter to be considered by the decision making Committee. The Chief Finance Officer’s report to the decision making Committee should outline the reasons for non-approval. Responsibilities A.23 The level of approval required will depend on where the revenue budget is being moved to and from and its value, as detailed below.

Value Variation Virement

up to £5,000 Senior Accountant Senior Accountant

£5,000 - £10,000 Senior Accountant Manager (Finance)

£10,001 - £100,000 Manager (Finance) Head of Service

£100,000 + Head of Service S151 Officer

A.24 Virements between capital budget schemes must be approved by the decision making committee.

Updated September 2017 Page 90 Part D – Page 8 Financial Regulations

Contributions to or from Reserves Why is this important? A.25 Holding adequate reserves is a key part of good financial management. Reserves are either held for specific purposes (earmarked reserves) or for dealing with unexpected items not included within the budget (general reserves). Key Controls A.26 Risk based assessment of general reserves sets out the minimum and maximum levels of general reserves that should be held. A.27 Chief Finance Officer must confirm that the reserves are adequate. A.28 Regular reporting of the level of reserves as part of the budget monitoring process to the decision making committee. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.29 Requests for contributions to or from all reserves need the approval of the Chief Finance Officer in accordance with the agreed purpose of the reserve. Responsibilities of the decision making committee A.30 The decision making committee will agree the purpose of the reserve. Setting of Fees & Charges Why is this important? A.31 Appropriate levels of fees & charges help avoid any unnecessary burden on Council resources across statutory and non-statutory services. Fee setting should be reactive, throughout the year, to appropriately set fees ranging from cost recovery to maximising income from trading services. Key Controls A.32 Chief Finance Officer must establish a charging policy for the supply of goods and services, including the appropriate charging of VAT, and review it regularly in line with other corporate strategies e.g. commercialisation. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.33 It is the delegated responsibility of the Chief Finance Officer to agree all changes to fees & charges.

Treatment of year-end balances Why is this important? A.34 The potential to carry forward underspends at the year end allows CMT to manage budgets flexibly however this needs to be balanced against the overall financial position of the Council. Key Controls A.35 Net underspendings on service estimates under the control of CMT may be carried forward subject to:

Updated September 2017 Page 91 Part D – Page 9 Financial Regulations

 The approval of the Chief Finance Officer who will make an assessment of the overall Council Balances.  The reporting to and approval of the decision making committee detailing the source of underspending or additional income and the proposed application of those funds. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.36 It is the responsibility of the Chief Finance Officer to administer the scheme and to approve all over and underspending on service estimates to be carried forward. Responsibilities of the decision making committee A.37 It is the responsibility of the decision making committee to approve the carry forward requests, put forward by the Chief Finance Officer.

Accounting policies Why is this important? A.38 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for the preparation of the Council’s statement of accounts, in accordance with proper practices for each financial year ending 31 March. Key Controls A.39 The key controls for accounting policies are: (a) Systems of internal control are in place that ensure financial transactions are lawful (b) Suitable accounting policies are selected and applied consistently (c) Proper accounting records are maintained (d) Financial statements are prepared which provide a true and fair view of the authority and it’s expenditure and income. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.40 To select accounting policies and ensuring that they are applied consistently. The accounting policies are set out in the statement of accounts, and cover such items as:  separate accounts for capital and revenue transactions  the basis on which debtors and creditors at year end are included in the accounts  details on substantial provisions and reserves  fixed assets  depreciation  capital charges  work in progress  stocks and stores  accounting for value added tax

Updated September 2017 Page 92 Part D – Page 10 Financial Regulations

 government grants  leasing  pensions.

Accounting records and returns Why is this important? A.41 Maintaining proper accounting records is one of the ways in which the Council discharges its responsibility for stewardship of public resources. The Council has a statutory responsibility to prepare its annual accounts to present a true and fair view of it’s operations during the year. These are subject to external audit. This audit provides assurance that the accounts are prepared properly, that proper accounting practices have been followed and that quality arrangements have been made for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of the Council’s resources. Key Controls A.42 The key controls for accounting records and returns are: (a) All finance staff and budget holders operate within the required accounting standards and timetables (b) All the Council’s transactions, material commitments and contracts and other essential accounting information are recorded completely, accurately and on a timely basis (c) Procedures are in place to enable accounting records to be reconstituted in the event of a systems failure (d) Reconciliation procedures are carried out to ensure transactions are correctly recorded (e) Prime documents are retained in accordance with legislative and other requirements. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.43 To determine the accounting procedures and records for the Council. When these are maintained outside Financial Services, CMT must consult the Chief Finance Officer. A.44 To Arrange for the compilation of all accounts and accounting records under their direction A.45 To comply with the following principles when allocating accounting duties (a) Separating the duties of providing information about sums due to or from the Council and calculating, checking and recording these sums from the duty of collecting or distributing them (b) Employees with the duty of examining or checking the accounts of cash transactions must not themselves be engaged in these transactions.

Updated September 2017 Page 93 Part D – Page 11 Financial Regulations

A.46 To make proper arrangements for the audit of the Council’s accounts in accordance with the Accounts and Audit Regulations A.47 To ensure that all claims for funds including grants are made by the due date. A.48 To authorise all grant claims or applications on behalf of the Council or where the Council is acting as accountable body. A.49 To ensure the proper retention of financial documents in accordance with legislative and other requirements. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT A.50 To comply with the principles of A.41 when allocating accounting duties. A.51 To maintain adequate records to provide a management trail leading from the source of income / expenditure through to the accounting statements. A.52 To supply information required to enable the statement of accounts to be completed in accordance with guidelines issued by the Chief Finance Officer. A.53 To ensure all grant claims or applications on behalf of the Council or where the Council is acting as accountable body are signed by the Chief Finance Officer or nominated deputy.

The annual statement of accounts Why is this important? A.54 The Council has a statutory responsibility to prepare its own accounts to present a true and fair view of it’s operations during the year. Audit/Audit & Governance/Accounts and Audit Committees is responsible for approving the statutory annual statement of accounts. Key Controls A.55 The key controls for the annual statement of accounts are: (a) The Council is required to make arrangements for the proper administration of its financial affairs and to secure that one of it’s officers has the responsibility for the administration of these affairs. In this Council, that officer is the Strategic Director. (b) The Council’s statement of accounts must be prepared in accordance with proper practice. Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer A.56 The Chief Finance Officer must:- (a) select suitable accounting policies and to apply them consistently (b) make judgements and estimates that are reasonable and prudent (c) comply with the Proper Practice (d) sign and date the statement of accounts, stating that it presents fairly the financial position of the Council at the accounting date and its income and expenditure for the year ended 31 March

Updated September 2017 Page 94 Part D – Page 12 Financial Regulations

(e) draw up the timetable for final accounts preparation and to advise staff and external auditors accordingly.

Updated September 2017 Page 95 Part D – Page 13 Financial Regulations

Financial Planning Financial Regulation B:

Introduction B.1 The Full Council is responsible for agreeing the Council’s policy framework and budget, which will be proposed by the decision making committee. In terms of financial planning, the key elements are:  The Revenue Budget  The Capital Programme  The Medium Term Financial Plan

Policy Framework B.2 The Full Council is responsible for approving the policy framework and budget. B.3 The Full Council is also responsible for approving procedures for agreeing variations to approved budgets, plans and strategies forming the policy framework and for determining the circumstances in which a decision will be deemed to be contrary to the budget or policy framework. B.4 The Full Council is responsible for setting the level at which the decision making committee may reallocate budget funds from one service to another. The decision making committee is responsible for taking in- year decisions on resources and priorities in order to deliver the budget policy framework within the financial limits set by the Council.

Budgeting - Revenue

Budget format B.5 The general format of the budget will be determined by the Chief Finance Officer. Why is this important? B.6 The format of the budget determines the level of detail to which financial control and management will be exercised. The format shapes how the rules around virements and variations will operate and sets the level at which funds may be reallocated within budgets. Key Controls B.7 The key controls for the budget format are: (a) The format complies with all legal requirements (b) The format complies with CIPFA’s Service Reporting Code of Practice (c) The format reflects the accountabilities of service delivery

Updated September 2017 Page 96 Part D – Page 14 Financial Regulations

Responsibilities of Chief Finance Officer B.8 To determine the format of the budget that is approved by Full Council.

Budget preparation Why is this important? B.9 The Council is a complex organisation responsible for delivering a wide variety of services. It needs to plan effectively and to develop systems to enable scarce resources to be allocated in accordance with priorities. The budget is the financial expression of the Council’s plans and policies. B.10 The revenue budget must be constructed so as to ensure that resource allocation properly reflects the service plans and priorities of Full Council. Budgets are needed so that the Council can plan, authorise, monitor and control the way money is allocated and spent. It is illegal for a council to budget for a deficit. B.11 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for ensuring that a detailed revenue budget is prepared on an annual basis and an outline financial plan for future years for consideration by the decision making committee, before submission to the Full Council. The Full Council may amend the budget or ask the decision making committee to reconsider it before approving it. B.12 The budget approved by Full Council, usually in February each year, sets out the planned income and expenditure for the year ahead. This provides the legal authority for officers to incur expenditure. It is important that the budget reflects service plans and priorities. Key Controls B.13 Budget proposals are considered by Scrutiny & Performance/Overview & Scrutiny Committee prior to final consideration by the decision making committee and recommendation to Full Council B.14 Once off sources of funding are not used to support ongoing expenditure without being explicitly explained B.15 Amendments to the budget at Full Council must be made in writing 55 hours before the meeting commences and must identify the source of funding for the amendment. B.16 Budget managers are consulted in the preparation of the budgets for which they will be held responsible and accept accountability for their budgets and the level of service to be delivered B.17 A monitoring process is in place to review regularly the effectiveness and operation of budget preparation and to ensure any corrective action is taken. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.18 To prepare the detailed annual revenue budget and outline financial plan for future years for the decision making committee

Updated September 2017 Page 97 Part D – Page 15 Financial Regulations

B.19 To prepare and submit reports on budget prospects for the decision making committee, including resource constraints set by the Government. Reports should take account of medium-term prospects, where appropriate. B.20 To determine the detailed form of revenue estimates and the methods for their preparation, consistent with the budget approved by the full Council, and after consultation with the decision making committee. B.21 To prepare and submit reports to the decision making committee on the aggregate spending plans of services and on the resources available to fund them, identifying, where appropriate, the implications for the level of Council Tax to be levied. B.22 To encourage the best use of resources and value for money by working with SLT and CMT to identify opportunities to improve economy, efficiency and effectiveness, and by encouraging good practice in conducting financial appraisals of development or savings options, and in developing financial aspects of service planning. B.23 To advise the Full Council on the decision making committee proposals in accordance with their responsibilities under section 151 of the Local Government Act 1972. B.24 To certify the robustness of the budget estimates. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT B.25 To ensure that budget estimates reflect agreed service plans and that these estimates are prepared in line with guidance issued by the Chief Finance Officer B.26 Draw attention to the Chief Finance Officer of any significant changes to the service which will impact upon the service budget estimates or future years budgets. B.27 Undertake budget preparation tasks as identified by the Chief Finance Officer. B.28 To integrate financial and budget plans into service planning, so that budget plans can be supported by financial and non-financial performance measures

Budget monitoring and control Why is this important? B.29 Budget management ensures that once the budget has been approved by Full Council, resources allocated are used for their intended purposes and are properly accounted for. Budgetary control is a continuous process, enabling the Council to review and adjust its budget during the financial year. It also provides the mechanism that calls to account managers responsible for defined areas of the budget. B.30 By continuously identifying and explaining variances against budgets, the Council can identify changes in trends and resource requirements at the earliest opportunity. The Council itself operates within an overall limit, approved when setting the budget. To ensure that the Council does

Updated September 2017 Page 98 Part D – Page 16 Financial Regulations

not overspend, each service is required to manage its own expenditure and income within the budget allocated to it. Key Controls B.31 The key controls for managing and controlling the revenue budget are: (a) Budget holders are responsible for budgets within their area (b) There is a named budget holder for each budget (c) Budget holders accept accountability for their budgets and the level of service to be delivered and understand their financial responsibilities (d) Budget holders follow an approved certification process for all expenditure (e) Income and expenditure is properly accounted for (f) Regular budget monitoring and reporting. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.32 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for establishing an appropriate framework of budgetary management and control that ensures: (a) budget management is exercised within annual limits unless the Full Council agrees otherwise (b) CMT has available timely information on receipts and payments on each budget which is sufficiently detailed to enable managers to fulfil their budgetary responsibilities (c) expenditure is committed only against an approved budget head (d) all officers responsible for committing expenditure comply with relevant guidance, and the financial regulations (e) each budget has a single named responsible officer. As a general principle, budget responsibility should be aligned as closely as possible to the decision-making processes that commits expenditure (f) significant variances from approved budgets are investigated and reported by budget managers regularly. B.33 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for providing appropriate financial information to enable budgets to be monitored effectively. They must monitor and control overall expenditure and income against budget and high-level, budget monitoring reports should be produced on a regular basis to both the decision making committee and SLT. B.34 The Chief Finance Officer will advise on whether expenditure is revenue or capital. The Chief Finance Officer will determine the most appropriate source of funding at the time of setting the budget and on production of the Statement of Accounts.

Responsibilities of SLT B.35 To hold CMT to account for the budgets under their control.

Updated September 2017 Page 99 Part D – Page 17 Financial Regulations

B.36 To agree any necessary corporate actions to address budget variances. Responsibilities of CMT B.37 It is the responsibility of CMT to: (a) maintain budgetary control within their Service and to ensure that all income and expenditure are properly recorded and accounted for (b) ensure that spending remains within the services overall limit, and that individual budget heads are not overspent, by monitoring the budget and taking appropriate corrective action where significant variations from the approved budget are forecast (c) ensure that a monitoring process is in place to review performance levels/levels of service in conjunction with the budget and is operating effectively (d) prepare and submit to Financial Services reports on the services projected income and expenditure compared with its budget, including actions to be taken to address the variances (e) Alert the Chief Finance Officer of any problems identified.

Medium Term Planning Why is this important? B.38 Medium term planning involves planning the budget over a number of years. As each year passes, another future year will be added to the medium term plan. This ensures that the Council is always preparing for events in advance. Key Controls B.39 The key controls for medium term planning are: (a) A plan is produced setting out assumptions on future years expenditure and income levels (b) Plan is reported to Members to provide future years outlook when taking decisions Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.40 To produce a medium term financial plan B.41 To advise on the medium-term implications of spending decisions. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT B.42 Draw attention to the Chief Finance Officer of any significant changes to the service which will impact upon the service budget estimates or future years budgets.

Budget Control – Capital B.43 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for ensuring that a capital programme is prepared on an annual basis for consideration by the decision making committee before submission to the Full Council.

Updated September 2017 Page 100 Part D – Page 18 Financial Regulations

Why is this important? B.44 Capital expenditure involves acquiring or enhancing fixed assets with a long-term value to the Council, such as land, buildings and major items of plant, equipment or vehicles. Capital assets shape the way services are delivered in the long term and create financial commitments for the future in the form of financing costs and revenue running costs. Key Controls B.45 The key controls for the capital programme are: (a) Specific approval by the Full Council for the programme of capital expenditure (b) Expenditure on capital schemes is subject to the approval of the Chief Finance Officer (c) A scheme and estimate and associated revenue costs are prepared for each scheme (d) Schemes are identified individually in the capital programme (e) The development and implementation of asset management plans (f) Accountability for each scheme is accepted by a named manager (g) Regular budget monitoring of progress of capital schemes. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.46 To prepare capital estimates jointly with SLT and CMT and to report them to the decision making committee for approval. The decision making committee will make recommendations on the capital estimates and on any associated financing requirements to the full Council. B.47 The Chief Finance Officer is also responsible for producing a Capital Strategy that details a medium term capital programme. B.48 To prepare and submit reports to the decision making committee on the projected income, expenditure and resources compared with the approved estimates. B.49 To issue guidance concerning capital schemes and controls, for example, on project appraisal techniques. The definition of ‘capital’ will be determined by the Chief Finance Officer, having regard to government regulations and accounting requirements. B.50 To obtain authorisation from the decision making committee for individual schemes where the estimated expenditure exceeds the capital programme provision by more than a specified amount.

Responsibilities of SLT & CMT B.51 It is the responsibility of the Service Managers to comply with guidance concerning capital schemes and controls issued by the Chief Finance Officer. B.52 To ensure that all capital proposals have undergone a project appraisal in accordance with guidance issued by the Chief Finance Officer.

Updated September 2017 Page 101 Part D – Page 19 Financial Regulations

B.53 To prepare a quarterly return of estimated final costs of schemes in the approved capital programme for submission to the Chief Finance Officer. B.54 To ensure that adequate records are maintained for all capital contracts. B.55 To proceed with projects only when there is adequate provision in the capital programme and with the agreement of the Chief Finance Officer. B.56 To prepare and submit reports, jointly with the Chief Finance Officer, to the decision making committee, of any variation in contract costs greater than the approved limits. The decision making committee may meet cost increases by virement from savings elsewhere within their capital programme. B.57 To prepare and submit reports, jointly with the Chief Finance Officer, to the decision making committee, on completion of all contracts where the final expenditure exceeds the approved contract sum by more than the specified amount. B.58 To ensure that credit arrangements, such as leasing agreements, are not entered into without the prior approval of the Chief Finance Officer and, if applicable, approval of the scheme through the capital programme. B.59 To gain the approval of the Chief Finance Officer and to seek the decision making committee approval where there are proposals to bid for supported borrowing approvals to be issued by government departments to support expenditure that has not been included in the current year’s capital programme.

Maintenance of Reserves B.60 It is the responsibility of the Chief Finance Officer to advise the decision making committee on prudent levels of reserves using a risk management based approach. Why is this important? B.61 The decision making committee must decide the level of general reserves it wishes to maintain before Full Council can decide the level of council tax. Reserves are maintained as a matter of prudence. They enable the authority to provide for unexpected events and thereby protect it from overspending, should such events occur. Reserves for specific purposes may also be maintained, such as maintenance of assets. Key Controls B.62 To maintain reserves in accordance with Proper Practice and agreed accounting policies B.63 For each reserve established, the purpose, usage and basis of transactions should be clearly identified. B.64 Authorisation and expenditure from reserves by the Chief Finance Officer.

Updated September 2017 Page 102 Part D – Page 20 Financial Regulations

Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.65 To advise the decision making committee on prudent levels of reserves for the Council using a risk based approach.

Leases Why is this important? B.66 There are two types of leases, operating and finance leases and there are specific accounting tests to determine what type a lease is. Operating leases result in revenue costs whilst finance leases affect both revenue and capital budgets. There are also specific accounting and disclosure requirements for each type of lease. This has been further enhanced by the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards. It is important that the terms of each lease are assessed to determine how the lease would be classified before the lease is entered into. Key Controls B.67 No leases entered into without prior approval of Chief Finance Officer Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer B.68 It is the responsibility of the Chief Finance Officer to consider the classification of a lease and the resulting implications prior to authorising the signing of the lease, in writing. Responsibilities of SLT & CMT B.69 To gain the approval of the Chief Finance Officer, in writing, before entering into any lease or hire purchase type arrangement. This applies to leases where the Council is either the lessee or the lessor. B.70 CMT must ensure that charges arising from such arrangements can be met from the delegated budget for the current and future years.

Updated September 2017 Page 103 Part D – Page 21 Financial Regulations

Risk Management and Control of Resources Financial Regulation C:

Introduction C.1 It is essential that robust, integrated systems are developed and maintained for identifying and evaluating all significant operational risks to the Council. This should include the proactive participation of all those associated with planning and delivering services.

Risk Management C.2 The decision making committee is responsible for approving the Council’s risk management strategy and for reviewing the effectiveness of risk management. The decision making committee is responsible for ensuring that proper insurance exists where appropriate. C.3 The SLT is responsible for promoting the Council’s risk management strategy throughout the Council. Why is this important? C.4 All organisations, whether public or private sector, face risks to people, property, reputation and continued operations. Risk is the chance or possibility of loss, damage, injury or failure to achieve objectives caused by an unwanted or uncertain action or event. Risk management is the planned and systematic approach to the identification, evaluation and control of risk. It’s objectives are to secure the assets of the organisation and to ensure the continued financial and organisational well-being of the organisation. In essence, it is therefore, an integral part of good business practice. Risk management is concerned with evaluating the measures an organisation already has in place to manage identified risks and then recommending the action the organisation needs to take to control these risks effectively. Key Controls C.5 The key controls for risk management are: (a) Procedures are in place to identify, assess, prevent or contain material risks, and these procedures are operating effectively throughout the authority (b) A monitoring process is in place to review regularly the effectiveness of risk reduction strategies and the operation of these controls. The risk management process should be conducted on a continuing basis (c) Managers know that they are responsible for managing relevant risks and are provided with relevant information on risk management initiatives (d) Provision is made for losses that might result from the risks that remain

Updated September 2017 Page 104 Part D – Page 22 Financial Regulations

(e) Procedures are in place to investigate claims within required timescales (f) Acceptable levels of risk are determined and insured against where appropriate (g) The Council has identified business continuity plans for implementation in the event of disaster that results in significant loss or damage to it’s resources Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.6 To prepare and promote the Councils’ risk management Strategy. C.7 To develop risk management controls in conjunction with SLT and CMT. C.8 To include all appropriate employees of the Council in a suitable fidelity guarantee insurance. C.9 To effect corporate insurance cover, through external insurance and to negotiate all claims in consultation with other officers, where necessary. Responsibilities of SLT & CMT C.10 To notify the Chief Finance Officer immediately of any loss, liability or damage that may lead to a claim against the Council, together with any information or explanation required by the Chief Finance Officer or the Council’s insurers. C.11 To take responsibility for risk management in their areas, having regard to advice from the Chief Finance Officer and other specialist officers (e.g. health and safety). C.12 To ensure that there are regular reviews of risk within their service. C.13 To notify the Chief Finance Officer promptly of all new risks, properties or vehicles that require insurance and of any alterations affecting existing insurances. C.14 To consult the Chief Finance Officer and Legal & Democratic Services Manager on the terms of any indemnity that the authority is requested to give. C.15 To ensure that employees or anyone covered by the Council’s insurances, do not admit liability or make any offer to pay compensation that may prejudice the assessment of liability in respect of any insurance claim.

Internal Control C.16 Internal control refers to the systems of control devised by the management to help ensure the Council’s objectives are achieved in a manner that promotes economical, efficient and effective use of resources and that the Council’s assets and interests are safeguarded. Why is this important? C.17 The Council is complex and beyond the direct control of individuals. It therefore requires internal controls to manage and monitor progress towards strategic objectives.

Updated September 2017 Page 105 Part D – Page 23 Financial Regulations

C.18 The Council has statutory obligations, and, therefore, requires internal controls to identify, meet and monitor compliance with these obligations. C.19 The Council faces a wide range of financial, administrative and commercial risks, both from internal and external factors, which threaten the achievement of its objectives. Internal controls are necessary to manage these risks. C.20 The system of internal controls is established in order to provide measurable achievement of: (a) Efficient and effective operations (b) Reliable financial information and reporting (c) Compliance with laws and regulations (d) Risk management. Key Controls C.21 The key controls and control objectives for internal control systems are: (a) Key controls should be reviewed on a regular basis and the Council should make a formal statement annually to the effect that it is satisfied that the systems if internal control are operating effectively (b) Managerial control systems, including defining policies, setting objectives and plans, monitoring financial and other performance and taking appropriate anticipatory and remedial actions. The key objective of these systems is to promote ownership of the control environment by defining roles and responsibilities (c) Financial and operational control systems and procedures, which include physical safeguards for assets, segregation of duties, authorisation and approval procedures and information systems (d) An effective internal audit function that is properly resourced. It should operate in accordance with the principles contained in the Auditing Practices Board’s auditing guideline ‘Guidance for Internal Auditors’, CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Internal Audit in Local Government in the United Kingdom and with any other statutory obligations and regulations. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.22 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for advising on effective systems of internal control which provide reasonable assurance of effective and efficient operations, financial stewardship, probity and compliance with laws and regulations and other relevant statements of best practice. They should ensure that public funds are properly safeguarded and used economically, efficiently, and in accordance with the statutory and other authorities that govern their use.

Responsibilities of SLT & CMT C.23 It is the responsibility of CMT to establish sound arrangements for planning, appraising, authorising and controlling their operations in order

Updated September 2017 Page 106 Part D – Page 24 Financial Regulations

to achieve continuous improvement, economy, efficiency and effectiveness and for achieving their financial performance targets. C.24 To manage processes to check that established controls are being adhered to and to evaluate their effectiveness, in order to be confident in the proper use of resources, achievement of objectives and management of risks. C.25 To review existing controls in the light of changes affecting the Council and to establish and implement new ones in line with guidance from the Chief Finance Officer. CMT should also be responsible for removing controls that are unnecessary or not cost or risk effective – for example, because of duplication. C.26 To ensure staff have a clear understanding of the consequences of lack of control.

Audit Requirements C.27 The Accounts and Audit Regulations require every local authority to maintain an adequate and effective internal audit. C.28 The Audit Commission is responsible for appointing external auditors to each local authority. The basic duties of the external auditor are governed by section 15 of the Local Government Finance Act 1982, as amended by section 5 of the Audit Commission Act 1998. C.29 The authority may, from time to time, be subject to audit, inspection or investigation by external bodies such as HM Revenues and Customs who have statutory rights of access. Internal Audit Why is this important? C.30 The requirement for an internal audit function for local authorities is implied by section 151 of the Local Government Act 1972, which requires that authorities “make arrangements for the proper administration of their financial affairs”. The Accounts and Audit Regulations specifically require that a “relevant body will maintain an adequate and effective system of internal audit of their accounting records and control systems”. C.31 Accordingly, internal audit is an independent and objective appraisal function established by the Council for reviewing the system of internal control. It examines, evaluates and reports on the adequacy of internal control as a contribution to the proper, economic, efficient and effective use of resources. Key Controls C.32 The key controls for Internal Audit are: (a) That it is independent in it’s planning and operation (b) Internal audit has direct access to the head of paid service, all levels of management and directly to elected members

Updated September 2017 Page 107 Part D – Page 25 Financial Regulations

(c) The internal auditors comply with the Auditing Practices Board’s auditing guideline ‘Guidance for Internal Auditors’ as interpreted by CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Internal Audit in Local Government in the United Kingdom. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.33 To ensure that internal auditors have the authority to: (a) access Council premises at reasonable times (b) access all assets, records, documents, correspondence and control systems (c) receive any information and explanation considered necessary concerning any matter under consideration (d) require any Officer to account for cash, stores or any other Council asset under his or her control (e) access records belonging to third parties, such as contractors, when required (f) directly access the Chief Executive, Chair of the decision making committee and Chair of Audit/Audit & Governance/Accounts and Audit Committees C.34 To approve the strategic and annual audit plans prepared by Internal Audit, which take account of the characteristics and relative risks of the activities involved. C.35 To ensure that effective procedures are in place to investigate promptly any fraud or irregularity. Responsibilities of SLT & CMT C.36 To ensure that internal auditors are given access at all reasonable times to premises, personnel, documents and assets that the auditors consider necessary for the purposes of their work. C.37 To ensure that auditors are provided with any information and explanations that they seek in the course of their work. C.38 To consider and respond promptly to recommendations in audit reports. C.39 To ensure that any agreed actions arising from audit recommendations are carried out in a timely and efficient fashion. C.40 To notify the Chief Finance Officer immediately of any suspected fraud, theft, irregularity, improper use or misappropriation of the Council’s property or resources. Pending investigation and reporting, managers should take all necessary steps to prevent further loss and to secure records and documentation against removal or alteration. C.41 To ensure that new systems for maintaining financial records, or records of assets, or changes to such systems, are discussed with and agreed by internal audit prior to implementation.

Updated September 2017 Page 108 Part D – Page 26 Financial Regulations

External Audit Why is this important? C.42 The external auditor has rights of access to all documents and information necessary for audit purposes. C.43 The basic duties of the external auditor are defined in the Audit Commission Act 1998 and the Local Government Act 1999. In particular, section 4 of the 1998 Act requires the Audit Commission to prepare a code of audit practice, which external auditors follow when carrying out their duties. The code of audit practice issued in March 2000 sets out the auditor’s objectives to review and report upon: (a) the financial aspects of the audited body’s corporate governance arrangements (b) the audited body’s financial statements (c) aspects of the audited body’s arrangements to manage its performance. C.44 The Council’s accounts are scrutinised by external auditors, who must be satisfied that the statement of accounts presents a true and fair view of the financial position of the Council and its income and expenditure for the year in question and complies with the legal requirements. Key Controls C.45 The Dorset Council’s Partnership has opted into arrangements for Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited, an independent company limited by guarantee and incorporated by the Local Government Association, to appoint its external auditors. The National Audit Office will set the standards for public audit, which external auditors follow when carrying out their audits. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.46 To ensure that external auditors are given access at all reasonable times to premises, personnel, documents and assets that the external auditors consider necessary for the purposes of their work. C.47 To ensure there is effective liaison between external and internal audit. C.48 To work with the external auditor and advise the full Council, the decision making committee, Audit/Audit & Governance/Accounts and Audit Committees, SLT and CMT on their responsibilities in relation to external audit. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT C.49 To ensure that external auditors are given access at all reasonable times to premises, personnel, documents and assets that the external auditors consider necessary for the purposes of their work. C.50 To ensure that all records and systems are up to date and available for inspection.

Updated September 2017 Page 109 Part D – Page 27 Financial Regulations

Preventing Fraud and Corruption Why is this important? C.51 The Council will not tolerate fraud and corruption in the administration of it’s responsibilities, whether from inside or outside the council. C.52 The Council’s expectation of propriety and accountability is that all members and staff at all levels will lead by example in ensuring adherence to legal requirements, rules, procedures and practices. C.53 The Council also expects that individuals and organisations (e.g. suppliers, contractors, service providers) with whom it comes into contact will act towards the Council with integrity and without thought or actions involving fraud and corruption. Key Controls C.54 The key controls regarding the prevention of financial irregularities are that: (a) The Council has an effective anti-fraud and anti-corruption policy and maintains a culture that will not tolerate fraud and corruption (b) All members and staff act with integrity and lead by example (c) Senior managers are required to deal swiftly and firmly with those who defraud or attempt to defraud the Council, or who are corrupt (d) The maintenance of a register of interests in which any hospitality or gifts accepted must be recorded (e) Whistle blowing procedures are in place and operate effectively (f) Legislation including the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 is adhered to. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.55 To develop and maintain an anti-fraud and corruption strategy C.56 To maintain adequate and effective internal control arrangements C.57 To ensure that all suspected irregularities are reported to Internal Audit and Chief Executive. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT C.58 To ensure that all suspected irregularities are reported to Internal Audit. C.59 To instigate the Council’s disciplinary procedures where the outcome of an audit investigation indicates improper behaviour. C.60 To ensure that where financial impropriety is discovered, the Chief Finance Officer is informed, and where sufficient evidence exists to believe that a criminal offence may have been committed, the Police are called in to determine with the Crown Prosecution Service whether any prosecution will take place.

Assets Why is this important?

Updated September 2017 Page 110 Part D – Page 28 Financial Regulations

C.61 The Council holds assets in the form of property, vehicles, equipment, furniture and other items worth many millions of pounds. It is important that assets are safeguarded and used efficiently in service delivery, and that there are arrangements for the security of both assets and information required for service operations. An up-to-date asset register is a prerequisite for proper fixed asset accounting and sound asset management. Key controls C.62 The key controls for the security of resources such as land, buildings, fixed plant and machinery, equipment, software and information are: (a) Resources are used only for the purposes of the Council and are properly accounted for (b) Resources are available for use when required (c) Resources no longer required are disposed of in accordance with the law and the regulations of the Council so as to maximise benefits (d) An asset register is maintained for the Council, assets are recorded when they are acquired by the Council and this record is updated as changes occur with respect to the location and condition of the asset (e) All staff are aware of their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding the Council’s assets and information, including the Data Protection Act and software copyright legislation (f) All staff are aware of their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding the security of the Council’s computer systems, including maintaining restricted access to the information held on them and compliance with the Council’s computer and internet security policies. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.63 To ensure that an asset register is maintained in accordance with good practice for all fixed assets with a value in excess of £10,000. The function of the asset register is to provide the Council with information about fixed assets so that they are:  Safeguarded  Used efficiently and effectively  Adequately maintained. C.64 To ensure that assets are valued in accordance with the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom: A Statement of Recommended Practice (CIPFA/LASAAC) Responsibilities of SLT and CMT C.65 CMT should ensure that records and assets are properly maintained and securely held. They should also ensure that contingency plans for the security of assets and continuity of service in the event of disaster or system failure are in place.

Updated September 2017 Page 111 Part D – Page 29 Financial Regulations

C.66 To ensure the proper security of all buildings and other assets under their control. C.67 To consult the Chief Finance Officer in any instances where security is thought to be defective or where it is considered that special security arrangements may be needed, or where circumstances suggest the possibility of any irregularity. C.68 To ensure that no Council asset is subject to personal use by an employee without proper authority. C.69 To ensure cash holdings on premises are kept to a minimum. C.70 To ensure that keys to doors, safes and similar receptacles are carried on the person of those responsible at all times; loss of any such keys must be reported to the Chief Finance Officer as soon as possible. C.71 To ensure that all employees are aware that they have a personal responsibility with regard to the protection and confidentiality of information, whether held in manual or computerised records. Information may be sensitive or privileged, or may possess some intrinsic value, and its disclosure or loss could result in a cost to the Council in some way.

Stocks, Stores, Furniture & Equipment Responsibilities of CMT C.72 CMT will be responsible for the care and physical control of all stocks, stores furniture, plans and equipment in their custody. Records should be maintained in a form specified by the Chief Finance Officer. C.73 All stocks of goods held as stores, or for resale, will be subject to stock check every six months. A certificate of the value held at 31st March each year at current prices will be certified by the Manager and the certificate forwarded to Internal Audit as soon as possible. C.74 All discrepancies should be investigated and pursued to a satisfactory conclusion. C.75 Correction of deficiencies and surpluses on stocks and stores accounts will be in accordance with the procedures laid down by the Chief Finance Officer, and adjustments exceeding £500 will be reported to Internal Audit. C.76 There will be independent control of all receipt forms, cheques, tickets or similar documents and it will be the responsibility of the appropriate Manager to ensure that all such items are serially numbered and controlled in accordance with arrangements agreed with Internal Audit.

Buildings, Land & Property Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.77 Periodic surveys of the conditions of all properties in which the Council has a proprietary interest will be made. The Chief Finance Officer will ensure that such surveys are carried out and reports prepared. Responsibilities of Specific CMT members

Updated September 2017 Page 112 Part D – Page 30 Financial Regulations

C.78 The Head of Infrastructure & Assets will maintain an Asset Management Plan for all land and buildings owned by or leased to the Council. C.79 The Head of Infrastructure & Assets will maintain records and systems that ensure that the best use is made of all properties. C.80 The Head of Infrastructure & Assets will, in consultation with Legal Services, ensure that all leases are kept up to date and rents due are revised at the appropriate time. The Head of Infrastructure & Assets will advise the Council on alternative uses of land and property as best serves the Council’s interests at the time. C.81 The Legal Services Corporate Manager will have custody of the title deeds and other agreements under seal or hand of all land owned by the Council (together with all deeds and documents held as security for any monies owed to the Council) and are responsible for their safe-keeping.

Treasury Management C.82 The Council has adopted CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Treasury Management in Local Authorities. C.83 The Full Council is responsible for approving the Treasury Management policy statement setting out the matters detailed in paragraph 15 of CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Treasury Management Committee in Local Authorities. The Policy Statement is proposed to the Full Council by the decision making committee. The Chief Finance Officer has delegated responsibility for implementing and monitoring the statement. C.84 All money in the hands of the authority is controlled by the officer designated for the purposes of section 151 of the Local Government Act 1972, referred to in the code as the Chief Finance Officer. C.85 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for reporting to the decision making committee a proposed Treasury Management strategy for the coming financial year at or before the start of each financial year. The decision making committee will receive regular updates on Treasury Management activities. C.86 All management decisions on borrowing, investment or financing will be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer, who is required to act in accordance with CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Treasury Management Committee in Local Authorities. C.87 Because of the impact upon the finances of the Council and with the Chief Finance Officer having significant delegated authority, the Council will have undertake regular Treasury Management updates and training open to all Councillors. The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for reporting to the decision making committee not less than twice in each financial year on the activities of the Treasury Management operation and on the exercise of his or her delegated Treasury Management powers. One such report will comprise an annual report on Treasury Management for presentation by 30 September of the succeeding financial year.

Updated September 2017 Page 113 Part D – Page 31 Financial Regulations

Why is this important? C.88 Many millions of pounds pass through the Council’s books each year. This led to the establishment of codes of practice. These aim to provide assurance that the Council’s money is properly managed in a way that balances risk and return, but with the overriding consideration being given to the security of the Council’s capital sum. Key Controls C.89 That the Council’s borrowings and investments comply with the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management and with the Council’s policy statement. C.90 Full Council approve the Treasury Management Strategy Statement setting limits on treasury management activities. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.91 To arrange the borrowing and investments of the Council in such a manner as to comply with the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management and the Council’s treasury management policy statement and strategy. C.92 To report at least twice a year on treasury management activities to the decision making committee and at least twice a year to the member Treasury Management update days. C.93 To ensure all investments of money are made in the name of the Council or in the name of nominees approved by the Full Council Responsibilities of SLT and CMT C.94 To ensure that loans are not made to third parties and that interests are not acquired in companies, joint ventures or other enterprises without the approval of Full Council, following consultation with the Chief Finance Officer.

Banking Arrangements Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.95 All arrangements with the Council’s bankers concerning the Council’s bank accounts and the issue and deposit of cheques will be made through the Chief Finance Officer. C.96 The Chief Finance Officer will be authorised to operate such subsidiary bank accounts as they deem necessary. All amendments/changes to these arrangements will be reported to the Chief Executive. C.97 Any overdraft on the Council’s bank accounts will be kept within the set limits. Bank accounts will be reconciled at intervals no longer than one month. C.98 All agreements with Banking Organisations regarding Direct Debits will be approved by the Chief Finance Officer.

Updated September 2017 Page 114 Part D – Page 32 Financial Regulations

C.99 All cheques and direct debit mandates drawn on the bank accounts of the Council will:  Be signed only by the Chief Finance Officer or other officer authorised by the Chief Executive to sign on behalf of the Chief Finance Officer.  Bear the name of the Chief Finance Officer as produced by the Council’s computers where this has been specifically agreed by the Chief Finance Officer. C.100 The Chief Finance Officer will arrange for such safeguards as are deemed necessary and practicable, including the separation of duties, so that as far as possible the following procedures are the responsibility of separate officers:  The checking of creditors’ accounts  The control of cheques  The preparation of cheques  The signature of cheques  The entry of the cash amount  The authorisation of BACS and CHAPS payments  The reconciliation of bank balances C.101 The Chief Finance Officer will issue Cash Handling and Banking procedures. C.102 The list of outstanding cheques will be examined at least monthly by Financial Services and reasons sought for cheques which have not been cashed. Cheques, which have not been cashed six months after the date of issue, will be cancelled. Responsibilities of CMT C.103 CMT is responsible for ensuring the control, monitoring and regular banking of daily receipts arising from cash collection points under their control. The Chief Finance Officer will provide detailed procedure notes, which will be adhered to at all times. C.104 All monies received on behalf of the Council will, without delay, be banked in the Council’s name in accordance with the instructions of the Chief Finance Officer. C.105 There will be separation of duties between receiving and paying out monies. Officers who collect cash will not be involved in the maintenance of financial records in respect of that cash. This requirement can only be excepted on the written approval, in advance, of the Chief Finance Officer. C.106 Post that may contain income will be subject to control by not less than 2 persons from the point of delivery through to the receipt of a signature at the cash desk. The Chief Finance Officer will issue detailed written instructions for handling postal income and these instructions will be adhered to at all times.

Updated September 2017 Page 115 Part D – Page 33 Financial Regulations

Staffing Why is this important? C.107 In order to provide the highest level of service, it is crucial that the Council recruits and retains high calibre, knowledgeable staff, qualified to an appropriate level. Key Controls C.108 The key controls for staffing are: (a) An appropriate staffing strategy and policy exists, in which staffing requirements and budget allocation are matched (b) Procedures are in place for forecasting staffing requirements and cost (c) Controls are implemented that ensure staff time is used efficiently and to the benefit of the Council (d) Checks are undertaken prior to employing new staff to ensure that they are appropriately qualified, experienced and trustworthy. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.109 To ensure that budget provision exists for all existing and new employees C.110 To act as an advisor to managers on areas such as National Insurance and pension contributions, as appropriate. Responsibilities of CMT C.111 CMT are responsible for controlling total staffing numbers by:  advising the decision making committee on the budget necessary in any given year to cover estimated staffing levels  adjusting the staffing to a level that can be funded within approved budget provision, varying the provision as necessary within that constraint in order to meet changing operational needs  the proper use of appointment procedures. C.112 To ensure that the staffing budget is an accurate forecast of staffing levels and is equated to an appropriate revenue budget provision. C.113 To monitor staff activity to ensure adequate control over such costs as sickness, overtime, training and temporary staff. C.114 To ensure that the staffing budget is not exceeded without due authority and that it is managed to enable the agreed level of service to be provided. C.115 To ensure that the Chief Finance Officer is informed if the staffing budget is likely to be materially over or underspent.

Updated September 2017 Page 116 Part D – Page 34 Financial Regulations

Insurance Why is this important? C.116 The Council’s assets, both physical, financial and staffing need to be adequately protected against risks through insurance. Key Controls C.117 Insurance cover is arranged and controlled centrally to ensure consistent and adequate cover is maintained. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer C.118 The Chief Finance Officer will make arrangements for approved insurance cover, maintaining adequate records and negotiating claims with the Council’s insurers. C.119 The Chief Finance Officer will, with the co-operation of other managers, review insurance cover annually. C.120 The Chief Finance Officer will keep CMT notified as to the nature and extent of the various risks that are covered or left exposed. Responsibilities of CMT C.121 CMT will advise the Insurance Officer of the extent and nature of all new risks where insurance may not exist or may be inadequate. C.122 CMT will notify immediately the Insurance Officer, in writing, of any loss, liability or damage or any event likely to lead to a claim in connection with their area of responsibility. C.123 CMT will be responsible for ensuring proper maintenance of inventories of furniture, equipment and the means for prompt and efficient identification of each item for the purposes of insurance claims or claims under suppliers’ guarantees.

Write off of Bad Debts Why is this important? C.124 All income due to the Council from all sources such as the sundry debtors system, penalty charge notices, council tax & NNDR, is important but there will be circumstances where it is not possible to collect monies due and debts need to be written off. It is important that this is a last resort after all appropriate recovery has been undertaken. Key Controls C.125 Write offs dealt with centrally to ensure a consistent approach. Responsibilities of Specified Officers C.126 The approval of the Responsible Financial Officer to write off debts over £10,000 must be obtained. The following officers have been authorised to write off debts:  Head of Financial Services – to write off debts up to £10,000  Head of Revenues & Benefits – to write off relevant debts up to £1,000 for areas under his/her management.

Updated September 2017 Page 117 Part D – Page 35 Financial Regulations

 Head of Assets & Infrastructure – to write off debts up to £100 in relations to the operation of Car Parking Responsibilities of CMT C.127 To ensure the Chief Finance Officer is notified of all debts to be considered for write off. C.128 To notify the Chief Finance Officer of any additional information which may lead to the recovery of amounts due, even after the debt has been written off, for example a forwarding address.

Breaches of Financial Regulations C.129 Where a failure to comply with these regulations is identified the matter should be bought to the immediate attention of the Chief Finance Officer. C.130 The Chief Finance Officer will report to the Chief Executive for minor breaches and to the decision making committee where the Chief Finance Officer considers the matter to be more serious. C.131 Consequences of a breach of these regulations could include disciplinary action, removal of budgetary delegations or responsibilities.

Updated September 2017 Page 118 Part D – Page 36 Financial Regulations

Systems and Procedures Financial Regulation D:

Introduction D.1 Sound systems and procedures are essential to an effective framework of accountability and control.

General Why is this important? D.2 Services have many systems and procedures relating to the control of the Council’s assets, including purchasing, costing and management systems. Services are increasingly reliant on computers for their financial management information. The information must therefore be accurate and the systems and procedures sound and well administered. They should contain controls to ensure that transactions are properly processed and errors detected promptly. D.3 The Chief Finance Officer has a professional responsibility to ensure that the Council’s financial systems are sound and should therefore be notified of any new developments or changes. Key Controls D.4 The key controls for systems and procedures are: (a) Basic data exists to enable the Council’s objectives, targets, budgets and plans to be formulated (b) Performance is communicated to the appropriate managers on an accurate, complete and timely basis (c) Early warning is provided of deviations from target, plans and budgets that require management attention (d) Operating systems and procedures are secure. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.5 To make arrangements for the proper administration of the Council’s financial affairs including to: (a) Issue advice, guidance and procedures for officers and others acting on the Council’s behalf (b) Determine the accounting systems, form of accounts and supporting financial records (c) Establish arrangements for audit of the Council’s financial affairs (d) Approve any new financial systems to be introduced (e) Approve any changes to be made to existing systems. D.6 Any changes made by CMT to the existing financial systems or the establishment of new systems must be approved by the Chief Finance

Updated September 2017 Page 119 Part D – Page 37 Financial Regulations

Officer. However, CMT are responsible for the proper operation of financial processes in their own services. Responsibilities of CMT D.7 To ensure that accounting records are properly maintained and held securely. D.8 To ensure that invoices and documents with financial implications are not destroyed, except with arrangements approved by the Chief Finance Officer. D.9 To ensure that a complete management trail, allowing transactions to be traced from the accounting records to the original document, and vice versa, is maintained. D.10 To incorporate appropriate controls to ensure that, where relevant: (a) All input is genuine, complete, accurate, timely and not previously processed (b) All processing is carried out in an accurate, complete and timely manner (c) Output from the system is complete, accurate and timely. D.11 To ensure that the organisation structure of their service provides an appropriate segregation of duties to provide adequate internal controls and to minimise the risk of fraud or other malpractice. D.12 To ensure there is a documented and tested disaster recovery plan to allow information system processing to resume quickly in the event of an interruption. D.13 To ensure that systems are documented and staff trained in operations. D.14 To consult with the Chief Finance Officer before changing any existing system or introducing new systems. D.15 To supply a list of authorised officers, with specimen signatures and delegated limits, to the Chief Finance Officer, together with any subsequent variations. D.16 Any changes to agreed procedures by CMT to meet their own specific service needs should be agreed with the Chief Finance Officer. D.17 CMT should ensure that their Officers receive relevant financial training that has been approved by the Chief Finance Officer. D.18 To ensure that effective contingency arrangements, including back-up procedures, exist for computer systems. Wherever possible, back-up information should be securely retained in a fireproof location, preferably off site or at an alternative location within the building. D.19 To ensure that, where appropriate, computer and other systems are registered in accordance with data protection legislation. CMT must ensure that staff are aware of their responsibilities under freedom of information legislation. D.20 To ensure that relevant standards and guidelines for computer systems issued by the Chief Finance Officer are observed.

Updated September 2017 Page 120 Part D – Page 38 Financial Regulations

D.21 To ensure that computer equipment and software are protected from loss and damage through theft, vandalism etc. D.22 To comply with the copyright, design and patents legislation and, in particular, to ensure that: (a) Only software legally acquired and installed by the Council is used on it’s computers (b) Staff are aware of legislative provisions (c) In developing systems, due regard is given to the issue of intellectual property rights.

Income and expenditure D.23 It is the responsibility of CMT to ensure that a proper scheme of delegation has been established within their area and is operating effectively. The scheme of delegation should identify staff authorised to act on their behalf, or on behalf of the decision making committee, in respect of payments, income collection and placing orders, together with the limits of their authority. The decision making committee is responsible for approving procedures for writing off debts as part of the overall control framework of accountability and control.

Income Why is this important? D.24 Income can be a vulnerable asset and effective income collection systems are necessary to ensure that all income due is identified, collected, receipted and banked properly. It is preferable to obtain income in advance of supplying goods or services as this improves the Council’s cashflow and also avoids the time and cost of administering debts. Key Controls D.25 The key controls for income are: (a) All income due to the Council is identified and charged correctly, in accordance with approved charges (b) All income is collected from the correct person, at the right time, using the correct procedures (c) All money received by an employee on behalf of the Council is banked without delay. The responsibility for cash collection should be separated from that:  For identifying the amount due  For reconciling the amount due to the amount received (d) Effective action is taken to pursue non-payment within defined timescales (e) Formal approval for debt write off is obtained (f) Appropriate write off action is taken within defined timescales

Updated September 2017 Page 121 Part D – Page 39 Financial Regulations

(g) Appropriate accounting adjustments are made following write off action (h) All appropriate income documents are retained and stored for the required time period (i) Money collected and deposited is reconciled to the bank account by a person who is not involved in the collection or banking process. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.26 To agree arrangements for the collection of all income due to the Council and to approve the procedures, systems and documentations for its collection. D.27 To establish and initiate appropriate recovery procedures, including legal action where necessary, for debts that are not paid promptly. D.28 To agree the write off of bad debts over £10,000 in each case. D.29 To ensure that appropriate accounting adjustments are made following write off action. Responsibilities of CMT D.30 To separate the responsibility for identifying amounts due and the responsibility for collection as far as is practicable D.31 To ensure that at least two employees are present when post is opened so that money received by post is properly identified and recorded D.32 To hold receipts, tickets and other records of income for the appropriate period. D.33 To lock away all income to safeguard against loss or theft, and to ensure the security of cash handling. D.34 To ensure that income is paid fully and promptly into the appropriate bank account in the form in which it is received. Appropriate details should be recorded on to paying in slips to provide an audit trail. D.35 To ensure income is not used to cash personal cheques and other payments. D.36 To provide Financial Services with all necessary information in order to assist in collecting debts that the service have originated, including any further information requested by the debtor, and in pursuing the matter on the Council’s behalf. D.37 To recommend to the Chief Finance Officer all debts to be written off. Once raised, no bona fide debt may be cancelled, except by full payment or by its formal writing off. A credit note to replace a debt can only be issued to correct a factual inaccuracy or administrative error in the calculation and / or billing of the original debt. D.38 To notify the Chief Finance Officer of outstanding income relating to the previous financial year, as soon as possible after 31 March, in line with the timetable determined by Financial services.

Updated September 2017 Page 122 Part D – Page 40 Financial Regulations

Ordering and paying for work, goods and services Why is this important? D.39 Public money should be spent with demonstrable probity and in accordance with the Council’s policies. Authorities have a statutory duty to achieve best value in part through economy and efficiency. The Council’s procedures should help to ensure that services obtain value for money from their purchasing arrangements. This section should be read in conjunction with the Contract Procedural Rules (Section F). General D.40 Every officer and member has a responsibility to declare any links or personal interests that they may have with purchasers, suppliers and / or contractors if they are engaged in contractual or purchasing decisions on behalf of the Council, in accordance with appropriate codes of conduct. D.41 Official orders must be raised on the Purchase Ordering and Commitments System. Official orders must be raised for all work, goods or services to be supplied to the Council except for petty cash purchases, refunds or other exceptions specified by the Chief Finance Officer. D.42 Standard terms and conditions must not be varied without the prior approval of the Chief Finance Officer. D.43 The default method of payment by the Council will be by BACS. The use of direct debit will only be in exceptional circumstances and must be signed by the Chief Finance Officer. D.44 Official orders must not be raised for any personal or private purchase, nor must personal or private use be made of Council contracts. Key Controls D.45 The key controls for ordering and paying for goods, works and services are: (a) All goods and services are ordered only by appropriate persons and are correctly recorded (b) All goods and services shall be ordered in accordance with the Contract Procedural Rules (c) Goods and services received are checked to ensure they are in accordance with the order (d) Payments are not made unless goods have been received by the Council to the correct price, quantity and quality standards (e) All payments are made to the correct person, for the correct amount and are properly recorded, regardless of the payment method (f) All appropriate evidence of the transaction and payment documents are retained and stored for the required period (g) All expenditure, including VAT, is accurately recorded against the right budget and any exceptions are corrected.

Updated September 2017 Page 123 Part D – Page 41 Financial Regulations

Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.46 To ensure that all the Council’s financial systems and procedures are sound and properly administered. D.47 To approve any changes to existing financial systems and to approve any new systems before they are introduced. D.48 To approve the form of official orders and associated terms and conditions. D.49 To make payments from the Council’s funds on CMT’s authorisation that the expenditure has been duly incurred in accordance with financial regulations. D.50 To make payments, whether or not there is a budget, where the payment is specifically required by statute or is made under a court order. D.51 To make payments to contractors on the certificate of the appropriate CMT member, which must include details of the value of the work, retention money, amounts previously certified and amounts now certified. Responsibilities of CMT D.52 To ensure that orders are raised on the Purchase Ordering and Commitments system for all goods and services, usually before the commitment is entered into, other than the exceptions specified in D.41. D.53 To ensure that orders are only used for goods and services provided to the service. Individuals must not use official orders to obtain goods or services for their private use. D.54 To ensure that the Procurement Officer is consulted on all procurements over £10,000. D.55 To ensure the authorised signatory list held by Financial Services is up to date, including specimen signatures identifying in each case the limits of their authority for both ordering and / or authorisation of invoices. The authoriser of the order should be satisfied that the goods and services ordered are appropriate and needed, that there is adequate budgetary provision and that quotations or tenders have been obtained if required. Value for money should always be achieved. D.56 To ensure that goods are checked on receipt to verify that they are in accordance with the order. D.57 To ensure that payment is not made unless a proper VAT invoice has been received, checked, and certified for payment, confirming: (a) Receipt of goods or services (b) That the invoice had not previously been paid (c) The expenditure has been properly incurred and is within budget provision (d) The prices and arithmetic are correct and accord with quotations, tenders, contracts or catalogue prices (e) Correct accounting treatment of tax

Updated September 2017 Page 124 Part D – Page 42 Financial Regulations

(f) That the invoice is correctly coded (g) That discounts have been taken where available (h) That appropriate entries will be made in accounting records. D.58 To ensure that two authorised members of staff are involved in the ordering, receiving and payment process. A different officer from the person checking the invoice should authorise the invoice. D.59 To ensure that payments are not made on a photocopied or faxed invoice, statement or other document other than a formal invoice. Where the original invoice has been lost, a faxed copy will be accepted only where it has been certified that it is a true copy that has not previously been passed for payment. D.60 To ensure that the Service obtains best value from purchases and comply with the Contract Procedural Rules. D.61 To ensure that employees are aware of the Code of Conduct D.62 To ensure that loans, lease agreements or rental agreements are not entered into without prior agreement of the Chief Finance Officer D.63 To notify the Chief Finance Officer of outstanding expenditure relating to the previous financial year as soon as possible after 31 March, in line with the timetable determined by Financial services. D.64 To notify the Chief Finance Officer immediately of any expenditure to be incurred as a result of statute / court order where there is no budgetary provision.

Payments to employees and members Why is this important? D.65 Staff costs are the largest item of expenditure for most Council services. It is therefore important that payments are accurate, timely, made only where they are due for services to the Council and that payments accord with the individuals’ conditions of employment. It is also important that all payments are accurately and completely recorded and accounted for and that members allowances are authorised in accordance with the scheme adopted by Full Council. Key Controls D.66 The key controls for payments to employees and members are: (a) Proper authorisation procedures are in place and that there is adherence to corporate timetables in relation to:  Starters  Leavers  Variations  Enhancements and that payments are made on the basis of contracts, timesheets or claims

Updated September 2017 Page 125 Part D – Page 43 Financial Regulations

(b) Frequent reconciliation of payroll expenditure against approved budget (c) All appropriate payroll documentation are retained and stored for the required period (d) That HMRC regulations are complied with. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.67 To arrange and control secure and reliable payment of salaries, wages, or other emoluments to existing and former employees, in accordance with procedures prescribed by them, on the due date. D.68 To record and make arrangements for the accurate and timely payment of tax, superannuation and other deductions. D.69 To make arrangements for payment of all travel and subsistence claims. D.70 To make arrangements for paying members travel or other allowances upon receiving the prescribed form, duly completed and authorised. Responsibilities of CMT D.71 To ensure appointments are made in accordance with Human Resources Policies and Procedures and that adequate budget provision is available. D.72 To notify the Human Resources Corporate Manager of all appointments, terminations or variations which may affect the pay or pension of an employee or former employee. D.73 To ensure that adequate and effective systems and procedures are operated, so that:  Payments are only authorised to bona fide employees  Payments are only made where there is valid entitlement  Conditions and contracts of employment are correctly applied.  Employees names listed on the payroll are checked at regular intervals to verify completeness and accuracy. D.74 To ensure the authorised signatory list held by Financial Services is updated for staff changes, listing who is authorised to sign timesheets, claim forms etc. D.75 To ensure that payroll transactions are processed only through the payroll system. CMT should give careful consideration to the employment status of individuals providing services on a self- employment or subcontract basis. HMRC applies a tight definition for employee status, and in case of doubt, advice should be sought from Financial Services. D.76 To certify travel and subsistence claims and other allowances. Certification is taken to mean that journeys were authorised and expenses properly and necessarily incurred, and that allowances are properly payable by the authority, ensuring that cost effective use of travel arrangements is achieved. Claims should be supported by itemised receipts and should not include reimbursement for alcohol.

Updated September 2017 Page 126 Part D – Page 44 Financial Regulations

D.77 To ensure that the Chief Finance Officer is notified of any employee benefit in kind, to enable full and complete reporting within the income tax self-assessment system. D.78 To ensure that all appropriate payroll documentation is retained for the required period.

Taxation D.79 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for advising SLT and CMT, in the light of guidance issued by appropriate bodies and relevant legislation as it applies, on all taxation issues that affect the Council. D.80 The Chief Finance Officer is responsible for maintaining the Council’s tax records, making all tax payments, receiving tax credits and submitting tax returns by their due date as appropriate. Why is this important? D.81 Like all organisations, the Council is responsible for ensuring it’s tax affairs are in order. Tax issues are often very complex and the penalties for incorrect accounting for tax are severe. It is therefore very important for all officers to be aware of their role. Key controls D.82 The key controls for taxation are: (a) Budget managers are instructed on required record keeping (b) All taxable transactions are identified, properly carried out and accounted for within stipulated timescales (c) Records are maintained in accordance with instructions (d) Returns are made to the appropriate authorities within the stipulated timescale. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.83 To complete all HMRC returns regarding Pay As You Earn (PAYE). D.84 To complete a monthly VAT return to HMRC. D.85 To provide details to HMRC regarding the Construction Industry tax scheme (CIS). D.86 To maintain up to date guidance for Council employees on taxation issues.

Responsibilities of CMT D.87 To ensure that the correct VAT liability is attached to all income due and that all VAT recoverable on purchases complies with HMRC regulations. D.88 To ensure that, where construction and maintenance works are undertaken, the contractor fulfils the necessary CIS requirements. D.89 To ensure that all persons employed by the Council are added to the Council’s payroll and tax deducted from any payments, except where the

Updated September 2017 Page 127 Part D – Page 45 Financial Regulations

individuals are bona fide self-employed or are employed by a recognised staff agency. D.90 To follow the guidance on taxation issued by the Chief Finance Officer.

Trading accounts Why is this important? D.91 Trading accounts have become more important as local authorities have developed a more commercial culture. Councils are required to keep trading accounts for services provided on a basis other than straightforward recharge of cost. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer D.92 To advise on the establishment and operation of trading accounts. Responsibilities of CMT D.93 To ensure that the same accounting principles are applied in relation to trading accounts as for other services.

Updated September 2017 Page 128 Part D – Page 46 Financial Regulations

External Arrangements Financial Regulation E:

Introduction E.1 The Council provides a distinctive leadership role for the community and brings together the contributions of the various stakeholders. It must also act to achieve the promotion or improvement of the economic, social or environmental well-being of its area.

Partnerships Why is this important? E.2 Partnerships are likely to play a key role in delivering community strategies and in helping to promote and improve the well-being of the area. Local authorities are working in partnership with others – public agencies, private companies, community groups and voluntary organisations. Local authorities still deliver services but their distinctive leadership role is to bring together the contributions of the various stakeholders. They therefore need to deliver a shared vision of services based on user wishes. E.3 Local authorities will mobilise investment, bid for funds, champion the needs of their areas and harness the energies of local people and community organisations. Local authorities will be measured by what they achieve in partnership with others. General E.4 The main reasons for entering into a partnership are: (a) The desire to find new ways to share risk (b) The ability to access new resources (c) To provide new and better ways of delivering services (d) To forge new relationships. E.5 A partner is defined as either: (a) An organisation (private or public) undertaking, part funding or participating as a beneficiary in a project or (b) A body whose nature or status gives it a right or obligation to support the project. E.6 Partners participate in projects by: (a) Acting as a project deliverer or sponsor, solely or in concert with others (b) Acting as a project funder or part funder (c) Being the beneficiary group of the activity undertaken in a project. E.7 Partners have common responsibilities:

Updated September 2017 Page 129 Part D – Page 47 Financial Regulations

(a) To be willing to take in a role in the broader programme appropriate to the skills and resources of the partner organisation (b) To act in good faith at all times and in the best interests of the partnerships aims and objectives (c) Be open about any conflict of interests that might arise (d) To encourage joint working and promote the sharing of information, resources and skills between public, private and community sectors (e) To hold confidentially any information received as a result of partnership activities or duties that is of confidential or commercially sensitive nature (f) To act wherever possible as ambassadors for the project. Key controls E.8 The key controls for authority partners are: (a) If appropriate, to be aware of their responsibilities under the Council’s financial regulations and contract procedural rules (b) To ensure that risk management processes are in place to identify and assess all known risks (c) To ensure that project appraisal processes are in place to assess the viability of the project in terms of resources, staffing and expertise (d) To agree and accept formally the roles and responsibilities of each of the partners involved in the project before the project commences (e) To communicate regularly with other partners throughout the project so that problems can be identified and shared to achieve their successful resolution. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer E.9 To advise on effective controls that will ensure that resources are not wasted. E.10 To advise on the key elements of funding a project. They include: (a) A scheme appraisal for financial viability in both the current and future years (b) Risk appraisal and management (c) Resourcing, including taxation issues (d) Audit, security and control requirements (e) Carry-forward arrangements E.11 To ensure that the accounting arrangements are satisfactory. Responsibilities of SLT and CMT E.12 To maintain a register of all contracts entered into with external bodies in accordance with procedures specified by the Chief Finance Officer.

Updated September 2017 Page 130 Part D – Page 48 Financial Regulations

E.13 To ensure that, before entering into agreements with external bodies, a risk management appraisal has been prepared for the Chief Finance Officer. E.14 To ensure that such agreements and arrangements do not impact adversely upon the services provided by the Council. E.15 To ensure that all agreements and arrangements are properly documented. E.16 To provide appropriate information to the Chief Finance Officer to enable a note to be entered into the Council’s statement of accounts concerning material items. E.17 SLT and CMT are responsible for ensuring that appropriate approvals are obtained before any negotiations are concluded in relation to work with external bodies. E.18 The Monitoring Officer is responsible for promoting and maintaining the same high standards of conduct with regard to financial administration in partnerships that apply throughout the Council. Responsibilities of the decision making committee E.19 The decision making committee is responsible for approving delegations, including frameworks for partnerships. The decision making committee is the focus for forming partnerships with other local public, private, voluntary and community sector organisations to address local needs. E.20 The decision making committee can delegate functions – including those relating to partnerships – to Officers. These are set out in the scheme of delegation that forms part of the Council’s Constitution. Where functions are delegated, the decision making committee remains accountable for them to the full Council.

External Funding Why is this important? E.21 External funding is potentially a very important source of income, but funding conditions need to be carefully considered to ensure that they are compatible with the aims and objectives of the Council. Local authorities and increasingly encouraged to provide seamless service delivery through working closely with other agencies and private sector providers. Funds from external agencies provide additional resources to enable the Council to deliver services to the local community. However, in some instances, although the scope for external funding has increased, such funding is linked to tight specifications and my not be flexible enough to link to the Council’s overall plan. Key controls E.22 The key controls for external funding are: (a) To ensure that key conditions of funding and any statutory requirements are complied with and that the responsibilities of the accountable body are clearly understood

Updated September 2017 Page 131 Part D – Page 49 Financial Regulations

(b) To ensure that funds are acquired only to meet the priorities approved in the policy framework by the Full Council (c) To ensure that any match funding requirements are given due consideration prior to entering into long-term agreements and that future revenue budgets reflect those requirements. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer E.23 To authorise all applications and claims for external funding. E.24 To ensure that all funding notified by external bodies is received and properly recorded in the Council’s accounts. E.25 To ensure that the match funding requirements are considered prior to entering into the agreements and that future revenue budgets reflect these requirements. E.26 To ensure that audit requirements are met. Responsibilities of CMT E.27 To ensure that all applications and claims are authorised by the Chief Finance Officer. E.28 To ensure that all claims for funds are made by the due date. E.29 To ensure that the project progresses in accordance with the agreed approach and that all expenditure is properly incurred and recorded. E.30 To report to Members as required E.31 To maintain adequate supporting documentation to enable claims for funding to be maximised.

Accountable Body Why is this important? E.32 Local authorities are increasingly encouraged to provide seamless service delivery through working closely with other agencies and private sector providers. If the Council acts as accountable body for a project it needs to demonstrate the same high level of stewardship over the management of these funds . Key controls E.33 The key controls for accountable bodies are: (a) All responsibilities as an accountable body must be approved by the Chief Finance Officer (b) All financial regulations will apply as if it were the Council’s own funds, unless expressly agreed by the Chief Finance Officer. Responsibilities of the Chief Finance Officer E.34 To approve all applications for the Council to act as Accountable Body E.35 To approve any non application of Financial Regulations in relation to the Accountable Body Responsibilities of CMT

Updated September 2017 Page 132 Part D – Page 50 Financial Regulations

E.36 To ensure all Financial Regulations are enforced in relation to the Accountable Body funds.

Updated September 2017 Page 133 Part D – Page 51 Financial Regulations

Contract Procedural Rules Financial Regulation F: Definitions

F.1 “Procurement Guidance” means any internal guidance that is produced by the Partnership’s Procurement Team for the purposes of assisting Officers in relation to these Rules. For the avoidance of doubt provisions within the Council’s Procurement Guidance are intended to be for information only and no part(s) within it are intended to contain binding provisions unless a provision of the Rules expressly provides otherwise.

F.2 “Section 151 Officer” means the Officer appointed by the Council for the purposes of section 151 Local Government Act 1972 and if unavailable or absent includes any deputy appointed by that Officer.

F.3 “Procurement Team Leader” means any Officer who is employed within the Partnership to hold the post of Procurement Team Leader and if unavailable or absent includes any deputy appointed by that Officer.

F.4 “Procurement Team” includes the Procurement Officer and any Officers under the management of the Procurement Officer.

F.5 “Partnership” refers to the Dorset Councils Partnership of North Dorset District Council, West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council.

F.6 “Rules” mean these Contract Procedure Rules.

F.7 “Strategic Director” includes any member of the Senior Leadership Team.

Introduction F.8 The Contract Procedural Rules set out the Rules that must be followed when the Council purchases supplies, services or works. The Rules are not intended as a substitute for further appropriate detailed legal or other professional advice.

F.9 Government and EU public procurement policy require that the Council must permit, and be seen to be permitting, freedom of opportunity to trade with the Council and to be open and transparent about how we do things.

F.10 The most important principles are transparency, openness and fair competition.

Updated September 2017 Page 134 Part D – Page 52 Financial Regulations

F.11 If the Council fails in its relevant procurement duties, a supplier or contractor may have cause for a complaint against us, may be able to claim compensation and the contract may be cancelled. F.12 The Rules should be read alongside any Procurement Guidance which may be issued, amended or revoked at any time by the partnership’s Procurement Team.

F.13 The Section 151 Officer is responsible for keeping the Rules under review and monitoring compliance.

Scope F.14 The Rules apply to any contract that results in a payment being made by the Council as well as to some types of contracts where a service is being provided for the Council which results in some income being generated for the Council (known as concessions). F.15 The Rules also apply to the disposal of surplus goods. F.16 The Rules do not cover grants which the Council may receive or make (unless the grant is part of a contract for services). However, it will cover how we spend grant funding unless those supplying the grant specify otherwise. F.17 The Rules do not apply to the purchasing of property. F.18 If you are in any doubt whether the Rules do apply, you should check with the Procurement Team.

Exemption from the Rules F.19 An exemption cannot be given for a contract where the total value exceeds the relevant EU threshold. F.20 Exemptions from the competitive requirements of these Rules for procurements below the relevant EU threshold should usually be requested in advance of the procurement process in accordance with the following procedure. F.21 An exemption must be agreed by the Section 151 Officer. F.22 The Section 151 Officer may agree to an exemption if s/he is satisfied, after considering a Contract Exemption Form that has been approved by the Procurement Team Leader, that the exemption is justified on at least one of the following grounds: (a) the nature of the market for the works to be carried out or the goods or services to be provided has been investigated and is demonstrated to be such that a departure from the requirements of the Rules is justifiable, because the contract can only be performed, or best value is likely to be achieved, by approaching one contractor or consultant; (b) the contract is for works, supplies or services that are required in circumstances of reasonably unforeseeable urgency;

Updated September 2017 Page 135 Part D – Page 53 Financial Regulations

(c) that the works, goods or services to be supplied would involve greater cost, risk and/or potentially significant additional work to the Council: (i) in trying to harmonise differing systems, designs, solutions, machinery or plant; and/or (ii) having regard to existing knowledge and/or experience that a particular contractor or consultant has of existing function(s) of the Council;

than would be the case if the contract were awarded by approaching just one, or a specific, contractor or consultant;

(d) where a change of supplier would cause: (i) disproportionate technical difficulties; or (ii) diseconomies; or (iii) significant disruption to the delivery of council services, F.23 then a contract can be extended for up to 12 months. A record of the decision approving an exemption and the reasons for it should be kept with the Contract Strategy. F.24 Any exemptions granted for more than one year must be reviewed annually and either reconfirmed, amended or revoked. F.25 Officers must still follow the remainder of these Rules even if an exemption is granted from the competitive requirements.

Waivers of Contract Procedure Rules F.26 Waivers of any of these Rules will only be given in exceptional circumstances by the Full Council, Cabinet, Strategy Committee or Management Committee as appropriate.

Starting the Procurement Process F.27 Heads of Service are responsible for ensuring that Procuring Officers within their departments have the necessary skills and knowledge appropriate to the task. F.28 Before starting a procurement process, it will normally be appropriate to have regard to the need and options for satisfying it. The options for satisfying the need include: (a) not buying the supplies, having the works done or providing the services at all; (b) providing the goods, works or services ourselves (for example, by taking surplus supplies from another department or using their staff); (c) getting someone else to provide the on-going supplies, works or service (“outsourcing”/ provision by the private, voluntary, “third” sectors or another local authority or public body);

Updated September 2017 Page 136 Part D – Page 54 Financial Regulations

(d) providing the supplies, works or services in partnership with someone else (with the private, voluntary, “third” sectors or another local authority or public body); (e) by commissioning jointly with another Council; and / or (f) shared service delivery with another Council i.e. by delegating our functions to another Council, setting up a Joint Committee or setting up a new company to deliver the services for us or with other authorities jointly.

Collaborative Procurements F.29 Joint procurements must be led by one council that is named as the contracting body in the procurement documents. The procurement documents must state the contracting body is procuring on behalf itself and other councils, and name all of the other councils to the procurement.

F.30 The Partnership is not an identifiable contracting body. For procurements on behalf of the Partnership, one Council must lead the procurement as the contracting buyer on behalf itself and the other Councils within the Partnership.

F.31 If following consideration of alternative buying solutions, a joint procurement or other form of collaborative procurement is to be used with another Council, the conduct of the procurement should be on terms no less rigorous than the requirements of these rules for any Council procurement. Contracts Involving PFI or PPP Arrangements F.32 For contracts involving the transfer of Council employees to a third party , a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) or Public Private Partnership (PPP) arrangement and any other procurement that the procuring Officer considers could give rise to significant reputational risk to the Council, Officers should: (a) seek a Member decision from the appropriate Committee as to whether tenders are to be invited under the Head of Service recommended contract strategy; (b) in the event of tenders having been secured and evaluated, seek a further decision from the Members as to whether a contract is to be awarded and to whom. Estimating the Value of Procurements F.33 Before procuring any goods, works or services, the Procuring Officer must estimate the value, net of VAT, of the procurement. F.34 The value of a contract means the estimated total monetary value over its full duration, including any form of option and any renewals of the contract. In the case of collaborative procurements, the

Updated September 2017 Page 137 Part D – Page 55 Financial Regulations

spend of all buying partners to the procurement should be included in the estimated value. F.35 Detailed EU procurement provisions apply to the method used to estimate the value of contracts. Guidance on these methods is available from the Procurement Team. F.36 In general terms, it is preferable if the Council makes its purchases in the form of a single large procurement in preference to a series of smaller procurements. Particularly in the case of contracts for which a Contract Strategy is required, you should normally consider whether this might be an option in relation to your proposed procurement and if appropriate discuss it with the Procurement Team. A large procurement can be arranged into “lots”, for example geographically, with smaller contracts awarded if this promotes competition and/ or encourages Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) to bid. F.37 Procurements should not be subdivided for the purpose of avoiding any of the following procurement thresholds. F.38 The thresholds at which the different rules apply are summarised in the table below:

Value Authorisation to Competition Authorisation Documentation start Requirements required to award required to Procurement contract award contract Process

Less than - Minimum of 1 Manager or Head of Purchase Order £5,000 written quote Service with standard Or call off a terms & conditions or suitable terms and framework conditions agreement approved by Legal Services

More than or - Minimum of 2 Manager or Head of Purchase Order equal to written quotes Service with standard £5,000 and Or call off a terms & less than conditions or suitable £10,000 terms and framework conditions agreement approved by Legal Services.

Updated September 2017 Page 138 Part D – Page 56 Financial Regulations

More than or Head of Service Minimum of 3 Head of Service and Purchase Order equal to and Procurement written quotes Procurement Team with a) standard £10,000 and Team Leader must Or call off a Leader must terms and less than approve Contract approve Contract conditions or b) suitable £100,000 Strategy Strategy terms and framework conditions agreement approved by Legal Services or c) a form of agreement approved by Legal Services.

More than or Strategic Director Minimum of 3 Strategic Director Purchase Order equal to and Procurement Tenders and Procurement with a) standard £100,000 and Team Leader must Or call off a Team Leader must terms and less than approve Contract approve Contract conditions or b) suitable relevant EU Strategy Strategy. Contract terms and framework Threshold must be signed by conditions agreement Strategic Director approved by and sealed in Legal Services or accordance with the c) a form of Constitution agreement approved by Legal Services.

Equal to or Strategic Director Minimum of 4 Strategic Director Purchase Order more than EU and Procurement Tenders and Procurement with a form of Threshold Team Leader must Or call off a Team Leader must agreement approve Contract approve Contract approved by suitable Strategy Strategy. Contract Legal Services. framework must be signed by agreement Strategic Director and sealed in accordance with the Constitution

Contract Strategy F.39 A Contract Strategy is required for all procurements which is estimated at £10,000 or over. The Contract Strategy must be recorded using the standard template and the strategy must be approved by the Procurement Team Leader. F.40 Template Procurement documents are available from the Procurement Team. If your procurement is estimated at £10,000 or over then the Procuring Officer must consult with the Procurement Team Leader prior to sending any documents out to potential bidders. The template documents are regularly updated; therefore,

Updated September 2017 Page 139 Part D – Page 57 Financial Regulations

the Procuring Officer must request the most recent version, from the Procurement Team, for any procurement that is undertaken. F.41 The Pre-Procurement part of the Contract Strategy form must be completed by the Procuring Officer before procurement is commenced. F.42 The Contract Award part of the Contract Strategy form must be completed by the Procuring Officer before a contract is awarded. F.43 Before the procurement is commenced or the contract is awarded, the relevant part of the Contract Strategy must be approved by: (a) for procurements with an estimated value or actual contract award value less than £100,000 (i) The appropriate Head of Service; and (ii) The Procurement Team Leader; (b) for procurements with an estimated value or contract award value more than or equal to £100,000: (i) The appropriate Strategic Director; and (ii) The Procurement Team Leader. F.44 All Contract Strategies must be recorded on the Contract Strategy form available from the Procurement Team. The Procurement Team Leader is responsible for keeping the Contract Strategy form under review and up-to-date.

How We Buy the Goods and Services We Need

Publication – Contract Opportunities under EU Threshold F.45 Generally, contract opportunities estimated at more than or equal to £10,000 should be published. F.46 Procurement opportunities more than or equal to £25,000 must be published unless the Procurement Team Leader agrees otherwise. The reasons for that decision should be recorded on the Contract Strategy.

F.53 Wherever we publish a contract opportunity that is estimated to be more than or equal to £25,000, it is a legal requirement that the opportunity is published on the central government portal Contracts Finder. Procuring Officers should contact the Procurement Team to arrange this.

Publication – Contracts Awarded £10,000 or over F.47 All contract awards with a value of £10,000 or more, must be recorded and published on the Council’s Contract Register. F.48 The Procurement Team is responsible for maintaining the Contract Register. F.49 All contract awards valued at £25,000 or more must, in addition to publication on the Contract Register, be published on the central

Updated September 2017 Page 140 Part D – Page 58 Financial Regulations

government Portal Contracts Finder. Procuring Officers should consult with the Procurement Team to arrange this.

Purchase Orders F.50 The Purchase Order must specify the supplies, services or works being purchased. In addition, the Purchase Order must contain: the prices, terms and conditions of contract and the terms of payment.

Terms and Conditions of Contract F.51 Contracts under £10,000 should be awarded using a purchase order with the Council’s standard terms and conditions or terms and conditions that have been approved by Legal Services. The Procuring Officer must satisfy themselves that proposed terms and conditions are appropriate and if necessary consult Legal Services. F.52 Contracts more than or equal to £10,000 and less than £100,000 can be awarded using a purchase order with: (i) the Council’s standard terms and conditions; or (ii) terms and conditions approved by legal services; or (iii) a form of agreement approved by legal services; and the Procuring Officer must consult, at the earliest opportunity, Legal Services about the suitability of the proposed terms and conditions. F.53 Procuring Officers must consult, at the earliest opportunity, Legal Services about the proposed terms and conditions of any contract more than or equal to £100,000 in value. Contracts more than or equal to £100,000 must be awarded using a purchase order with a form of agreement that has been approved by legal services.

Framework Agreements F.54 Procuring Officers should check with the Procurement Team Leader whether any Framework Agreements exists that the Council can use and is suitable for what we are buying. F.55 Often, framework agreements will be the most efficient and cost effective way of buying goods, services or works. If a suitable framework is not already in place then it may be sensible to consider if it would be better value to set up a framework. This is likely where you are going to need to buy the same or similar things again in the future. Guidance on how to set up a framework is available from the Procurement Team Leader. F.56 Where a framework agreement is used, the procedures to award a contract provided in the Framework Agreement’s documentation must be strictly complied with and undertaken in consultation with the Procurement Team Leader.

Updated September 2017 Page 141 Part D – Page 59 Financial Regulations

Quotes (where a Framework Agreement is not used) F.57 Where a Framework Agreement is not used, for procurements with an estimated value: (i) Less than £5,000 at least 1 written quote (ii) Less than £10,000 (but more than or equal to £5,000) at least 2 written quotes must be obtained; (iii) Less than £100,000 (but more than or equal to £10,000) at least 3 written quotes must be obtained; before a formal purchase order is issued.

Tenders (where a Framework Agreement is not used) F.58 For procurements with an estimated value of more than or equal to £100,000 but below the relevant EU threshold a formal tender process must be conducted (where a Framework Agreement is not used) in the manner outlined below. F.59 A minimum of 3 candidates must be approached for securing a tender unless the agreement of the Procurement Team Leader is secured. Circumstances which might justify a smaller tendering exercise should include evidence that insufficient suitable candidates exist and this should be recorded on the Contract Strategy. F.60 Where tenders are to be invited the procedure to be followed must be determined prior to advertising and must be one of the following: (a) Open tender (all interested contractors submit a tender in response to an advertisement). (b) Restricted procedure (expressions of interest from interested contractors in response to an advertisement). This procedure can only be used for works contracts with an estimated value more than or equal to the EU threshold for goods and services. When advertising for expressions of interest, suppliers should generally be given 4 weeks from the date of publication to submit a Supplier Selection Questionnaire. Shorter timescales can only be used with the approval of the Procurement Team Leader. F.61 A 10 day standstill period should be observed between the decision to award and entering into the contract, during which period unsuccessful suppliers to the procurement may challenge the result. Suppliers must be notified of the standstill period through an electronic mode of communication. Any decision not to include a standstill period must be approved by the Procurement Team Leader.

Tenders Over the EU threshold (where a Framework Agreement is not used)

Updated September 2017 Page 142 Part D – Page 60 Financial Regulations

F.62 Contract values above which detailed EU procurement provisions apply are currently published on the Procurement Intranet page. Please note that these thresholds are amended bi-annually in January and you must refer to the Procurement Team to check the latest thresholds.

F.63 For transactions valued over the relevant EU threshold for supplies, services or works, where a Framework Agreement is not used, a formal EU tender process must be followed. F.64 The procurement of any service above EU threshold and not based on a framework agreement, must consider how the economic, social and environmental well-being of the relevant area might be improved as per the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012. F.65 A Contract Notice must be placed in the Official Journal of the European Union. Only after the Contract Notice has been published may the advert also be placed on the Council’s Contract Register, Contracts Finder and any other appropriate publications or online portals. F.66 Where tenders are to be invited the procedure to be followed must be in accordance with the Public Contract Regulations. The following procedures are provided by the detailed EU procurement provisions: (i) Open procedure (ii) Restricted procedure (this will normally be the most appropriate procedure to follow) (iii) Competitive procedure with negotiation (iv) Competitive dialogue (v) Innovation partnership (vi) Use of the negotiated procedure without prior publication F.67 The Procurement Team Leader must approve the chosen procedure and record this decision on the Contract Strategy. The Procurement Team can provide Procuring Officers with further information about the procedures. F.68 A 10 day standstill period must be observed between the decision to award and entering into the contract, during which period unsuccessful suppliers to the procurement may challenge the result. Suppliers must be notified of the standstill period through an electronic mode of communication. F.69 A Contract Award Notice must be placed in the Official Journal of the European Union within 30 calendar days after the date of award. Only after the Contract Award Notice has been published may contract award notices be published on the Council’s Contract Register, Contracts Finder and any other appropriate publications or online portals.

Updated September 2017 Page 143 Part D – Page 61 Financial Regulations

Electronic Procurement e-Tendering F.70 The Council’s secure electronic tendering system must be used wherever possible, in order to conduct the procurement process electronically via the internet. Any decision not to use the e- Tendering portal for procurements more than or equal to £10,000 must be approved by the Procurement Team Leader. e-Auctions F.71 An e-Auction is a reverse auction where suppliers bid against each other online for contracts against a published specification using secure internet-based technology. It is unlikely that the Council will need to purchase sufficient volume to make this a cost effective procurement route. The agreement of the Procurement Team Leader should be secured by anyone wanting to use this option or participate in an e-Auction event run by another organisation, such as the Crown Commercial Service. F.72 Purchasing from auction based websites (such as EBay) is not permitted.

Receiving and opening tenders Receipt – not using the e-Tendering System F.73 Where an e-Tendering system is not used, a response to an invitation to tender for a transaction valued over £100,000 must : (a) be delivered in the tender envelope provided by the Council no later than the time specified for submission of tenders in the invitation to tender (b) have a label addressed to the Procurement Team Leader at South Walks House, South Walks Road, Dorchester, Dorset, DT1 1UZ placed on the tender envelope; (c) have a further label specifying the contract title, date and time of return placed on the tender return envelope. (d) be in hard copy (with a copy on CD ROM if required); and (e) have no labelling or other markings that identify the tenderer on the envelope. F.74 Where an e-Tendering system is not used, the Procuring Officer must make arrangements to ensure that: (i) the receipt of each Tender is logged without delay upon receipt in the Tender Record Book; and (ii) the envelope containing the Tender remains sealed but is noted with the date and time of receipt and the name and signature of the Receiving Officer; and (iii) if received by post, the receipt is undertaken by the Officer dealing with the post or by such other Officer as

Updated September 2017 Page 144 Part D – Page 62 Financial Regulations

is identified as most appropriate for the tender process; or (iv) if received by hand, receipt is logged by a Customer Services Officer or such other Officer as has been identified as most appropriate for the tender process. (v) All such Tenders are passed without delay to the Procurement Team Leader. F.75 Procuring Officers should not disclose the names of candidates to any staff involved in the receipt, custody or opening of Tenders. F.76 The Procurement Team will keep the Tenders secured in a locked cabinet until the time specified for their opening. F.77 The Procurement Team will make arrangements to ensure that all Tenders are opened at the same time when the period for their submission has ended. The Procuring Officer or his representative must be present. Tenders must be opened in the presence of an officer representing the Chief Executive and a Financial Officer. Invitations should also be sent to Internal Audit and the Chief Finance Officer who may also wish to attend. F.78 The Procurement Team will make arrangements to ensure that the opened tenders are recorded in the Tender Record Book. F.79 Faxed or emailed tenders must not be accepted.

Receipt - using the e-Tendering System F.80 Where an e-Tendering system is used, electronic tenders must only be received via the electronic tendering software system. Irregular Tenders F.81 Where a tender has been received which is an Irregular Tender in that it does not fully comply with the instructions given in the Invitation to Tender documentation because it is received after the appointed time for receipt or contains a mark of identification, the Officer shall, prior to opening any of the tenders, submit a report to the Strategic Director responsible for finance giving details of the Irregular Tender. F.82 If, having considered that report, that Strategic Director considers that the tenderer who submitted the Irregular Tender has gained no advantage from its irregularity s/he may determine to accept the Irregular Tender and authorise that it be opened and evaluated together with any other tenders in accordance with this Regulation. F.83 The Strategic Director responsible for Finance shall record in writing the reasons why each Irregular Tender has been accepted or rejected and sign and date the record. This record shall be kept with the Tender Record Book and a copy on the contract file. Opening – not with the e-Tendering System

Updated September 2017 Page 145 Part D – Page 63 Financial Regulations

F.84 Upon opening, a summary of the main terms of each Tender must be recorded in the Tender Record Book and signed and dated by all Officers present at the opening. F.85 Tenders shall be compared with an estimate prepared by Officers to identify whether they appear to be unrealistically high or low for the purposes of that estimate. Opening – using the e-Tendering System F.86 The procedure provided by this e-Tendering System to validate and open the tenders must be followed.

Clarification Procedures and Post-Tender Negotiation F.87 Providing clarification of an Invitation to Tender to potential or actual candidates in writing or by way of a meeting may be permitted subject to the approval of the Procurement Team Leader. Care must be taken to ensure that no unfair advantage is gained by a candidate and questions and answers must therefore be circulated to all participants. F.88 If there appears to be an error in a bid or supporting information, the candidate must be invited to confirm or withdraw the bid. Where the error relates to the tender total as calculated from tendered rates and variable quantities, the bid will be regarded as the tender total bid and the rate adjusted accordingly. The tenderer will be invited to confirm or withdraw the bid and resulting rate. F.89 Where a procurement is conducted through either the open or restricted procedures no post tender negotiations are permitted. F.90 Where the Competitive Procedure with Negotiation or the Negotiated Procedure has been used and post-tender negotiation has been entered into, all tenderers should be invited to submit their best and final offers at the conclusion of negotiations under the same procedure as for the receipt and opening of tenders above. In this case, the best and final offers should be evaluated by revisiting the objective scoring process and revising scores as appropriate.

Evaluating quotations / tenders F.91 Where written quotations are invited for contracts valued at or below £100,000 for which a contract strategy has been prepared, then the bidder submitting the lowest price compliant bid should normally be awarded any resulting contract, unless alternative pre-determined criteria are detailed in the document used to invite bids awarded on that basis. F.92 For contracts valued over £100,000 and for all contracts governed by EU Directives, a more complex Best Value tender evaluation procedure based on the identification of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (“MEAT”) must be used. There are some situations, however, where MEAT will not be an appropriate method of evaluation - usually where the only discerning factor between products and/or solutions will be that of price (e.g. where you are buying stationery or other standard items). It is unlikely that providers for Services or Works could be

Updated September 2017 Page 146 Part D – Page 64 Financial Regulations

selected on price alone as these will often require more quality based evaluation techniques. While criteria for evaluation is at the discretion of the Council care needs to be taken that using a lowest price method of evaluation rather than using MEAT is appropriate for the procurement. F.93 The MEAT evaluation involves scoring tenders objectively by a panel of two or more officers and/or independent experts using criteria which must: (a) be pre-determined and listed in the invitation to tender documentation in order of importance; (b) be strictly observed at all times throughout the tender process; (c) reflect the principles of Best Value; (d) include price; (e) consider whole-life costing, particularly in the case of capital equipment where the full cost of maintenance, decommissioning and disposal should be taken into account; (f) be capable of objective assessment; (g) be weighted according to their respective importance; (h) for restricted procedures, must not include criteria which have already been assessed at the shortlisting (selection questionnaire) stage; (i) include, where applicable, the quality of the tenderers’ proposals to accept a transfer of staff under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE); (j) include, where applicable, the quality of the tenderer’s proposals to consider corporate objectives such as sustainability, third sector , SMEs and ethical purchasing; and (k) avoid discrimination or perceived discrimination on the basis of age, gender, ethnicity, religion/belief, disability or sexuality or other protected characteristics or cause contrary to any of the Council’s policies. F.94 Where this evaluation methodology is used, any resulting contract must be awarded to the tenderer which submits the most economically advantageous tender, i.e. the tender that achieves the highest score in the objective assessment. F.95 The Officer must prepare a report to include the allocated scoring and reasons and recommendation. The report must be submitted with the Contract strategy to the Procurement Team Leader for approval prior to the contract being awarded. F.96 Following the opening of tenders/ assessment of quotations, in addition to any authorisations contained within the Officer Scheme of Delegations a contract may be accepted by the following:-

Updated September 2017 Page 147 Part D – Page 65 Financial Regulations

Contract Value Authorised to Accept Tender

Up to £100,000 Head of Service / Corporate Manager

Over £100,000 but not Head of Service and Strategic exceeding £1,000,000 Director

Over £1,000,000 Chief Executive

Awarding contracts and Audit Trails F.97 The results of any shortlisting evaluation process and tender / quotation evaluation process must be recorded in writing. F.98 Prior to the award of a contract the Officer determining the award should, if they are in doubt, check that the appropriate budget holder has sufficient funds in place to sustain the contract. F.99 It is also good practice if prior to awarding the contract the determining Officer seeks to confirm that the appropriate procurement procedures were followed. F.100 In the event that the determining Officer is in doubt as to the availability of funds and/or believes that appropriate procurement procedures were not followed, then s/he should in the first instance liaise with the Procurement Team Leader prior to awarding the contract. F.101 A contract should only be signed by an Officer duly authorised to do so. The Officer Scheme of Delegations contains various delegations and provisions that are relevant in this respect. F.102 For all transactions valued at or over £10,000, details of relevant matters relating to the award be passed to the Procurement Team Leader to include: (a) details of the contract; and (b) The Officer responsible for managing the contract. The Procurement Team Leader will arrange for these details to be recorded on the Contract Register. This form must be approved by the Procurement Team Leader and copied to Legal Services. Heads of Service / Corporate Managers should ensure that proper records of all procurement activity are kept for six (6) years, or twelve (12) years if the contract is sealed, after the end of the contract. However documents which relate to unsuccessful candidates may be electronically scanned or stored by some other suitable method after twelve (12) months from award of contract, provided there is no dispute about the award. If an Officer is uncertain as to what documentation should be retained then s/he should consult with the Procurement Team Leader / Legal Services.

Updated September 2017 Page 148 Part D – Page 66 Financial Regulations

F.103 The Officer procuring a contract should make arrangements to ensure that copies of contract documentation for any contracts procured by other collaborative partners to which the Council was also a signatory are retained, accessible to the Council and that copies can be made available to any reasonable extent required having regard to the time periods identified above. For contracts in respect of which a Contract Strategy was completed, the Council is likely to wish to retain in its own possession a copy of the contract and such other contractual documentation as may be considered appropriate. The procuring Officer should therefore make arrangements for a copy of the contract to be secured with Legal Services. So far as any other documentation is concerned, the procuring Officer should check with the Procurement Team Leader and / or Legal Services if they wish to have clarification of other documentation that should be copied and provided to the Council at the outset. F.104 All original contract documentation and copies of contract documentation secured pursuant to the provisions above must be passed to Legal Services for safekeeping.

Standstill Period (for all contracts over £100,000) F.105 For all contracts tendered pursuant to the detailed EU Procurement Provisions, and call – offs from a framework with a value over the EU threshold, a ‘standstill period’ must be observed between the decision to award and contract conclusion. F.106 For all contracts tendered over £100,000 but below the EU threshold it is recommended that a ‘standstill period’ be observed between the decision to award and contract conclusion. Any decision not to include a standstill period must be approved by the Procurement Team Leader. F.107 Once the decision to award a contract is made, each tenderer must be notified in writing on the outcome of the tender process. This notification must include: (a) details of the contract award criteria; (b) where practicable the score the tenderer obtained against those award criteria; (c) where practicable the score the winning tenderer obtained; (d) the name of the winning tenderer; (e) the relative characteristics and advantages of the winning tender; and (f) all other legal requirements. F.108 There must be a minimum of 15 calendar days between the despatch of this notification and the conclusion of the contract. This time period can be reduced to 10 calendar days if notification is by electronic means. F.109 Special rules apply where a tenderer requests a debrief on the tender process. Even if a tenderer asks for a debrief outside of the standstill

Updated September 2017 Page 149 Part D – Page 67 Financial Regulations

period we are still obliged to provide this. If a request for a debrief is received, advice must be sought from the Procurement Team Leader at the earliest opportunity. F.110 The contract documentation must be completed and signed before the contract commences. Only with the prior written approval from Legal Services may a contract with a value below £100,000 be commenced without the contract documentation having been signed and completed.

Contract Award Notice F.111 All contracts awarded to which the EU Detailed Procurement Provisions apply, including a call off contract from a framework where the total value of the call off has a value over the relevant EU threshold, must be announced by means of a Contract Award Notice in OJEU published no later than 30 calendar days after the date of award.

Conditions of contract F.112 All transactions must use an appropriate form of contract. If you are unsure about the suitability of a contract you should seek advice from the Legal Services. For contracts in respect of which a contract strategy has been prepared it is likely to be appropriate to seek advice from Legal Services regarding the relevant contract to use. F.113 For all contracts for services where the services: (a) relate to PFIs or PPPs; (b) are for a value in excess of £10,000; or (c) are of a nature that you consider to be complex or unclear, then Legal Services must be consulted before inviting a tender regarding the identification of a reasonable set of contract conditions. F.114 Where: (a) the Procuring Officer considers that the Council may wish to enforce the contract more than six years after its end (b) the price paid or received under the contract is a nominal price and does not reflect the value of the goods or services; (c) the Procuring Officer is in any doubt about the authority of any person signing for the other contracting party; (d) the procuring officer considers that a contract is considered to be of a strategically important or politically sensitive nature; or (e) the extended limitation period would be of value; (f) the contract is for a value in excess of £100,000, and /or (g) the Procuring Officer considers that the contract is unusual or particularly complex, the contract must be in writing and executed under seal. F.115 Where a contract exceeds £100,000 it should also be signed by two Officers.

Updated September 2017 Page 150 Part D – Page 68 Financial Regulations

F.116 A contract must be sealed where: (a) The council may wish to enforce the contract more than six years after its end; or (b) The price paid or received under the contract is a nominal price and does not reflect the value of the goods or services; or (c) Where there is any doubt about the authority of the person signing for the other contracting party; or (d) The Total Value exceeds £100,000.

F.117 Legal Services must: (a) keep a record or list of all model sets of conditions of contract that gives details of when the conditions were last updated, who is responsible for their updating and contact references; (b) review all current conditions of contract, at least every 2 years, or when new legislation is introduced; F.118 monitor and review conditions of contract issued by other organisations from time to time; F.119 The Procurement Team will maintain the Council’s contract register and make it available to the public on the Council’s internet.

Parent Company Guarantees and Performance Bonds F.120 The Procuring Officer must consult the Chief Finance Officer and Procurement Team Leader on all tenders where the total value exceeds £100,000 to determine if a bond, parent company guarantee or other security is required.

Disposal of Assets F.121 Heads of Service / Corporate Managers are responsible for the disposal of their own surplus goods. The same competitive process for buying supplies, services and works must also be applied to the disposal of surplus goods. Separate arrangements are in place for land and property disposals. F.122 If you are in any doubt, professional advice must be sought when making valuations. F.123 Assets for disposal must be sent to public auction except where better value for money is likely to be obtained by inviting sealed bids. You must consider the full cost of the process and the commission payable before deciding which method of disposal is appropriate. F.124 When inviting sealed bids to dispose of surplus assets (other than land and property) the process is determined as follows:

Total Estimated Value Procedure

Up to £100 one written bid

Updated September 2017 Page 151 Part D – Page 69 Financial Regulations

£100.01 to £10,000 three written sealed bids

£10,000.01 to £100,000 four written sealed bids

£100,000.01 and above Invitation to Tender to at least four candidates

F.125 The highest value unconditional bid received should be accepted unless, in the view of the Chief Finance Officer, a conditional bid offers better value to the Council. F.126 Officers dealing with the disposal of land should consult with Legal Services. Documentation and details of the process must be maintained in order to demonstrate best consideration is achieved.

Transfers of Contracts F.127 Where the Strategic Director with responsibility for finance determines that it is appropriate do so following consultation with the Procurement Team Leader, the Council may agree to transfer a contract. The Contract Register must be updated with the transfer details. For the avoidance of doubt this provision shall be treated as part of the Officer Scheme of Delegations for the purposes on interpreting the power of the Strategic Director in this respect.

Conflicts of Interest F.128 Any interest which may affect the award of a contract under these Rules must be declared. Every officer must make a written declaration of interests and update it immediately when an interest changes. F.129 The Corporate Manager for Legal Services, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer, must either certify such interests as being acceptable or take any action s/he considers appropriate in respect of potential conflicts of interest and the Officer should take no part in the award of a contract by the Council. F.130 The Council’s Code of Conduct for Employees contains provisions relating to the acceptance of gifts and hospitality and the Council’s zero tolerance approach to fraud. Gifts or hospitality should not be accepted from any tenderers to any contract being let by the Council and to do so could give rise to a disciplinary offence. You must inform the Strategic Director responsible for Finance and the Procurement Team Leader if you are dealing with a contract for the Council and have been offered such a gift or hospitality. F.131 No Council contract should be used by an Officer for personal use.

Variations F.132 Contracts must not be extended or varied without consulting the Procurement Team Leader. Any variation to the contract must be recorded in writing and stored with the original contract documentation.

Updated September 2017 Page 152 Part D – Page 70 Financial Regulations

Contract formalities F.133 Contract documentation shall be completed in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. F.134 Officers must ensure that all contract documents are passed to Legal Services for safe keeping. The Procuring Officer must ensure that where appropriate contract details are notified to the Insurance Officer prior to the commencement of any new contract. If the Procuring Officer should is in doubt on this matter then s/he should seek the advice of the Procurement Team Leader.

Post Contract Monitoring and Evaluation F.135 Where a contract for which a Contract Strategy was prepared covers a period of time the Procuring Officer should monitor and record details of (a) Performance (b) Compliance with specification and contract (c) Cost (d) Any value for money requirements (e) User satisfaction and risk management. F.136 Any failure to meet the specification should be reported to the line manager of the officer monitoring the contract as soon as reasonably possible

Prevention of Corruption F.137 The Officer must comply with the Constitution and must not invite or accept any gift, hospitality or reward in respect of the award or performance of any contract. If any gift, hospitality or reward is offered or received the Officer must immediately notify a Director and the Corporate Manager for Legal Services. F.138 It will be for the Officer to prove that anything received was not received corruptly. F.139 High standards of conduct are obligatory. Corrupt behaviour may lead to dismissal and is a crime under the statutes. F.140 The Officer must immediately notify the Chief Finance Officer and Corporate Manager for Legal Services if he/she becomes aware of any personal interest or relationship to any candidate. F.141 A clause to the following effect must be put in every written council contract:  The council may terminate this contract and recover all its loss if the contractor, its employees or anyone acting on the contractor's behalf do any of the following things: (a) Offer, give or agree to give to anyone any inducement or reward in respect of this or any other council contract

Updated September 2017 Page 153 Part D – Page 71 Financial Regulations

(even if the contractor does not know what has been done); or (b) Commit an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 1916, the Bribery Act 2010 or Section 117(2) of the Local Government Act 1972; or (c) Commit any fraud in connection with this or any other council contract whether alone or in conjunction with council members, contractors or employees. Any clause limiting the contractor's liability shall not apply to this clause.

Procurement by Consultants F.142 Any consultants used by the Council will be appointed in accordance with these Contract procedural rules. Where the Council uses consultants to act on its behalf in relation to any procurement, then the Head of Service or Director will ensure that the consultants are provided with a copy of these Procedural Rules and that they carry out any procurement in accordance with them. No consultant will make any decision on whether to award a contract of who a contract should be awarded to. The Project Officer will ensure that the consultant’s performance is monitored. F.143 Any consultant who has been appointed to seek tenders on behalf of the Council as all or part of their duties will comply with these procedural rules and will act as the Head of Service unless an Officer has been appointed to do so in accordance with the High Value Procurement Rules.

Income Generation Opportunities F.144 The thresholds outlined in F.38 will apply to income generation opportunities such as licences and concessions. F.145 New, innovative proposals may be given a contract for a maximum of 2 years before testing the market, where the proposed sum is below the EU threshold.

Updated September 2017 Page 154 Part D – Page 72 Financial Regulations

Updated September 2017 Page 155 Part D – Page 73 This page is intentionally left blank Procurement Strategy for the Dorset Councils Partnership of North Dorset District Council, West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council

Summary

This strategy is based on the vision of the National Procurement Strategy, for Local Government procurement, which encourages all Councils in England to engage with the delivery of outcomes in four key areas.

1. Making Savings 2. Supporting Local Economies 3. Leadership 4. Modernising Procurement

Introduction and Background Local communities and taxpayers depend on the Dorset Councils Partnership to commission essential public services and to commercially manage suppliers. Procurement’s role is ‘strategic’ but it is not always recognised as such either from within or outside our own organisations.

The strategic vision for local government procurement is:  Commitment from the top in each council (from both the executive and senior managers)  More efficient use of the sector’s procurement resources  Speaking with a single cohesive voice nationally  Exerting influence right across the public sector

Objectives Making Savings The Dorset Councils Partnership are dealing with significant financial pressures resulting from reductions in government funding and rising demand. The Partnership need to make savings. This means using spending power wisely and strategically and setting objectives for procurement and contract management.

Supporting Local Economies The Partnership needs to maximise the economic, social and environmental benefits to communities from every pound that is spent, and it is believed that spend with SMEs (Small to Medium sized Enterprises) and VCSEs (Voluntary and Community Sector Enterprises) can make a very significant contribution to local economic growth. This includes Social Value Act duties. We can do more to remove barriers faced by SME’s and VCSE’s bidding for our contracts.

Demonstrating Leadership To be able to deliver, Procurement needs to demonstrate leadership to increase its impact and influence across the Borough and Districts.

Modernisation To rise to the challenge we need to modernise in terms of scope, use of technology and practices and procedures.

Page 157 Making Savings

Overview

In order to demonstrate leadership of key spend categories to address financial pressures, drive market management and to develop new models of service delivery through procurement, the Partnership should look at adopting a category management approach as a starting point to identify key spend areas.

Category management in procurement can help to reduce the cost of buying goods and services, reduce risk in the supply chain, increase overall value for the supply base and gain access to more innovation from suppliers. It is a strategic approach that focuses on the vast majority of organisational spend on both services and supplies and if applied effectively seeks to reduce demand, simplify the way we buy and aggregate spend across the entire organisation or multiple organisations. The results can be significantly greater than traditional transactional based purchasing.

Councils have been encouraged to establish partnering and collaboration arrangements for at least a decade and many have been doing just so for much longer. Much has been done already, including a move to more joint and integrated commissioning but the increasing issues relating to financial pressures and the need to demonstrate the impact that improved efficient procurement can have on outcomes for communities makes this even more important going forward.

Working with the wider public sector is becoming more and more normal practice, the Partnership needs to consider integration of their demand and supply chains with their colleagues in fire, health, police and other wider public sector organisations to appropriately aggregate spend, use wider experience and greater expertise and to reduce duplication of work.

The Dorset Councils Partnership spends significant and increasing amounts via contracts with suppliers, often as part of our transformation to meet financial challenges. We need to be more effective in contract and supplier management to ensure we maximise both the opportunities for additional income generation and the potential savings these bring. Contract management is more than ensuring suppliers meet their contractual obligations, it can also help us to identify and manage our own and suppliers’ risks, and achieve savings and continuous improvement throughout the life of the contract.

1. Category Management

Outcomes  Category Management will help the Dorset Councils Partnership to make savings by maximising value from areas of spend.  The Dorset Councils Partnership achieves savings through developing and using more standard specifications for appropriate goods and services.  A broad understanding of the Dorset Councils Partnership supply market is gained through appropriate spend and supplier analyses.

Page 158 Recommendations  Recognise the benefits and tap into category management plans of other public sector organisation and through Professional Buying Organisations (PBO’s).  Review existing framework arrangements at early stages of procurement to reduce duplicated effort.  Recognise the benefits from engaging with a national approach and ensure timely publication of data to ensure a robust analysis can take place.

2. Partnering and Collaboration

Outcome  The Dorset Councils Partnership make savings by aggregating spend through effective collaboration or via a shared service on common goods and services without compromising the need for social value and providing opportunities for local businesses.

Recommendations  Develop a greater approach to partnering and collaboration  Explore opportunities through existing routes to market, in particular harnessing existing shared service or PBO Resources.

3. Contract and Supplier Management

Outcomes  A corporate approach to contract management means the Dorset Councils Partnership can demonstrate their effectiveness in gaining most value from contracts.  The Dorset Councils Partnership obtains best value from supply chains through proper relationship management.

Recommendations  Measure contract outputs and key performance indicators to ensure competitiveness over the life of the contract.  Ensure visibility of supply chains.  Expect main contractors to act fairly with supply chains and mandate timely payment to subcontractors through contract clauses.

4. Performance and Transparency

Outcomes  Supplier performance on contracts increases and costs decrease across the whole sector through effective performance monitoring and transparency.  Innovation and transparency is improved because the Dorset Councils Partnership share commercial and performance data on common goods and services.  Published data, under the transparency code opens new markets for local businesses, the voluntary and community sectors, and social enterprises to run services or manage public assets.

Page 159 Recommendations  Baseline contract spending and outcomes internally over time and with other councils and use this information to inform our contingency planning and re-competition strategies.  Join together with other councils and partners to share information that makes processes and performance more open and transparent.  Ensure the rights to the data created as a result of a service being contracted out remains with the Partnership.

5. Risk and Fraud Management

Outcomes  Risks are identified and managed through an approach to risk management that is integral to the council’s corporate processes.  Fraudulent procurement practices are identified and reduced in both the supply chain and post contract award.

Recommendation  Proactively audit contracts to check for fraud.

6. Demand Management

Outcome  Costs and oversupply are reduced through implementation of demand management techniques with the procurement and commissioning cycle.

Recommendations  Build in a demand management approach before procurement begins.  Seek alternative mechanisms to procure customer needs.

Supporting Local Economies

Overview

The Dorset Councils Partnership must focus on providing the maximum benefit onto our communities from every taxpayer pound that is spent and with our economic development role, take responsibility for generating economic, environmental and social growth in local communities. The Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 requires councils to consider social value in all services contracts with a value above the EU threshold. Social Value can mean many different things, for example the inclusion of targeted recruitment and training opportunities in public contracts that can make a contribution to addressing the issue of poverty and reduced social mobility.

The private and voluntary sector organisations that are so important to local and regional economies need to view council contracts in a positive way and want to do business with us. The Partnership needs to continue to make better use of our purchasing power to create opportunities; for jobs and training, for regeneration and to maximise value for money.

Page 160 In order to encourage a mixed range of suppliers of suppliers to deliver value for money services the Partnership needs to encourage suppliers to bid for new or emerging requirements, to be innovative and to work collaboratively with other providers in the economy.

We can help to remove barriers to effective working by improving access to our tendering opportunities, being open and transparent about what we have already procured and as far as possible by identifying and publishing future requirements.

1. Economic, Environmental and Social Value

Outcomes  The Partnership gains maximum value from procurement through inclusion of economic, environmental and social value criteria in contracts for goods/services and works.  We reduce waste by making sustainable choices when procuring products and services – helping us to cut costs, and meet our social, economic and environmental objectives.  Consideration given to smaller businesses and community or voluntary organisations with regard to smaller service contracts.

Recommendations  Consideration is given as to how to obtain social value in all procurements over the EU threshold.  Sustainability is considered at the ‘identify need’ stage of the procurement cycle.

2. Improving access for SME’s and VCSE’s

Outcomes  A wide range of suppliers are encouraged to do business with us through use of portals to advertise tender opportunities.  Barriers to doing business with us are removed without compromising due process.  SME’s and VCSE’s are able to identify potential ‘partners’ with whom to form consortia to bid for our contracts.  The Dorset Councils Partnership identify forward spend wherever possible and use this data to inform pre-market engagement and supplier planning.  Define criteria within the process focusing on supporting and addressing local economic priorities (such as skills gaps, training, economic deprivation etc.) is a significant part of the progress enabling bidders to show how their bid will support the council’s economic, social and environmental priorities.  Social and voluntary enterprises, organisations and other council services working and/or operating in areas suffering with economic depravation will be made aware of potential contracts (and council services that are being considered for alternative service delivery) through engagement and support during the procurement process.

Recommendations  Identify all procurement opportunities over £5,000 through regional portals.  Ensure websites make it clear which portals are being used to advertise tender opportunities and how suppliers can register.

Page 161  Measure the amount of local spend as a way of identifying and reducing the barriers for smaller organisations in bidding for our contracts.  Develop or update and publish the ‘selling to the council’ guide.  Mandate payment by suppliers to their subcontractors be no greater than those in the primary contract, through contract clauses.  Engage with single, simplified PQQ’s such as PAS91 for construction.  Learn from and engage with the supply base and other councils on a regional basis through market days.  Ensure that lotting strategies do not create unwanted barriers for smaller businesses.  Link into existing framework contracts which outline how consortia can be encouraged.  Establish performance related criteria for all contracts to enable us to consider how contracts can perform against local social and economic criteria such as supporting development of skills and offering employment opportunities in areas suffering with economic deprivation.

Leadership

Overview

Councils have led the way in the public sector, demonstrating initiative and resourcefulness to rise to the social, economic and environmental challenges that our communities are facing. It is this willingness to think about doing things differently, then actually take action, that has made local government the most efficient part of public sector.

In order to make the most of our influencing role, there needs to be early and stronger engagement with markets, and in particular with commissioners of services, to decide on whether a procurement route is the best option for the service being commissioned. Procurement will use their understanding of existing markets to help commissioners make a value for money decision and, if necessary, to help consultation with the market to appraise the potential delivery models, with the fairness and transparency rules.

1. Single Cohesive Voice

Outcome  Central Government policy takes into account the needs and differences of local government because local government procurement speak clearly with one cohesive voice.

Recommendations  Engage with procurement networks to ensure visibility of and input into policy.  Join with Professional Buying Organisations to showcase and share good practice and to influence Government and wider public sector.

2. Commitment from the top

Outcomes  Procurement is recognised as strategically important by the Chief Executive, Members and Senior Officers within the Partnership. Page 162  Procurement is supported in each authority through the appointment of a Councillor champion.  Best overall value has been considered in all of our addressable third party spend.  Procurement is a driver to implement Council Policy.

Recommendations  Provide periodic updates to senior managers and elected members on implementation of good practice and its relevance to the organisation.  Encourage an Elected Member Champion for Procurement.  A senior level director takes overall strategic responsibility for procurement and ensures full value is extracted from all procurement decisions.  Link this Procurement Strategy to the Corporate Strategy and show how the Procurement Strategy supports and can help to deliver corporate objectives.

3. Commissioning

Outcomes  The Partnership identifies strategic outcomes in relation to assessed user needs, and design and secure appropriate services to deliver these outcomes.  The Partnership better understands and manages demand through the commissioning process to better target services efficiently and effectively.

Recommendations  Use a strategic commissioning approach to appraise new service delivery models.  Procurement and Commissioning staff work together to ensure best outcomes for service users.  Demonstrate a willingness to move to multifunctional delivery.  Set out a corporate approach to decommissioning services that includes: - Clear Objectives - Co-produced products and strategy - Communications strategy - Transparency - Timescales and timetable - Risk management - Defined roles for those involved

4. Procurement Training

Outcomes  The Dorset Councils Partnership builds better procurement competences within each Council by ensuring staff are equipped with the knowledge, training and practical skills needed to derive maximum benefit from procurement practices.  The Partnership is more influential with suppliers through taking a more commercial approach to procurement.  Council officers understand and implement the flexibilities afforded by the new EU Procurement Directives.

Page 163 Recommendations  Engage with other councils to ‘piggy back’ onto training and development programmes.  Ensure senior officers are involved directly in high value contracts.  Recruit consultants with commercial skills to help with developing a more commercial approach to procurement.  Council officers understand and implement the flexibilities afforded by the new EU Procurement Directive.

Modernisation

Overview

Recognising the importance of political drive and vision behind increasing commercial activity to drive financial self-sufficiency, there is an increasing role for procurement in commercialisation and income generation. Regeneration of existing contracts could be a useful source of further savings or income but Procuring Officers need to see each new contract they negotiate as an opportunity for a more commercial approach which may also include, exploring assets, selling services and understanding and reducing costs/benefit analysis.

In order to get best value from the market, the Partnership should encourage supplier innovation. This may be through hosting supplier or provider innovation days on specific procurement projects, through allowing for innovative tenders in the procurement process or by moving towards outcome based specifications that focus attention on the results – or outcomes – that the services are intended to achieve. We should be sharing information about innovation through case studies, discussion forums and sharing templates.

A wide range of e-procurement tools already exist, for example e-marketplaces, e-tendering and e- invoicing. Studies have concluded that the UK public sector falls behind our European counterparts, particularly the Scandinavian countries and particularly in the area of e-invoicing which is due to be adopted as a new EU Directive in 2016. The Dorset Councils Partnership should be looking to realise benefits from e-invoicing and should now be encouraging our suppliers to embrace this technology at the earliest opportunity.

The Government is expected to transpose the new EU Directives into UK Law late in 2014, the new directives will bring increased flexibilities for the Partnership and businesses, freeing up markets and facilitating growth. There will also be a new light touch concessions directive i.e. where the consideration consists in the right to exploit works or services or that right together with payment (e.g. toll bridges, canteen services) and operating risk is transferred to the supplier. A new innovation partnerships procedure will be introduced which allows authorities to encourage suppliers to develop works, supplier or services not currently available on the market, through long term partnerships.

1. Commercialisation and Income Generation

Outcome  Procuring staff are more commercially minded, and understand and realise benefits from all funding streams including how contracts can be developed to generate income. Page 164 Recommendations  Invest in training and developing commercial acumen for new and existing staff.  Develop forward savings and income generation plans.

2. Supplier Innovation

Outcome  Suppliers are able to demonstrate innovation through all stages of the procurement cycle.

Recommendations  Join with other councils and Professional Buying Organisations to engage in supplier market and innovation days.  Ensure terms and conditions are flexible enough to allow for changes in technology during the life of the procurement.  Use outcome-based specifications that include the minimum technical and performance requirements and focus on a statement of the problem that needs to be solved.

3. Using Technology

Outcomes  Increase efficiency and productivity and realise full benefits through the use of appropriate e-procurement solutions in procurement processes.  Use of e-invoicing helps the Dorset Councils Partnership and suppliers streamline administrative processes and improves supplier liquidity.

Recommendations  Use electronic means for tendering processes in line with EU Directives  Work with suppliers to encourage a move to more e-business.  Consider making e-invoicing a contractual requirement.

Page 165 This page is intentionally left blank Social Value Policy Statement for the Dorset Councils Partnership of North Dorset District Council, West Dorset District Council and Weymouth and Portland Borough Council

The Public Services (Social Value) Act of 2012 requires Public Authorities to have regard to how economic, social and environmental well-being may be enhanced through the provision of Public Services.

Scope of Application The Act catches any proposal to procure or make arrangements for procuring the provision of services, or the provision of services together with the purchase or hire of goods or the carrying out of works by: 1) entering into a public services contract that is not a contract based on a Framework agreement, or 2) concluding a framework agreement as regards which public services contracts are likely to constitute the greater part by value of the contracts based on the agreement.

The Act only applies to service contracts and service contracts with only an element of goods or works above the EU Threshold, currently £164,176 for public bodies. This includes all public service markets, from health and housing to transport and waste Contracts that are required in an emergency where it would be impractical to comply are excluded to that extent. Commissioners will be required to factor Social Value in at the pre-procurement stage, allowing them to embed Social Value in the design of the service from the outset.

Background The Dorset Councils Partnership will consider how all qualifying procurements might improve the economic, social and environmental well-being of the local area and how, in conducting the process of procurement, we will act with a view to securing those benefits.

In addition to a focus on price, the Act empowers us to consider the collective benefits to the community and wider social, economic and environmental outcomes (e.g. stronger communities, improved health, improved environment) that can be procured over and above the direct purchasing of services, goods and outcomes. (Public Services Social Value Act 2012, A Brief Guide, Social Enterprise UK, 2012)

There is no one definition of social value. However the Government’s Sustainable Procurement Task Force define social value as “a process whereby organisations meet their needs for goods, services, works and utilities in a way that achieves value for money on a whole life basis in terms of generating benefits to society and the economy, whilst minimising damage to the environment.”

For the Dorset Councils Partnership this means that from the outset we must look at ways of making our communities more resilient, and less dependent on Public Services, through the procurements that we will undertake. Each procurement will need to consider how it can benefit the social and economic well being of the area and minimise any impact that it may have on the environment.

At present the Partnership serves a combined population of 235,509 residents with over 101,591 residential dwellings (2014 mid year estimates, Office of National Statistics). The area is renowned for its stunning scenery and boasts the honour of World Heritage Status for the Jurassic Coastline which stretches within the boundaries of West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Page 167 Borough Council. Protecting and promoting social and economic wellbeing and maintaining high quality customer service while preserving the environment is vitally important. Procurement is one means to help the Partnership achieve these goals.

Each year the Partnership spends millions of pounds to secure services, safeguard the residents and ensure cleanliness and regeneration of the Weymouth & Portland, West Dorset and North Dorset areas. The Partnership engages with residents and businesses when performing these roles and often works in partnership with providers in the wider public, private, voluntary and community sectors.

The approach of the Social Value Act is to seek to create maximum benefit for the resident and business community and drive up service quality, but it can also lead to cross-departmental savings and support community organisations to enter the market.

Supporting the social economy Organisations already operating within the community are often best placed to understand local needs, deliver personalised services and reach those most needing support. The Act aims to help organisations win contracts directly which could help to stimulate a role for social enterprises as part a wider supply chain, allowing for greater partnerships between private sectors and social enterprises as contracts require providers to draw in their combined skills and resources.

Efficiencies across departments and public bodies The Act will support commissioners to combine the economic, social and environmental objectives and embed them across all strategic procurements instead of approaching them individually. Often those undertaking procurement are encouraged to seek best price but the Act encourages multiple benefits to be achieved, which in turn can give rise to cross service or cross organisational efficiencies. Ensuring that all spending decisions require contractors to support local employment opportunities can play a part in reducing the lack of employment instigated by economic pressures.

A broader evaluation of cost, across services and objectives, which measures the price of social value against the cost of lost opportunities for the local community, can show how this approach gives rise to savings across services and public bodies. Social value led commissioning can enable innovation through procurement which can instigate further efficiencies.

Local economic growth and well-being Local Government procurement has the potential to significantly influence local economic growth and well-being by addressing local challenges. Over 40% of local authorities’ expenditure is now on third party contracts and this figure is rising as the current trend away from direct delivery in local government continues. Local bodies no longer have the same control through direct delivery to achieve local strategic targets, but these objectives can be embedded within their supply chains through the use of social value. Buying services in this way has the potential to have a profound impact.

Page 168 Aligning social value with local needs Suppliers can have a positive impact on local communities beyond the direct remit of their contract. By aligning social value commissioning with local strategic needs, local authorities can use their supply chain to help them achieve local targets.

Embedding Social Value into Commissioning and Procurement Practice The Partnership is bound by the EU rules and will be required to comply with the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012, and can best deliver it in the following ways:

 Prepare and adopt a policy that sets out our Partnerships priorities for the well being of the areas that we serve – this can done on a 3 or 4 year cycle.  In relation to any services that we are responsible for, consider how we should commission them, considering our social value policy.

If we decide to commission services by procuring them from a third party, we should consider how our priorities can be reflected in the procurement:  In the specification for those services  By asking about the bidders’ track record in delivering the services  By determining the criteria to be adopted for determining the winning tender

Before we launch any procurement exercise, we should engage with the market about how to realise the whole service package including those aspects that can increase the social value in the project. Within this we will encourage the market to engage with organisations that can help realise the social value aspects of the services: many social enterprises are in a strong position to assist with this.

We will need to adopt mechanisms for measuring the performance of the services including social value requirements that are linked to the way that services are paid for under the relevant contract.

The Partnership will learn from the performance of the contract about how best to develop social value requirements and also to assist practice in subsequent procurement exercises.

We can also consult with the local community, including residents, elected officials, social enterprises and other local businesses, to enhance our understanding of what social value looks like in the local context.

Our Social Value policy should:  Promote training and employment opportunities, often for under-represented groups, for example for youth employment, women’s employment, the long term unemployed and people with physical or learning disabilities.  Promote compliance with social and labour law, including related national and international policy committees/agendas.  Promote SME’s and civil society organisations through an observance of existing duties of equal treatment, proportionality and transparency and by making subcontracting opportunities more visible.

Page 169  Stimulate socially conscious markets  Demonstrate socially responsive governance  Promote fair and ethical trading  Ensure more effective and efficient public expenditure  Contribute to health improvement priorities  Stimulate social integration and inclusion  Stimulate demand for environmentally friendly goods, services and works.  Contribute to climate change migration targets and to energy efficiency.

Our Social Value Policy will aim to cover:  A description of the purpose and remit of the Partnership.  A list of areas in which the Partnership will pursue Social Value within our core purpose.  The other organisations in the public sector that the Partnership works with to achieve these ends.  How the Partnership will reflect these commitments in our procurement processes.  Some targets that the Partnership will adopt as desirable outcomes.  How the Partnership will enable SME’s and social enterprises to participate in our public service commissioning requirements.  How the Partnership will report on its social value every year.

The Partnership will develop a Social Value Policy alongside the Partnership development programme, a key transformation journey which is spelled out in our emerging 2020 Vision. We believe that there is a role for District and Borough Council services that are provided locally and are responsive to communities. Our corporate plans, which set out our key priorities and include inward investment and economic growth targets, can be seen at www.dorsetforyou.com/strategies.

Page 170 Agenda Item 10

Management Committee 31 October 2017 Response to Government Consultation: Planning for the Right Homes in the Right Places For Decision

Brief Holders Cllr Ray Nowak – Environment and Sustainability Cllr Gill Taylor - Housing

Senior Leadership Team Contact: S Hill, Strategic Director

Report Author: T Warrick – Spatial Policy and Implementation Manager

Statutory Authority The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires local planning authorities to have regard to national policies and guidance in plan-making. Planning agreements are made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Planning Act 2008 provides the statutory basis for the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The Duty to Co-operate and neighbourhood planning were introduced by the Localism Act 2011.

Purpose of Report

1 For Members to consider the Government’s consultation proposals on Planning for the Right Homes in the Right Places and to agree a response.

Recommendations

2 That Members agree the proposed response to the Government’s consultation, as set out in Appendix 1.

Reason for Decision

3 To ensure that the Council’s views on the Government’s proposed changes to national planning policy are taken into account.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4 In February 2017 the Government published ‘Fixing Our Broken Housing Market’ (the Housing White Paper) for public consultation. This stated that further consultation on specific issues would follow. On 14 September 2017 the Government honoured that commitment with the publication of ‘Planning for the Right Homes inPage the Right 171 Places: Consultation Proposals’. 5 The consultation paper seeks views on proposed changes to national policy aimed at delivering the housing that is needed. The main issues on which views are sought are:  A proposed standard method for calculating housing need at the local authority level;  A requirement for local planning authorities to produce ‘statements of common ground’ setting out how they are working together to meet requirements across boundaries in relation to the Duty to Co- operate;  How the standard method can help in planning for the needs of particular groups and support neighbourhood planning;  Proposals for improving the use of section 106 agreements by making the use of viability assessments simpler, quicker and more transparent;  Seeking views of how to build out more homes more quickly; and  A further 20% increase in fees for planning applications over and above the 20% increase already confirmed in the Housing White Paper.

6 The consultation document asks a number of questions in relation to these issues to which responses are sought. The main body of this report discusses these issues and the proposed responses to the questions (for which member agreement is sought) are set out in Appendix 1.

7 The consultation runs from 14 September to 09 November 2017. The Government will consider the responses to this consultation and the consultation on the Housing White Paper in preparing a draft revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It is intended to consult on the draft revised NPPF ‘early in 2018’ with the ambition to publish the final version in ‘Spring 2018’.

Implications

Proposed Standard Method for Calculating Housing Need 8 The Government has sought to develop a simple, realistic standard method for calculating ‘local housing need’ based on publicly available data, which aims to deliver the level of housing required across England as a whole. The Housing White Paper indicated that this was in the region of 225,000 to 275,000 net additional homes per year.

9 The proposed approach has three components, which are:  To establish a demographic baseline;  To adjust the baseline to take account of market signals (house prices); and  To limit any increase a local authority may face when reviewing a plan by applying a cap.

10 It is proposed that projected household growth over a 10-year period should be the demographic baseline for every local authority area. The most recently published data on workplace-based median house prices and median earnings establishes a ‘local affordability ratio’ which is then Page 172 applied, using an ‘adjustment factor’ (which aims to factor in mortgage borrowing capacity), to determine a figure for ‘local housing need’.

11 The Government recognises that the new standard method could lead to a significant increase in the assessed housing need in some areas and so seeks to limit any increase to 40% above the current annual requirement figure, in a local plan adopted in the last five years. For older local plans it is capped at 40% above whichever is higher of: the housing figure in the local plan; or the projected household growth for the area.

12 The application of the standard method gives a figure for the average annualised rate of housing development needed in an area. However, this figure will be subject to change as new data is produced. The consultation paper makes it clear that councils are expected to respond to such changes as a local plan is being prepared. However, once a local plan (or review) is submitted for examination the figure would, in effect, be fixed for two years, which it is envisaged would allow sufficient time for the examination to be completed without revisiting this issue.

13 The consultation paper is accompanied by a spreadsheet, which sets out an ‘indicative assessment of housing need based on proposed formula, 2016 to 2026’. The spreadsheet indicates that for West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland the ‘local housing need’ for the period 2016 to 2026 is 780 dwellings per annum (dpa) for the plan area as a whole. This is just 5 more than the figure of 775 dpa in the current local plan. However, there are some significant uncertainties relating to each of the components of the proposed standard approach which need to be resolved.

Step 1- Establishing the Demographic Baseline 14 It is proposed that the demographic baseline should be the annual average household growth over a 10-year period. However, local plans typically plan to meet needs over longer periods and the expectation of local plan inspectors is that provision should be made for 15 years’ future supply on adoption.

15 Clarification is required on whether the Government now intends to promote shorter, perhaps 10-year, plan periods alongside the stated intention in the Housing White Paper that local plans should be subject to review at least once every five years. Planning to meet needs (ideally) for 15-years on adoption remains the preferred approach as it establishes a longer term strategic approach to development, which may be required in order to deliver large-scale strategic sites and the associated infrastructure.

16 The other issue which is unclear is how any shortfall (or overprovision) in delivery against an existing local plan or previous need assessment figure should be taken into account in a review. The consultation paper seems to suggest that any local plan review should be re-based to a start date of 2016 (or later when more up to date data becomes available). Clarity on whether this would be an acceptable approach is critical to taking forward the West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan Review and many other local plans across the country. Page 173 17 On the recommendation of the local plan inspector, the Issues and Options Consultation Document for the Local Plan Review suggests that the same start date (2011) should be retained, but the end-date should be extended from 2031 to 2036 (i.e. the Local Plan Review would plan for 25 years and include any shortfall in delivery since 2011). Re-basing to 2016 would mean that the Local Plan Review would cover the 20-year period to 2036 and not take account of any shortfall in delivery between 2011 and 2016.

18 Since the more recent (2014) projections of household formation rates and assessments of local affordability (2016) should reflect any past performance (whether under- or over-provision), it is considered that it would be appropriate for all local plan reviews to use a 2016 (or later) base date. It should be clarified in national policy that when local plans are reviewed or updated, they should be re-based to an appropriate date that reflects the most up to date figures of need from the standard method.

Step 2 - Adjusting the Baseline to Take Account of Market Signals 19 The consultation paper indicates that any standard method should be ‘realistic’ and reflect ‘the actual need for homes in each area’. However, the proposed standard method is derived from district-level statistics on household formation rates and affordability and does not include any ‘bottom up’ assessment of local needs, for example from local housing needs surveys. National policy needs to recognise the limitations of the proposed approach.

20 Assessments of need that have been developed under current national policy have typically factored in allowances for second homes and vacant properties. In response to this consultation it may be suggested by developers that similar (or other) allowances should be included in the standard method. The standard method should be kept as simple as possible and given that the ‘adjustment factor’ ensures that sufficient provision is made for the number of homes needed nationally, it would be inappropriate to factor in any further allowances.

Step 3 - Applying a Cap to Increases in the Figure for Assessed Housing Need 21 It is proposed that where a local plan is less than 5 years old, any increase in the figure for housing need under the standard method would be limited to 40% of the current local plan figure. However, once an adopted local plan is more than 5 years old, the 40% cap may then apply to projected growth calculated on the basis of household projections, if that is higher. There is a small difference between the current assessment of housing need for West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland (775 dpa) and the figure for need from the proposed standard method (780 dpa). This increase is clearly well below 40% and so the proposed cap would not apply in taking forward the local plan review.

Making Information on Local Housing Need More Transparent 22 The consultation paper seeks views on how information on local housing need could be made more transparent. Local planning authorities are required to produce monitoring information, which should include data on housing need and delivery. Local planning authorities are required in particular to calculate and publish their five-year housing land supply annually. West Dorset and WeymouthPage 174 & Portland publish a monitoring report each year and also produce more detailed information on overall (and five-year) housing supply in an annual five-year housing land supply report. Both reports are online here - https://www.dorsetforyou.gov.uk/article/421799/West-Dorset-Weymouth-- Portland-monitoring.

23 The Government could require all local planning authorities to publish information on local housing need and supply on their websites, which should show how the figure of housing need for their local area has been derived from the standard method.

Joint Working 24 The consultation paper encourages local planning authorities to work together when identifying housing need and to produce joint plans, as has been done in West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland. Where joint plans are being produced, it proposes that the housing need for the defined area should be the sum of the local housing need for each local planning authority. This is the same approach that was used in the current West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan, using the current methodology for assessing housing need.

Implementing the New Approach 25 The Government recognises that new household projections and new data on local affordability will become available as local plans or reviews are prepared. Up until the point of submission, local planning authorities will be expected to take account of such changes, but after submission they will be able to rely on the evidence used to justify their local housing need for two years. The Government considers this to be sufficient time for a local plan examination to take place.

26 Household projections will be updated every two years whilst affordability data will be published annually. This means that the local housing need figure is likely to change frequently. This will present a challenge to any local planning authority preparing a local plan, not only in terms of knowing how much development to plan for, but also in terms of consulting with the public on the level of housing required.

27 A more straightforward and clearer approach would be to use the most up- to-date household projections and a two-year average of the affordability data from when the previous household projections were released. So for the next 2016-based household projection release (in March 2018), affordability data averaged over the period 2014 to 2016, would be used. This would not only smooth out any year-to-year changes to the local affordability ratio, but would also provide for a 2-year period with no changes in the local housing need calculation. This would help to make plan preparation more straightforward and easier for the public to understand.

28 The consultation document states that it may be appropriate for the final housing figure in a local plan to differ from the housing need figure after taking account of issues raised at examination. However, it should be made explicitly clear in national policy or guidance that this should not be influenced by any new household projections / affordability data published in the two-year period after submission.Page 175 29 There is a lack of clarity about what happens once a revised plan is adopted. It appears that the housing figure derived from the standard method and included in the submitted local plan, would (unless amended at examination) remain the figure for ‘local housing need’ to be used in making planning decisions and in any five-year housing land supply calculations for the five years post-adoption. It would be helpful if this was confirmed in national policy or guidance.

Amending the Test of Soundness 30 It is proposed to amend national planning policy so that having a robust method for assessing local housing need becomes a ‘test of soundness’ for a local plan. It is also proposed to make clear through guidance that the standard method will be sufficient to satisfy this test. This approach would mean that if a local planning authority used the standard method to derive a figure for local housing need, then that figure would be found sound by a local plan inspector. This would both provide reassurance to local planning authorities and reduce the scope for developers to challenge housing numbers, enabling local plan inquiries to be concluded more quickly.

Deviation from the New Method 31 The consultation paper permits deviation from the standard method for calculating local housing need ‘on very limited grounds’, but needs to provide guidance on what these grounds might be.

Five Year Supply 32 In the absence of an up-to-date local plan, after 31 March 2018, the new standard method should be used as a basis for assessing five year housing land supply.

33 The West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan was adopted in October 2015 and may be considered to be up-to-date by virtue of having been adopted within the last five years. However, the councils do not have a five year housing land supply and, by virtue of paragraph 49 of the NPPF, the ‘relevant policies for the supply of housing’ are deemed to be out of date. This raises the question of whether, from the 31 March 2018, five year housing land supply should be calculated on the basis of the figures in the adopted local plan or the figures from the new method. National policy or guidance needs to make clear that the new method should only be used where a local plan is out-of-date by virtue of being more than five years old.

34 Where it is appropriate to use the new method, clarity is required on: how the five year supply should be calculated; and whether any shortfall in delivery before 2016 should be factored in, and if so, how. Clarity is also required on whether the new delivery test will sit alongside current national policy on the application of the (5 or 20%) buffer, or replace it.

35 The proposal to allow the Secretary of State to retain some discretion to give additional time before the baseline applies, where a joint plan is being brought forward is welcomed, as this is the case in West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland. It would also be helpful if the Secretary of State retained some discretion where local plans are being brought together following local government re-organisation,Page 176 as is being proposed in Dorset. The suggestion that five-year land supply should be calculated over the whole area of a joint local plan (as is already being done in West Dorset and Weymouth) is supported.

Transitional Arrangements 36 The Issues and Options Consultation Document for the West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan Review looked at the issue of housing numbers based on current national policy. However, it is clear from the proposed transitional arrangements that the new standard method should be used to take forward the local plan review from this point.

37 The next stage is to produce a Preferred Options document for consultation, which will use the new standard method to assess housing need and reflect any other changes in national policy, which will be set out in the revised NPPF. Many potential changes to the NPPF have already been the discussed not only in the current consultation, but also in the Housing White Paper so work on the Preferred Options is progressing on that basis.

38 The Government intends to publish a full draft revised NPPF for consultation early in 2018, with a final version due in the Spring of 2018. This is likely to coincide with the passage of the Preferred Options document through the committee cycle to Full Council, ready for public consultation in late Spring 2018. Provided that the changes to national policy are taken forward in accordance with the Government’s stated intentions, it should be possible to continue to take forward the local plan review in a timely manner.

Duty to Co-operate: Statements of Common Ground 39 The Duty to Co-operate places a statutory duty on local planning authorities to co-operate on strategic cross-boundary planning matters. The consultation paper recognises that this process is not working effectively and the proposed remedy is to require local planning authorities to produce a statement of common ground, where planning issues need to be addressed by more than one council. Typically these would be produced over a housing market area, or other agreed geographical area.

40 The statement should set out the cross-boundary matters, including the housing need for the area, distribution and proposals for meeting any shortfalls. It should also set out where agreement has and has not been reached. The councils in any agreed geographical area (including a county council in a two-tier area) will be the primary authorities responsible for preparing and maintaining the statements and will need to be signatories to it.

41 Following the publication of the final version of the revised NPPF in Spring 2018, councils will have six months to produce an outline statement and a year to produce a full statement. This should then be updated when local plans reach key milestones, such as submission. The consultation paper gives a brief overview of what such statements should contain.

42 The work already undertaken on the Duty to Co-operate, the mechanisms for continuing engagement on strategic planning matters in Dorset (such as the Dorset Strategic PlanningPage Forum), 177 and the joint Local Plan Review should enable the proposals in the consultation paper to be taken forward relatively easily. However, clarity is required on a couple of points.

43 Clarity is required on the matters that need to be covered in the proposed statements of common ground. Paragraph 156 of the NPPF lists the ‘strategic priorities’ that councils should plan for and this list has been used as the basis for agreeing the strategic issues facing Dorset. This list, or similar, could be used to guide the production of all statements of common ground. Clarity is also required on the level of detail that may be required in a statement of common ground. This should focus on the arrangements for co-operation and should not: give rise to a need for strategic environmental assessment or risk pre-judging the outcomes of the local plan process.

44 Given that any statement of common ground is likely to be subject to a high degree of scrutiny by a local plan inspector, clarification of the role of statements of common ground in meeting the Duty to Co-operate is required.

45 The consultation paper proposes to introduce a new (or amended) ‘test of soundness’ requiring a local plan to be based on a strategy informed by agreements over a wider area and based on effective joint working evidenced in statements of common ground. The production of agreements and statements of common ground are primarily procedural matters. Paragraphs 159 to 174 of the NPPF already set out in some detail the documents that should form the ‘proportionate evidence base’ to support a local plan (or review). It would be more appropriate to mention these agreements and statements of common ground here.

46 At examination, it is important that inspectors take a consistent view on statements of common ground, particularly where they support two or more separate local plans. Where a local plan has been found sound and is compliant with the legal obligations in relation to the Duty to Co-operate, the statement of common ground, where it remains up to date, should carry significant weight in the examination of any other local plan covered by that statement.

47 Given the work that has already been undertaken on the Duty to Co- operate in West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland, there should be no difficulties in preparing an outline statement within six months and a full statement within a year.

Planning for a Mix of Housing Needs 48 The consultation paper seeks views on how to streamline the process for identifying the housing needs of individual groups, such as older and disabled people and families with children. The standard method for calculating housing need uses district-wide data on household projections and affordability. It does not include any ‘bottom up’ assessments of the needs of different groups, such as the need for self-build housing, which is derived from local self-build registers.

49 One approach may be to consider what needs from the groups listed in the consultation document could realistically be met through general housing provision and then to establishPage where 178 specialist provision is needed, as may be the case with sites for self-build housing. National policy that seeks to plan for a suitable mix of housing should be flexible in order to recognise that housing needs change over time. It could also promote the building of more adaptable homes, such as lifetime homes, which would provide greater flexibility in meeting the different needs of different groups.

50 Views are also sought on whether the current definition of older people in the NPPF is still fit for purpose. The current definition needs to be more inclusive so that it doesn’t just include older people over retirement age.

Neighbourhood Plans 51 Groups preparing neighbourhood plans often find it difficult to know what level of housing they should look to plan for. The Housing White Paper proposed to amend national policy so that local planning authorities would be expected to provide groups with housing need figures at the neighbourhood level.

52 The consultation paper proposes to make clear in national planning guidance that authorities may do this by making a reasoned judgement based on the settlement strategy and housing allocations in their local plan, so long as the plan provides a sufficiently up-to-date basis to do so.

53 Where a local plan is considered out of date and cannot be relied on as a basis for allocating housing figures, a simple formula-based approach is proposed. This would apportion the overall housing need figure for a local plan area (derived from the standard method) to a neighbourhood area, based on the population in that area. A neighbourhood area that had 10% of the population of a local plan area, would have an annualised local housing need figure, which would be 10% of the local plan housing figure (i.e. 10% of 780 = 78). This would need to be multiplied by the years of the plan period (say 20) to give an overall figure (i.e. 78 x 20 = 1,560).

54 Since delivery of housing through neighbourhood plans is uncertain and unpredictable, they should only aim to deliver locally identified needs rather than a proportion of the strategic needs of the area. This should be as an addition to the housing required to be delivered through the local plan process. The housing need for a neighbourhood plan should be derived from a local perspective reflecting the local situation and community aspirations, such as the local need for affordable homes and the needs of particular groups, such as older people wishing to downsize.

55 A simple apportionment of the district-wide assessment of housing need to neighbourhood areas is also not fine-grained enough to adequately reflect local circumstances, for example where a boarding school or military camp significantly increases the population figure for a parish.

Proposed Approach to Viability Assessment 56 In relation to plan-making, it is proposed that local planning authorities should set out the types and thresholds for affordable housing contributions required from developers and expectations for how this should be funded. However, it is not clear how much discretion local planning authorities will have with regard to setting thresholds for affordable housing. Page 179 57 Local planning authorities used to be able to set thresholds and the current local plan has a threshold of one unit (i.e. contributions are sought on all sites where there is one or more net additional dwellings). However, following a Written Ministerial Statement, national thresholds, below which affordable contributions (whether onsite, off-site or financial) should not be sought, were established. The national threshold is set at 10 units, although a lower, 5-unit threshold may be set in ‘designated rural areas’, including AONBs. As a result of this change in national policy, Members have agreed to normally apply the national thresholds.

58 The Government needs to clarify whether it is proposing to abandon current national thresholds to allow local planning authorities greater flexibility, or whether any local thresholds would need to be set in accordance with current national thresholds.

59 In relation to plan-making, it is also proposed that local planning authorities should set out the infrastructure needed to deliver the plan, expectations for how this should be funded and the contributions developers will be expected to make. This is broadly supported, but since viability considerations may change over a plan period, flexibility is required.

60 The consultation document asks whether current guidance on testing plans and policies for viability should be amended. The current practice of producing whole plan viability assessments is considered broadly appropriate. However, national guidance: to ensure that whole plan viability assessments are prepared in a consistent manner; and to ensure that the strategic viability of major allocations are also properly assessed as part of that process, would be helpful.

61 The consultation paper indicates that where policy requirements have been tested for their viability in a local plan, the issues should not usually need to be tested again at the planning application stage. The principle of setting out infrastructure (and affordable housing) needs (and the means of delivery) in local plans is supported, but it is considered that viability will need to be tested again at planning application stage when more detailed viability work is undertaken and /or viability work produced to support a local plan has become out of date.

62 The consultation document asks how Government can ensure that infrastructure providers, including housing associations, can be engaged throughout the plan making process.

63 Infrastructure providers do not always respond to consultation when local plans are being prepared, but they may become engaged at planning application stage and seek infrastructure provision that has not been identified in policy. Local planning authorities do not always have the expertise to establish infrastructure requirements in local plans without the input of providers. The Government could encourage greater engagement in plan-making by introducing legislation, or other measures, to require infrastructure providers to identify and plan to tackle long-term (15-years plus) infrastructure needs.

64 The Government intends to update guidance to encourage viability assessments to be simpler, Pagequicker 180and more transparent. Views are sought on how this could be achieved. One of the key issues locally is the lack of transparency regarding viability assessments. These are often produced on a ‘commercial in confidence’ basis and not made public, which local people often find very frustrating, as was the case with the planning applications for Dorchester Prison. To address these concerns, it is suggested that national policy should normally require an open book assessment of viability and that information should only remain confidential if there is a strong justification. It is also suggested that the Government could set out in guidance a standard approach to the assessment of viability in order to ensure consistency.

65 Views are sought on whether local planning authorities should set out in their local plans how they will monitor, report on and publicise funding secured through section 106 agreements. It would be appropriate for a local plan to set out the approach to monitoring planning agreements, although the local plan would not be an appropriate place to set out the monitoring information itself. Councils are currently required to produce monitoring information at least annually, which is made available online. The councils’ website is considered to be the appropriate location for information on planning agreements to be made available.

66 Views are also sought on what should be included in national guidance on a standard approach to monitoring and reporting planning obligations. Any such guidance needs to be sufficiently flexible to enable local planning authorities to report in ways that best suit local circumstances.

67 The consultation paper seeks views on how infrastructure and affordable housing secured through new development can be better publicised. One approach on larger schemes could be for developers and local planning authorities to develop joint communication strategies to increase awareness of the infrastructure and affordable housing secured through new development.

Planning Fees 68 The Housing White Paper set out the Government’s intention to increase nationally set planning fees by 20% for those local planning authorities who commit to invest the additional fee income in improving the productivity of their planning departments. The White Paper also indicated that a further 20% increase could be applied by those authorities who are delivering the homes their communities need. The current consultation paper seeks views on the most appropriate criteria to enable this further fee increase to be applied.

69 The consultation paper recognises that a lack of capacity and capability in planning departments can act as a constraint to development. However, fee increases are only permitted subject to certain nationally set conditions. It is considered that local planning authorities should be able to set fees locally so that planning departments can be adequately funded to be more positive and proactive in taking forward growth. In the event that the proposed further 20% increase in fees is introduced, it is considered that it should act as an incentive to fund the work necessary to deliver higher levels of housing development. Page 181 70 Views are also sought on whether any further fee increase should only be applied nationally once all local planning authorities have met the criteria, or only to individual authorities who meet them. Local planning authorities should be able to increase fees by 20% based on local circumstances rather than the performance of all local planning authorities nationally. If the Government wished to consider a more flexible approach to fee setting, one approach would be to allow local planning authorities to set their own fees until housing delivery reached the national target of between 225,000 and 275,000 new homes per year.

Build Out Rates 71 The consultation asks whether there are any other measures that could be taken to increase build out rates. Requiring infrastructure providers to publish long-term (15 years plus) action plans would help plan production. Greater clarity on infrastructure issues earlier in the process should help to: reduce levels of objection: enable planning decisions to be made more quickly: and bring forward delivery on site sooner.

Corporate Plan

72 The intention of the new methodology is to speed up plan preparation and enable more homes to be built. This is in keeping with the council’s corporate plan priority of contributing to a stronger local economy, including increasing the number of new homes built.

Financial

73 Responding to the Government’s consultation on changes to national planning policy does not have any direct financial implications. The proposed changes could enable the council to increase planning application fees by a further 20% above the 20% increase proposed in the Housing White Paper.

Equalities

74 Responding to the Government’s consultation on changes to national planning policy does not have any equalities implications.

Environmental

75 The consultation is primarily concerned with delivering sufficient housing to meet needs, but it also recognises the constrained nature of some areas and the potential difficulties in accommodating growth.

Economic Development

76 The consultation is primarily concerned with delivering sufficient housing, which helps to support economic growth.

Risk Management (including Health & Safety)

77 Failure to respond to the consultation would mean that the Council’s views on the Government’s proposed changes to national planning policy would not be taken into account. Page 182 Human Resources

78 Responding to the Government’s consultation on changes to national planning policy does not have any human resources implications. However it is important to recognise that the requirement to have local plan reviews completed every five years, and the continued significance of the five-year land supply, mean that resourcing of planning policy functions will be increasingly important.

Consultation and Engagement

79 The Government is consulting on proposed changes to national planning policy from 14 September to 9 November 2017. The consultation is open to everyone.

Appendices Appendix 1 - Proposed Responses to the Questions in the Government’s Consultation

Background Papers Planning for the Right Homes in the Right Places: Consultation Proposals: DCLG September 2017

Footnote

Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Trevor Warrick Telephone: 01305 252302 Email: [email protected] Date: 17/10/2017

Page 183 Appendix 1- Proposed Responses to the Questions in the Government’s Consultation

Question 1 (a): do you agree with the proposed standard approach to assessing local housing need? If not, what alternative approach or other factors should be considered?

The proposed approach is broadly supported, subject to the points set out below.

Clarification is required on whether the Government now intends to promote shorter, perhaps 10-year, plan periods. Planning to meet needs (ideally) for 15- years on adoption remains the preferred approach as it establishes a longer term strategic approach to development, which may be required in order to deliver large-scale strategic sites and associated infrastructure.

It should be clarified in national policy or guidance that when local plans are reviewed or updated, they should be re-based to an appropriate start date (i.e. currently 2016) that reflects the most up-to-date figures of local housing need from the standard method. It should be acknowledged that housing affordability resulting from any shortfall in supply is reflected within the affordability uplift component of the new method.

The standard method should be kept as simple as possible and given that the ‘adjustment factor’ ensures that sufficient provision is made for the number of homes needed nationally, it would be inappropriate to factor in any further allowances, for example for second homes and / or vacant properties.

Question 1(b): how can information on local housing need be made more transparent?

The Government could require all local planning authorities to publish information on local housing need and supply on their websites, which should show how the figure of housing need for their local area has been derived from the standard method.

Question 2: do you agree with the proposal that an assessment of local housing need should be able to be relied upon for a period of two years from the date a plan is submitted?

Yes. The proposed approach is broadly supported, subject to the points set out below.

The process for assessing housing need could be made less liable to frequent change if need were to be calculated on the basis of the most up-to-date household projections and a two-year average of the affordability data from when the previous household projections were released. This would not only provide for a 2-year period with no changes in the local housing need calculation, but would also smooth out any volatility in the year-to-year changes to the local affordability ratio.

Whilst it may be appropriate for the final housing figure in a local plan to differ from the housing need figure after taking account of issues raised at examination, it should be made explicitly clear in national policy or guidance that this should Page 184 not be influenced by any new household projections / affordability data published in the two-year period after submission.

National policy or guidance should make explicitly clear that once a revised plan is adopted, the housing figure it contains should remain the figure for ‘local housing need’ to be used in making planning decisions and in any five-year housing land supply calculations for five years following adoption.

Question 3: do you agree that we should amend national planning policy so that a sound plan should identify local housing needs using a clear and justified method?

Yes. This approach would mean that if a local planning authority used the standard method to derive a figure for local housing need, then that figure would be found sound by a local plan inspector. This would both provide reassurance to local planning authorities and reduce the scope for developers to challenge housing numbers, enabling local plan inquiries to be concluded more quickly.

Question 4: do you agree with our approach in circumstances when plan makers deviate from the proposed method, including the level of scrutiny we expect from the Planning Inspectors?

The consultation paper gives no indication of what ‘very limited grounds’ might be acceptable to justify a deviation from the standard method. National policy or guidance needs to set out, or at least give some examples, of the ‘very limited grounds’ on which deviation from the standard method may be appropriate. Without such guidance, the appropriateness of any deviation from the standard method will not be tested until examination, which is too late in the plan-making process.

Question 5(a): do you agree that the Secretary of State should have discretion to defer the period for using the baseline for some local planning authorities? If so, how best could this be achieved, what minimum requirements should be in place before the Secretary of State may exercise this discretion, and for how long should such deferral be permitted?

The Secretary of State should retain some discretion to defer the period for using the baseline to assess five year supply where a joint plan (or review) is being brought forward, as is the case in West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland.

Proposals for Local Government Reorganisation in Dorset are currently under consideration by the Secretary of State and, if agreed, two new unitary authorities would replace the nine existing councils. These new larger unitary authorities, if created, may need to bring together existing local plans, which will require time to implement. The Secretary of State should also retain some discretion to defer the period for using the baseline to assess five year supply where existing local plans are being brought together following local government reorganisation.

It is not clear how the new standard method should be used as a basis for assessing five year housing land supply in circumstances where some, but not all, of the policies in a local plan are considered to be out of date. National policy or guidance needs to make clear that the new method should only be used where a local plan is out-of-date by virtue of being more than five years old. It should not be used in circumstances where the ‘relevantPage policies185 for the supply of housing’ are deemed to be out of date (by virtue of paragraph 49 of the NPPF), as a result of not having a five-year housing land supply.

Clarity is also required on how the five year supply should be calculated in circumstances where it is considered appropriate to use the new method. In particular clarity is required on whether any shortfall in delivery before 2016 should be factored into the calculation and if so, how. The relationship between the calculation of five year housing land supply and the proposed new housing delivery test needs to be explained, in particular clarity is needed on the circumstances when a buffer of 20%, rather than 5%, should be applied.

Question 5(b): do you consider that authorities that have an adopted joint local plan, or which are covered by an adopted spatial development strategy, should be able to assess their five year land supply and/or be measured for the purposes of the Housing Delivery Test, across the area as a whole?

There is already an adopted joint local plan for West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland with a single housing figure, which is used to assess five year housing land supply across the area as a whole. The clarification that this approach is appropriate is welcome, and it would be sensible for the housing delivery test to also apply across the area as a whole as supported by the Inspector of the joint local plan.

Question 5 (c): do you consider that authorities that are not able to use the new method for calculating local housing need should be able to use an existing or an emerging local plan figure for housing need for the purposes of calculating five year land supply and to be measured for the purposes of the Housing Delivery Test?

No comment, since West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council are able to use the new method.

Question 6: do you agree with the proposed transitional arrangements for introducing the standard approach for calculating local housing need?

The proposed transitional arrangements indicate that West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland should use the new standard method to inform the review of their local plan. It is important that the proposed changes to national policy are taken forward in accordance with the Government’s published timetable to ensure that this local plan review (and others across the country) can be taken forward in a timely manner.

Question 7(a): do you agree with the proposed administrative arrangements for preparing the statement of common ground?

Clarity is required on the matters that need to be covered in the proposed statements of common ground. Paragraph 156 of the NPPF lists the ‘strategic priorities’ that councils should plan for. National policy could clarify that this list, or similar, should be used to guide the production of statements of common ground. Clarity is also required on the level of detail that may be required in a statement of common ground. If it is intended that they should set out how housing and other needs will be met between neighbouring local planning authorities, there may be a need for strategic environmental Pageassessment 186 and wider consultation. That level of detail could risk pre-judging the local plan process. The detail required in a statement of common ground should therefore be kept to a minimum and should be focused on the arrangements for co-operation rather than policies or policy outcomes.

Question 7(b): how do you consider a statement of common ground should be implemented in areas where there is a Mayor with strategic plan-making powers?

No Comment

Question 7(c): do you consider there to be a role for directly elected Mayors without strategic plan-making powers, in the production of a statement of common ground?

No Comment

Question 8: do you agree that the proposed content and timescales for publication of the statement of common ground are appropriate and will support more effective co-operation on strategic cross-boundary planning matters?

The statement of common ground is intended to be “part of the evidence for an individual plan examination” and will “not be separately examined by the Planning Inspectorate”. However, any statement of common ground will be subject to a high degree of scrutiny by a local plan inspector, who will use it both to make a judgement on whether the plan is sound and to determine whether a council’s legal obligations under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 have been met. Given this anticipated high degree of scrutiny, further clarification of exactly what should be included in a statement of common ground and the level of detail expected would be welcomed.

At examination, it is important that inspectors take a consistent view on statements of common ground, particularly where they support two or more separate local plans. Where a local plan has been found sound and is compliant with the legal obligations in relation to the Duty to Co-operate, the statement of common ground, where it remains up to date, should carry significant weight in the examination of any other local plan covered by that statement.

The proposed timeframes for production of statements would result in greater clarity and openness for those interested in cross-boundary issues.

Question 9(a): do you agree with the proposal to amend the tests of soundness to include that: i) plans should be prepared based on a strategy informed by agreements over the wider area; and ii) plans should be based on effective joint working on cross- boundary strategic priorities, which are evidenced in the statement of common ground?

The current tests of soundness already establish the principles that local plans should be based on: a strategy that meets needs (including unmet needs from neighbouring authorities, where it is reasonable to do so) and; effective joint working. The NPPF could include supportingPage guidance 187 on the evidence likely to be needed to test the soundness of a local plan, but the need for agreements and statements of common ground are primarily procedural matters that should not form part of the tests of soundness themselves.

Question 9(b): do you agree to the proposed transitional arrangements for amending the tests of soundness to ensure effective co-operation?

Yes. The transitional arrangements for producing statements of common ground appear appropriate.

Question 10(a): do you have any suggestions on how to streamline the process for identifying the housing need for individual groups and what evidence could be used to help plan to meet the needs of particular groups?

One approach may be to consider what needs from the groups listed in the consultation document could realistically be met through general housing provision and then to establish where specialist provision is needed, as may be the case with sites for self-build housing.

National policy that seeks to plan for a suitable mix of housing should be flexible in order to recognise that housing needs change over time. It could also promote the building of more adaptable homes, such as lifetime homes, which would provide greater flexibility in meeting the different needs of different groups.

Question 10(b): do you agree that the current definition of older people within the National Planning Policy Framework is still fit-for-purpose?

The definition is broadly appropriate, but needs to be more inclusive and should not be restricted to those above retirement age. This is because some older people over retirement age are able to live in homes without special adaptation, but conversely, some older people under the retirement age are in need of specialist housing.

Question 11(a): should a local plan set out the housing need for designated neighbourhood planning areas and parished areas within the area?

No. Local planning authorities are required to meet the housing target in their local plan. That target, whether established through a local assessment of need or through the proposed standard approach, gives the local planning authority the strategic target for their area. Local authorities are penalised for under-delivery through the proposed housing delivery test or through the five-year supply requirement. If responsibility for delivering some of this need is given to neighbourhood plans, delivery is taken out of the local planning authority’s hands whilst penalties still remain in place. Neighbourhood plans are optional and prepared by volunteers and delivery of housing through this mechanism is uncertain and unpredictable. Neighbourhood plans should therefore only deliver locally identified needs rather than a proportion of the strategic needs of the area. Neighbourhood plans should deliver this housing growth as an addition to that established through the local plan process.

Question 11(b): do you agree with the proposal for a formula-based approach to apportion housing need to neighbourhood plan bodies in Page 188 circumstances where the local plan cannot be relied on as a basis for calculating housing need?

No. The housing need for a neighbourhood plan should be derived from a local perspective reflecting the local situation and community aspirations, rather than seeking to meet a proportion of the district-based assessment of housing need. Neighbourhood plans should be delivering locally identified needs including the local need for affordable homes and the needs of particular groups, such as older people wishing to downsize.

A simple apportionment of the district-based assessment of housing need to neighbourhood areas is also not fine-grained enough to adequately reflect local circumstances. For example, children at a boarding school or service personnel at a military camp are counted within the population of a parish, but do not generate a significant local housing need or demand. However, under the proposed approach they would contribute to any estimate of local housing need at the neighbourhood level.

Question 12: do you agree that local plans should identify the infrastructure and affordable housing needed, how these will be funded and the contributions developers will be expected to make?

The principle of setting out infrastructure (and affordable housing) needs (and the means of delivery) in local plans is supported, as this establishes the requirements needed to support growth at an early stage. However, because viability information may rapidly become out of date, there needs to be some flexibility at the planning application stage.

The Government needs to clarify whether it is proposing to abandon the current thresholds in national policy below which affordable housing contributions should not be sought in order to allow local planning authorities greater flexibility, or whether any local thresholds would need to be set in accordance with the current national thresholds. If it is intended to allow local planning authorities greater flexibility, this would be supported as a positive move to address affordable housing needs locally.

Question 13: in reviewing guidance on testing plans and policies for viability, what amendments could be made to improve current practice?

A whole plan viability assessment is currently undertaken to evaluate the combined viability of local plan policies and CIL. This approach is all that is needed to determine affordable housing and infrastructure contributions and strike an appropriate balance between affordable housing and infrastructure provision. Current practice could be improved with the introduction of national guidance on producing whole plan viability assessments in order to ensure that they are prepared in a consistent manner. Guidance on assessing the viability of large allocations, which may be zero-rated for CIL, would be particularly useful to ensure that such sites would be capable of delivering the infrastructure, affordable housing and community benefits needed at planning application stage. This guidance could be produced by a panel of developer and public sector interests and would need to be regularly reviewed to take account of any new legislation or requirements set at the national level. Page 189 Question 14: do you agree that where policy requirements have been tested for their viability, the issue should not usually need to be tested again at the planning application stage?

As viability information can rapidly become out of date, there needs to be some flexibility at the planning application stage. If viability could not be tested again at planning application stage, more detailed site specific viability work would be required to support plan making. Work undertaken at plan-making stage is typically based on broad principles of viability and considers viability based on notional development scenarios. At planning application stage, viability work is more detailed and site specific. If detailed, site-specific viability work were to be required to support plan-making, it would slow down the plan-making process and have resource implications. Even if more detailed, site-specific viability work was undertaken to support a local plan, there is still a significant risk that it would become out of date before a planning application could be considered.

Question 15: how can Government ensure that infrastructure providers, including housing associations, are engaged throughout the process, including in circumstances where a viability assessment may be required?

At the plan making stage, planning officers typically seek the views of infrastructure providers about their needs, but they do not always respond. There is a tendency for infrastructure providers to only become engaged when proposals become more advanced and detailed, for example at the planning application stage, where they may seek infrastructure provision that has not been identified in policy. This engagement is too late in the process and makes the determination of planning applications more difficult.

Local planning authorities do not always have the expertise to establish infrastructure requirements without the input of providers. So if they do not engage, the local planning authority can find it difficult to justify the provision of some items of infrastructure in their local plans. The Government could encourage greater engagement in plan-making by introducing legislation, or other measures, to require infrastructure providers to identify and plan to tackle long- term (15-years plus) infrastructure needs.

Question 16: what factors should we take into account in updating guidance to encourage viability assessments to be simpler, quicker and more transparent, for example through a standardised report or summary format?

An amendment to national policy to normally require an open book assessment of viability (where viability is disputed) would increase transparency. There should only be very limited circumstances where viability information should remain confidential and it would be helpful if national policy or guidance could be produced to set out such circumstances.

The Government could also set out in guidance a standard approach to the assessment of viability. This could set out set out a series of assumptions and data sources that should be used (e.g. national published data on land value and build costs) in any assessment. The guidance could also require that any deviation from these assumptions and datasets would need to be justified. Page 190 Question 17(a): do you agree that local planning authorities should set out in plans how they will monitor and report on planning agreements to help ensure that communities can easily understand what infrastructure and affordable housing has been secured and delivered through developer contributions?

Local planning authorities should provide publically accessible information on planning agreements and it would be appropriate for local plans to set out the overall approach to monitoring and reporting, but not the monitoring information itself. Councils are currently required to produce monitoring information at least annually, which is made available online. The councils’ website is considered to be the most appropriate location for information on planning agreements to be made available.

Question 17(b): what factors should we take into account in preparing guidance on a standard approach to monitoring and reporting planning obligations?

The form and content of any reports on planning obligations should not be prescribed. Guidance should recognise that local planning authorities use different systems and approaches to manage their planning obligation records, and that not all local planning authorities have implemented CIL. Guidance could establish some broad principles, but needs to be sufficiently flexible to enable local authorities to develop approaches that best suit local circumstances.

Question 17(c): how can local planning authorities and applicants work together to better publicise infrastructure and affordable housing secured through new development once development has commenced, or at other stages of the process?

One approach on larger schemes would be for developers and local planning authorities to develop joint communication strategies to increase awareness of the infrastructure and affordable housing secured through new development.

Question 18(a): do you agree that a further 20 per cent fee increase should be applied to those local planning authorities who are delivering the homes their communities need? What should be the criteria to measure this?

The consultation paper recognises that a lack of capacity and capability in planning departments can act as a constraint to development. This raises the question of whether the proposed approach to fee setting, which only allows fee increases subject to certain nationally set conditions, is likely to resolve this problem and deliver the level of housing that is required nationally. It is considered that a more flexible approach may be required which enables local planning authorities to set fees locally. This would enable a more proactive approach to be taken so sufficient funds could be allocated to planning departments, not only to produce local plans and determine planning applications, but also to engage in a more positive and proactive way with the development industry. It is considered that this more flexible approach to fee setting would be more likely to deliver the number of new homes needed nationally.

In the event that the proposed further 20% increase in fees is introduced, it should also act as an incentive to increase housing delivery above rates currently being achieved, rather than as a ‘reward’Page for hitting 191 local plan targets. The ability to charge additional fees should be based on an assessment of the volume of work (and consequently resources) likely to be required to increase delivery above current levels.

Question 18(b): do you think there are more appropriate circumstances when a local planning authority should be able to charge the further 20 per cent? If so, do you have views on how these circumstances could work in practice?

See overall response to question 18(a).

Question 18(c): should any additional fee increase be applied nationally once all local planning authorities meet the required criteria, or only to individual authorities who meet them?

No. Local planning authorities should be able to increase fees by 20% based on local circumstances rather than the performance of all local planning authorities nationally. An alternative approach would be to give all local planning authorities greater discretion in setting fees until housing delivery reaches between 225,000 and 275,000 new homes per year (i.e. the assessment of the level of housing needed nationally).

Question 18(d): are there any other issues we should consider in developing a framework for this additional fee increase?

See overall response to question 18(a).

Question 19: having regard to the measures we have already identified in the housing White Paper, are there any other actions that could increase build out rates?

Requiring infrastructure providers to identify potential barriers to development and to publish clear long-term (15 years plus) action plans to tackle deficiencies, would help plan production. Currently it can be difficult to engage in a meaningful way with key bodies (such as utilities companies, Highways England, the Environment Agency among others) until the application stage. A requirement to plan long term would mean that infrastructure requirements would be better understood at an earlier stage. Since many objections to planning applications relate to infrastructure issues, the resolution of these issues earlier in the process should help to: reduce levels of objection: enable planning decisions to be made more quickly: and bring forward delivery on site sooner.

Page 192 Agenda Item 11

Management Committee 31 October 2017 Scrutiny of the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area For Decision

Briefholder Councillor James Farquharson – Economic Development Councillor Ray Nowak – Environment and Sustainability

Senior Leadership Team Contact: S Hill, Strategic Director

Report Author: L Watson, Democratic Services Team

Statutory Authority Local Government Act 2000 and Localism Act 2011 sets out the requirement for local authorities to establish overview and scrutiny committees and their functions.

Purpose of Report

1 To consider the findings and recommendations of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee following a scrutiny review of the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area.

Recommendations of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee

2 That a bid for £200,000 be endorsed by the Management Committee for investment in the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area to secure the following key improvements:

(a) Put forward a business case to secure funding from Historic England towards Conservation Area improvements;

(b) Provide a clear shopfront and advertisement design guide for the town centre to steer new development to protect local distinctiveness and quality of historic assets;

(c) Provide Enforcement by removal of A boards in the town centre, monitoring of developments and use of Section 215 notices to secure maintenance and repairs of buildings;

(d) A Conservation Officer to Support the Heritage Champion for the town centre (promoted by the BID) and Town Centre Manager (with facelift improvements to the pedestrianised area); Page 193 (e) Manage any funding from Historic England and bid for grants from the Arts Council and Heritage Lottery, to spend on restoring some Council owned buildings as a positive example to encourage others to do the same;

(f) There is recognition of the fact that aspects in this report rely on working in partnership with the Weymouth BID. Therefore if the Weymouth BID was to get a no vote and cease to continue in the future, the borough council should use a proportion of the levy currently paid to the Weymouth BID, in order to deliver this project.

Reason for Decision

3 To enable Management Committee to consider the findings of the scrutiny review of the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area by the Scrutiny and Performance Committee.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4 A group of members from the Scrutiny and Performance Committee have undertaken a scrutiny review of the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area. The report produced and subsequently agreed by the committee at their meeting on 5 October 2017 is attached at appendix 1 to this report. The report contains recommendations which are presented for consideration by the Management Committee.

Implications

Financial

5 The recommendations rely on Management Committee providing support to the bid for £200,000 for investment in the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area to secure the key improvements listed in the recommendation above. Management Committee have previously set aside reserves for once off projects and a number of projects have already been approved. There is currently £140,623 remaining unallocated therefore the recommendation cannot be supported in full from this funding. If all of this funding was allocated to this project there would be no funding available for any further projects. The use of the £140,623 would result in a loss of investment income of approximately £5,625 per annum.

Human Resources

6 Additional resource is required in the Conservation Team in order to progress this work.

Consultation and Engagement

7 During the review the scrutiny working group spoke to officers within the Planning and Conservation Teams, the Economic Development and Environment and Sustainability Briefholders and a representative of Page 194 Historic England. In addition, a consultation exercise was held with various local businesses and organisations.

Appendices

8 Appendix 1 – Scrutiny Review – Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area – report agreed by the Scrutiny and Performance Committee

Background Papers

9 None

Footnote

10 Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Lindsey Watson, Democratic Services Telephone: (01305) 252209 Email: [email protected]

Page 195 This page is intentionally left blank

Scrutiny Review –Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area

Report of the scrutiny working group on behalf of the Scrutiny and Performance Committee

May 2017 Updated September 2017

Page 197

1. Decision Required

1.1 The Scrutiny and Performance Committee is asked to endorse the findings and recommendations of the review contained within this report for referral to the Management Committee, for consideration and decision.

2. Introduction

2.1 Background – Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area

The Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area was designated in 1974 and extended in 1979, 1989, 1996 and 1998. The conservation area designation reflects Weymouth’s outstanding historic environment, which is one of its prime assets as a high quality tourism destination and focus for inward investment.

A detailed character appraisal of the conservation area was adopted by the borough council in December 2012. Local policies relating to conservation areas are included in the local plan, adopted in 2015. These closely reflect national policy.

The Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan was adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance in 2015, to support the local plan policies for the regeneration of the town centre. It was prepared in the context of the local plan policies including those for conservation areas, and took account of all the various constraints and challenges associated with the regeneration of town centre sites, as well as the input from public consultation and work with various stakeholders and interest groups. It was also informed by the conservation area appraisal.

Decisions affecting listed buildings and conservation areas must follow national legislation and policy, which is not under the borough council’s control, although there are judgements to be made about the impact of each scheme, with the advice of Historic England, who is the statutory consultee on matters relating to listed buildings and conservation areas. Conservation area designation does not prevent development, and development often provides opportunities to enable buildings to be maintained in viable uses. The potential harm and/or benefit of any particular scheme need to be assessed taking into account the significance of the heritage assets concerned.

There are various powers that local authorities may use to ensure that repairs are carried out to improve the condition of listed buildings or buildings in conservation areas. These powers are in place to protect historic buildings from urgent or fundamental damage, rather than generally enforce standards of maintenance.

2.2 Reason for review

A request for a scrutiny of the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area was submitted by Councillor James Farquharson and at the meeting on 6 October 2016, the Scrutiny and Performance Committee agreed to include the review on their work plan. The request for scrutiny had asked in particular for consideration of the following: Page 198

 With the town centre regeneration programme moving forward (part of the adopted Town Centre Masterplan) there is an urgent need to discover if conservation policies and its operation will present any conflicts that could disrupt progress;

 Also, more broadly, to discover how the Conservation Area policy and operation provide powers to enforce appropriate maintenance of existing town centre listed buildings. As well as enabling developments within and around those buildings to support their current and future viability and borough-wide economic and cultural vibrancy.

There was also a separate request to consider the impact of listed building legislation and policy on the potential for regeneration of Weymouth Town Centre, which is included on the Management Committee Action Plan. It was noted that these two reviews would be combined and dealt with through a single report to Scrutiny and Performance Committee and then onto Management Committee.

2.3 Membership and meetings

The Scrutiny and Performance Committee established a scrutiny working group in order to undertake the review. Membership of the scrutiny working group was as follows:

Councillors Claudia Moore (Lead Member), Jon Orrell (until May 2017), Cathy Page-Nash and Kate Wheller (until May 2017).

The scrutiny working group met on seven occasions during the period of the review to consider the different elements of the review and also undertook work outside of meetings.

3. Scope and Key Focus Areas of the Review

3.1 The scrutiny working group focused on two distinct areas – the impact of conservation area policies on the town centre regeneration programme and the powers there were to enforce appropriate maintenance of existing town centre listed buildings as well as to enable developments within and around them. The scope for the review set out the following areas for review:

 An examination of specific examples where the Conservation Area designation has hampered development within Weymouth Town Centre and how this can be mitigated against for future development;  Consideration of issues associated with the maintenance of buildings, including listed buildings, in the Conservation Area and how maintenance issues can be successfully dealt with. Seeking to improve the condition of buildings/upgrading of buildings in the Conservation Area;  How the energy efficiency of buildings in the Conservation Area can be improved and the promotion of available opportunities to owners of buildings;  Making a positive effort to bring flats above shops back into use as homes – looking at links to the borough council’s housing needs role;

Page 199

 Improving the quality and sustainability of the town centre environment and economy.

4. Summary of evidence considered

4.1 Documentation

The following documents and data were used by the committee in the process of carrying out this review:

 Scrutiny request form from Councillor James Farquharson – Councillor Farquharson was consulted throughout the scrutiny.  Background note produced for the Scrutiny and Performance Committee by the Corporate Manager, Planning – Community and Policy Development, in respect of the Conservation Area Policy and Town Centre Regeneration  Historic England guidance on conservation area designations, appraisals and management plans  Historic England guidance on conservation areas at risk which provides detail on specific ways in which community groups and management plans etc. can work to enhance heritage in at risk/deprived areas  Historic England guidance on energy efficiency in listed buildings  Historic England guidance on improving accessibility to historic buildings  Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area Character Appraisal – appraisal document and maps  Review of Policy ENV 4 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework  Review of Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990  North Dorset Shopfront Design Guide  Examples of recent successful applications concerning shop front changes including Islington shopfront design guide  PowerPoint presentation of an example application which recently went to Planning Committee and was approved for roller shutters, contrary to officer recommendation on conservation grounds  List of applications showing where flats have been approved over shops in Weymouth plus suggestions of constraints and issues  Review of cases provided by Planning and Enforcement officers including listed building consents  Examples of relevant appeal decisions from the Planning Inspectorate  List of applications that have been granted permission in the town centre Conservation Area for residential (members were able to view the applications using the planning application search on www.dorsetforyou.gov.uk)  Examples of cases of allowing the removal of ground floor interiors and resolution of enforcement issues arising  A consultation was carried out in August 2017 over a three week period to ascertain how local business and agencies have potentially been impacted by conservation procedures in the past three years. Links by email to the on-line survey (paper copies to those where we only had a postal address) were sent to a varied selection of businesses including shops, hotels, estate agents, businesses/agents known to have had dealings with the planning and conservation teams and organisations such as Weymouth Page 200

and Portland Chamber of Commerce, BID, Civic Society etc. to enquire about their experiences in this area. This survey was also advertised on Social Media. People were also invited to come and talk to us at a drop-in session if they wished. This was not taken up. The responses received (6 in total) were reviewed on 11th September 2017 by the scrutiny working group;  Details of the consultation were also circulated to all Weymouth and Portland Borough Councillors for their information and to invite any comments that they may have. One response was received from a borough councillor.

4.2 Witnesses

The following people acted as witnesses, providing verbal evidence and assistance in the process of carrying out this review:

 Kate Williams, Senior Conservation Officer  Clare McCarthy, Senior Planning Officer  Hilary Jordan, Corporate Manager – Planning, Community and Policy Development  Councillor James Farquharson, Economic Development Brief holder and originator of scrutiny request  Councillor Ray Nowak, Environment and Sustainability Brief holder  Neil Dackham, Enforcement Officer  David Stuart, Historic England  Paul Wyeth, Specialist Services Manager, Development Services

4.3 Other activities undertaken

 Review of guidance available on Historic England website: https://www.historicengland.org.uk  Review of information on Georgian Group website: https://georgiangroup.org.uk  Walk through of Weymouth Town Centre with the Conservation Officer

5. Key Findings

 We are lacking evidence to substantiate the claims made regarding planning officers restricting town centre improvements. Planning officers work with applicants to suggest improvements and members were referred to a number of policy, guidance, good practice and appeal decision/case law that is all used by officers when determining or assessing proposals. Each application needs to be assessed on its own merits. Only 1 application was turned down in 2016 and 3 applications in 2015. The scrutiny working group members saw 8 examples of successful upper floor conversions on their town centre walk;  The consultation with businesses/organisations did not bring up any tangible examples of the Conservation department restricting economic development in the town centre. 6 responses were received in total and there were no consultees who took up our offer to have a face to face discussion. Conservation staff were praised for their common-sense approach;

Page 201

 However, it was noted by respondents that the Planning Department is under- resourced and timeliness has been an issue. This issue was mainly because of the reorganisation due to the formation of the Dorset Councils Partnership and has been gradually improving in 2017 and is closer to hitting the government targets. This is outlined in the quarterly Business Review report considered by the borough council’s Management Committee;  The responses also highlighted concerns regarding lack of enforcement to maintain the quality of local buildings and increasing decay;  The Planning department runs a bi-annual Customer Forum where anyone who has worked with the Planning team is invited to come and share their feedback to improve services for the future;  We feel that the Planning department is severely under-resourced (specifically in Conservation and Enforcement);  There is a need to balance visitor versus resident needs – independent versus national stores – which is recognised as being difficult. It is all about quality but also need to consider who is best placed to lead on different areas;  The council has a role in leading this work but can’t do it all – there needs to be shared approach;  There is a recognition that the council needs help in this area;  We noted the importance of establishing a strategy and priorities and having everything in place ready for potential investment/funding opportunities;  Marketing and promotion needs to be looked at in order to inspire people to visit Weymouth. There is a need to find out what the market wants;  Reference was made to the peninsular development and whether it is ambitious enough. There are opportunities to promote cultural activities as part of the development;  There needs to be a political conviction of ambition. The impact of regular elections was recognised;  There is a lack of awareness of Weymouth’s historic features and events and more should be made of what the town already has;  Research has shown that it is about the quality of experience – the totality of the experience - and not just about shops e.g. parking, what do streets look like, toilets, are buildings in good condition, is the area welcoming, is there a diversity of food/drink opportunities and a recognition that there is something special, reinforcing the unique selling point;  It was noted that there needed to be consideration of promoting things within one hour’s drive of Weymouth plus promotion of choices for evening entertainment. The council has a role in setting the agenda to aspire others to join in and invest;  With regard to the review objective to make a positive effort to bring flats above shops back into use as homes, members of the scrutiny working group note that this is something that is already encouraged by the Planning department when they are asked for advice in this area.

Page 202

6. Ideas and suggestions to be explored

6.1 The following numbered suggestions are directly associated with the remit of this scrutiny working group in relation to Conservation. These all hinge on a successful bid for additional resources to be provided within the Conservation and Enforcement teams. If the bid is successful the aim would be for the funding to enable staff to investigate the following ideas and prioritise them through a further report to Scrutiny and Performance Committee and then undertake project work as agreed by members:

i. Securing a designation of Conservation Area at Risk from Historic England for Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area, following submission of the ‘at risk’ Survey on 30th May 2017. (If we are seen to be at risk we will receive match funding.)*

*It has been confirmed in September 2017 that Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area has been designated as “at risk” and Historic England are primarily concerned with the commercial section of the conservation area (St Thomas and St Mary streets).

ii. Creation of a shopfront design guide for Weymouth and Portland based on the North Dorset District Council guide. The design guide would include examples and details of how the town centre shopfronts should be maintained to encourage improvement and consistency;

iii. Setting up an Article 4 Direction to help prevent piecemeal changes that are harmful to the area or buildings, through the removal of certain permitted development rights in the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area;

iv. Increase revenue by increasing the charge for pre-application advice that Conservation Officers provide for listed buildings. (During pre- application advice, officers can achieve the best results by working with an applicant to look at how issues can be accommodated and find possible solutions in order to keep the building in use);

v. Enforcement of maintenance and repair of Listed Buildings and buildings within the Conservation Area through the use of Section 215 Notices by the Enforcement Officers within the Planning department. (This will require an extra enforcement officer to be employed); The Planning Department is currently putting together letters to send out Section 215 notices to relevant building owners.

vi. Explore opportunities to work with hoteliers, including looking at tenancy timescales, protocols for items such as signs and other ways of encouraging owners to look after their properties (possible pilot scheme);

vii. Research and apply for available funds to help bolster services such as Enforcement, Conservation, street scene improvements and contribute to grant incentives in Weymouth.

Page 203

6.2 The following ideas and suggestions to be progressed by the borough council in conjunction with other organisations if resources allow:

 Appointment of a Weymouth Town Manager to take a lead on community driven projects with support from the Heritage Champion (see below);

 Appointment of a ‘Heritage Champion’ for the town centre – potentially in association with the BID and Civic Society;

 Pride in our Borough’ competition to be discussed further with the BID including shop window displays/flower display competitions;

 Organise a public meeting including BID, local businesses, Civic Society and community to explain the issues clearly and gain a consensus for the way forward. (We need to get everyone on board and encourage them to take ownership of the improvements);

 Work with and encourage the BID to look at place branding / public realm work undertaken by Historic England. Some initial discussion has already been undertaken;

 Working with the Civic Society and other bodies who may be able to take on specific actions such as putting together a map of historic features for visitors;

 Pension fund owners to be more greatly encouraged to make improvements to the buildings they own;

 Discussions with local estate agents to encourage them to be more honest with their clients regarding planning applications and permissions;

 Working with Dorset County Council Highways team to secure removal of inappropriately placed A-boards forthwith as they are blocking large stretches of walkway and the styles are often not in keeping with the style of the town centre;

 A retail study to be undertaken including a SWOT analysis of what is working/not working in the town centre;

 Investment in a cherry picker by the Council to rent out for use by all in maintaining and cleaning buildings including Council owned buildings within the town, as well as use by the BID for cleaning and maintenance of street furniture and lighting.;

 Use of the comprehensive signage report commissioned by the BID to improve the issues we currently have.

Page 204

6.3 The following observations are recorded about officers and members involved in the Conservation and Planning areas:

 Conservation/Planning and members will need to work more collaboratively together to promote and encourage sustainable and economic growth. In so doing, build stronger relationships and understanding to help improve the standard of decision making and the quality of development in Weymouth. The goal is to attract long term, positive investment to a town that takes pride in its assets;

 Council members to be supportive of the new approach concerning shop front signage, shutters and lighting in Weymouth including the decisions at Planning Committee, will help raise the bar in the quality of materials and design within the town.

6.4 Conclusion

The scrutiny working group conclude that the Conservation Area is a quality that makes Weymouth special rather than being a hindrance to development. It is clear that the Heritage qualities of the Town Centre Conservation Area potentially offer a stimulus for investment and regeneration of the town. If this asset of Conservation is to assist in regeneration of the Town Centre it requires adequate resources.

It was recognised that the best means of achieving improvements is if the Conservation Area succeeds in being declared to be “at risk” by Historic England. This position has now been declared as of September 2017 and the recommended bid could be used to prepare a case to secure further funding from Historic England, the Arts Council, or the Heritage Lottery to enhance any resourcing bid from within the Council. These funds could then be spent on improvements to key buildings and other measures listed at section 6 above.

It is therefore recommended that a bid for £200,000 for increased funding of Conservation and Enforcement staffing will enable measures to be implemented to assist in the regeneration of the Town Centre Conservation Area to the benefit of Weymouth as a whole.

7. Recommendations

The Scrutiny Working Group propose that a bid for £200,000 is supported by Scrutiny and Performance Committee and recommended to be submitted to the Management Committee for investment in the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area to secure the following 5 key improvements.

1. Put forward a business case to secure funding from Historic England towards Conservation Area improvements;

2. Provide a clear shopfront and advertisement design guide for the town centre to steer new development to protect local distinctiveness and quality of historic assets;

Page 205

3. Provide Enforcement by removal of A boards in the town centre, monitoring of developments and use of Section 215 notices to secure maintenance and repairs of buildings;

4. A Conservation Officer to Support the Heritage Champion for the town centre (promoted by the BID) and Town Centre Manager (with facelift improvements to the pedestrianised area);

5. Manage any funding from Historic England and bid for grants from the Arts Council and Heritage Lottery, to spend on restoring some Council owned buildings as a positive example to encourage others to do the same;

6. There is recognition of the fact that aspects in this report rely on working in partnership with the Weymouth BID. Therefore if the Weymouth BID was to get a no vote and cease to continue in the future, the borough council should use a proportion of the levy currently paid to the Weymouth BID, in order to deliver this project.

8. Acknowledgements

8.1 The scrutiny working group would like to express their thanks to those that took time to meet with councillors and for the information that they provided as part of this scrutiny review.

9. Post scrutiny monitoring

9.1 A review of agreed recommendations made should be undertaken after six months of implementation.

Page 206 Agenda Item 12

Management Committee 31 October 2017 Community Governance Review for the creation of a Town Council For Recommendation To Council Briefholder Cllr Alison Reed

Senior Leadership Team Contact: S Caundle, Assistant Chief Executive

Report Author: Jacqui Andrews, Corporate Manager, Democratic & Electoral Services

Statutory Authority Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (“the 2007 Act”)

Purpose of Report

1. To set out draft recommendations for public consultation for the creation of a Parish Council for Weymouth.

Recommendations

2. It is recommended to Full Council that:

a) the draft recommendations for a new Parish Council for Weymouth summarised below, and set out in detail with supporting information at Appendix 2, are agreed for public consultation with a view to establishing a new Parish Council at the same time as any new Unitary Council for Dorset:

 The creation of a single Parish Council covering the Weymouth area  The name of the proposed new Parish Council will be Weymouth Town Council  The first election to the proposed new Parish Council to be in 2019 and then every fourth year thereafter;  The number of councillors to be elected to the proposed new Parish Council (Council size) will be 29;  The proposed new parish will be divided into 12 wards for the purposes of electing councillors;  The boundaries of the wards of the proposed new Council will be as indicated on the maps attached at Appendix A to the proposed recommendation document, and follow the boundaries of the Borough Council Wards;  The name of the proposed Wards and the number of Councillors to be elected to the proposed wards is as indicated at Appendix B to Page 207 the proposed recommendation document and replicate the names of the existing Borough Wards; and

b) to delegate to the Corporate Manager, Democratic & Electoral Services, power to undertake all action including any determinations in order to progress the consultation referred to in the Terms of Reference agreed by Full Council in June.

Reason for Decision

3. To ensure that Full Council meets the requirements of all relevant legislation and guidance, and to create a new Parish Council for Weymouth should the Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government decide to create 2 Unitary authorities across Dorset.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4. From February 2008, principal councils have had responsibility for undertaking community governance reviews and have been able to decide whether to give effect to recommendations made in those reviews. In making such a decision, Councillors are required to take account of the views of local people ensuring that governance arrangements continue to reflect local identities and facilitate effective and convenient local government.

5. At its meeting on 30 March 2017, Full Council agreed Terms of Reference for a Community Governance Review (CGR) considering the creation of new local governance arrangements for Weymouth. The Terms of reference for a CGR must specify the area under review and set out clearly the matters on which a CGR is to focus, and these terms of reference must be published. The Terms of Reference were agreed by Full Council and published on 31 March 2017. The Review must be concluded within 12 months of this date as required by legislation.

6. The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (“the 2007 Act”) requires that principal councils have regard to the guidance issued by the Secretary of State and the Local Government Boundary Commission for England.

Community Governance Review Process

7. At its meeting in June 2017, Full Council agreed initial proposals for public consultation. A comprehensive public engagement exercise then took place with advertisements on the internet, on social media, in public buildings, direct communications with local organisations and businesses, and a series of 6 roadshows facilitated by Members and Officers. The period for consultation closed on 1 September 2017. A copy of the full consultation analysis report is attached at Appendix 1, and sets out responses to specific questions and also gives detail of other comments received.

Page 208 8. A headline summary of the responses is as follows:

 There were 876 face-to-face interactions at the roadshows, and 944 survey responses received.  77% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the idea of a single town council representing Weymouth (net figure 63%).  There is a strong feeling of Weymouth being the area that residents see as their “community” (68.9%), compared to their own ward (21.1%).  There is strong support for the name Weymouth Town Council (56%)  65% of respondents agreed/strongly agreed with the proposed electoral arrangements. However, the net figure for agreement is 37.2% with 25.8% of respondents who disagree/strongly disagree and 11.2% neither agreeing or disagreeing. The full report identifies the reasons for this response and these were largely around the number of Councillors and/or number of Wards.

9. Under the Local Government Act 1999, the local authority has a general best value duty to secure continuous improvement in the way in which its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. This will be looked once a final decision has been made whether to create a new Parish Council as part of creation of any new organisation.

Draft recommendations for Consultation

10. The Steering Group for Democratic Improvement gave careful consideration to the consultation report and options for proposed recommendations for new governance arrangements for the Weymouth area, and concluded that residents would be best served by a single Parish for the whole of the Weymouth area. The Steering Group also reconsidered options for the name, Council size (number of Councillors), warding arrangements and ward names taking into account the views received from the public consultation exercise. The proposals of the Steering Group, together with the rationale for these proposals, are set out in the document recommended at Appendix 2.

Process and Implementation

11. The draft recommendations, when finalised and agreed by Full Council, will be subject to further public consultation for a period of approximately 9 weeks. The responses to this further public consultation will then be considered by Full Council before final recommendations are published.

12. If Full Council chooses to accept the final recommendations of the Review, concluded after public consultation, then a Reorganisation Order will be drafted and this will be published together with the reasons for the changes, making maps available for public inspection. There are also various bodies that must be notified of the changes including the Local Government Boundary Committee for England.

Page 209 13. The Council will also need to consider the transfer of assets to the new Town Council, and also to the existing Town Council in Portland. This is a separate piece of work that will be undertaken outside of the Community Governance Review process.

Implications

Financial

14. A sum of £200,000 has been set aside for work associated with the creation of a new parish council. The costs associated with the consultation in respect of the proposed recommendations will be met from this budget.

15. At this stage it is not possible to estimate what the council tax charges of a new Town Council would be. This will depend on which services the Town Council provides and the ability of the Town Council to generate other sources of income. This will be an important part of the modelling to ensure a new Town Council would be financially sustainable.

Consultation and Engagement

16. A public engagement and consultation exercise has taken place between 26 June 2017 and 1 September 2017 in accordance with the Terms of Reference for the Review agreed by Council in June 2017. Comments were invited on the initial draft proposals and also the Council also invited suggestions for alternative arrangements. A report setting out the responses to this public consultation exercise is attached at Appendix 1.

17. A further 9 week period of public consultation will take place in respect of the draft recommendations for local governance arrangements once agreed by Full Council, again in accordance with the Terms of Reference for the Review agreed by Council in June 2017.

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Community Governance Review consultation report plus appendix to the report setting out individuals’ comments. Appendix 2 – Consideration of a new Parish Council for Weymouth - Draft recommendations for consultation, including Appendix A (maps of proposed Ward boundaries) and Appendix B (proposed Ward names and number of Councillors to be elected to each Ward).

Background papers

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 The Local Government Boundary Commission for England – Guidance on community governance reviews.

Page 210 Footnote

Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Jacqui Andrews, Corporate Manager, Democratic & Electoral Services Telephone: 01258 484325 Date: 12 October 2017 Email: [email protected]

Page 211 This page is intentionally left blank Weymouth Community Governance Review 2017 - “Future Weymouth”- Consultation Response Report

Produced by Mark Simons for Weymouth and Portland Borough Council

September 2017

1 Page 213 Weymouth Community Governance Review 2017 - “Future Weymouth”

Consultation Response Report

2 Page 214 What was the A proposal has been made by six local authorities in Dorset, consultation about? including Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, to replace all nine councils with two new councils. If the government accepts this proposal, Weymouth and Portland Borough Council would not exist in April 2019. Weymouth would then be virtually the only place in Dorset not covered by a parish or town council. Portland currently has a town council.

This consultation sought residents' views about whether Weymouth should have a local parish or town council, and what this would look like, if it was in place. This process is called a community governance review.

The council held a full public consultation on the draft proposals. The council were keen to hear local residents' views including suggestions for alternative arrangements that meet the criteria set out in the government guidance. Over what period did the The consultation ran for 9 weeks finishing on 1 September consultation run? 2017. What consultation The consultation was available both electronically and in methods were used? paper form from libraries and council offices. The consultation was promoted widely through both the local press, social media and through a series of roadshows across the borough. The consultation had both a consultation plan and a separate communications plan prepared beforehand. How many responses 944 overall responses were received, with 939 confirming on were received overall? what basis they were responding. 845 (90.0%) were Weymouth residents, 4 (0.4%) represented organisations, 6 (0.6%) represented local businesses. A further 84 (8.9%) were residents from outside Weymouth. How representative is the The sample size is high for a consultation of this type with 845 response to the wider Weymouth residents taking part. If it were a random sample population of Weymouth? (but in this open survey people will self-select to take part) with the total population of Weymouth being 52,000, a response by 658 residents would mean one would be 99% confident that the answers given were representative of the wider population with a potential margin of error of +or- 5%. Where will the results be Results will be published on the council's website published? www.dorsetforyou.com How will the results be The results will be used to guide councillors’ decision making used? for developing proposals for the future governance of Weymouth Who has produced this Mark Simons, Consultation Officer DCC/DCP September report? 2017

Analysis Method: Questions were considered on an individual basis. Overall responses were examined -and also specific responses of respondents who lived in Weymouth itself. The 3 Page 215 main method of analysis was looking at the percentage of respondents who expressed a view on each question. For several questions the percentage strongly supporting and supporting are calculated. Those opposing and strongly opposing are also recoded. One is taken from the other giving a net agreement figure. This could be positive or negative. A figure of zero would mean an equal number of people supported and opposed a statement.

For each open question the text comments have been studied and coded depending on what issues were raised. The coded comments are then reported on based on the amount of times those individual issues have been raised. Total redacted comments are provided in an appendix. Note: some figures may not sum due to rounding.

About respondents

944 overall responses were received, with 939 confirming on what basis they were responding. 845 (90.0%) were Weymouth residents, 4 (0.4%) represented organisations, 6 (0.6%) represented local businesses. A further 84 (8.9%) were residents from outside Weymouth.

Are you responding as:

A A A A resident Weymouth representative representative from outside resident of an of a local Weymouth organisation business

Number 845 4 6 84

% of all 90.0% 0.4% 0.6% 8.9% responses

Where do respondents live? If people responded as a Weymouth resident they were asked for their postcode. 823 people provided their home postcode, with just under 800 proving to be complete and valid. The postcodes of all respondents living in or around the Weymouth area were plotted on a map. Below is a map of those responses. This clearly shows responses were received from right across the

4 Page 216 Weymouth area, with all areas being represented.

Community Identity

The question asked: Q5. “If you live in Weymouth what do you normally regard as your community? (Choose one)”

5 Page 217 Dorset as a Weymouth as A specific part Not applicable whole a whole of Weymouth

Number 86 594 182 72

% of all who 9.9% 68.9% 21.1% the question is applicable to

This question is fairly fundamental in a Community Governance Review. It is important that any governance arrangements fairly reflect what the residents feel is their community.

The response here is quite clear. Just over 2/3 (68.9%) of Weymouth residents who responded felt that their community was Weymouth as a whole, rather than Dorset or a specific part of the town. Only 21% felt their “community” was a particular suburb or sub area of the town or surrounding area. Even less felt Dorset as a whole was their community.

The table below shows the responses (Q6 & 7) of those who felt a particular part of Weymouth was their community. This is sorted by percentage. It shows Preston to the east of the area and Wyke Regis to the south both have quite a strong following

Area Number % Weymouth (Preston) 32 17.6 Weymouth (Wyke Regis) 28 15.4 Weymouth (Town 22 12.1 Centre/Melcombe Regis) Weymouth( Westham) 18 9.9 Weymouth (Radipole) 15 8.2 Weymouth (Broadwey) 8 4.4 Weymouth ( Littlemoor) 7 3.8 Weymouth (Chickerell) 6 3.3 Weymouth (Lanehouse) 1 0.5 Weymouth (Redlands) 0 0 Other (please specify) 45 24.7

Of those who selected “other”, the main areas specified were Upwey (11 times) Southill (6 times) Rodwell (6 times) and Sutton Poyntz (4 times). The proposed area for the town council

The respondents were given a statement and asked whether they agreed or disagreed with it. The statement was:

Q8. “A single new Town Council for the whole of Weymouth as one area would represent the community well.”

6 Page 218 (overall Strongly agree Agree Neither Disagree Strongly responses) agree/disagree disagree

Number 428 288 81 57 74

% 46.1% 31.0% 8.7% 6.1% 8.0%

Overall 928 responses were received to this question. As the table above shows 716 (77.1%) agree/strongly agree and 131 (14.1%) disagree/strongly disagree. This gives a net agreement figure of +63.0%. This overall shows strong agreement with the statement.

81 respondents neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement.

If you look specifically at the responses from people who live within Weymouth itself you find a slightly higher percentage support the statement that “a single new town council would represent the community well”. Here 78.5% strongly agree or agree with the statement and 12.9% strongly disagree or disagree with it. Looking at the responses from people who felt they had a disability an equally high percentage supported the statement, with 80.9% (strongly agree/agree).

A single new Town Council for the whole of Weymouth as one area would represent the community well (all responses)?

800 700 600 500 400 Agree/strongly 300 agree, 716 200 100 , 0

Responses to the survey from business and organisations were very limited despite efforts in the Communications Plan to address this. Only 6 businesses and 4 organisations responded. 4 businesses strongly agreed/agreed with this statement and 2 strongly disagreed/disagreed. The majority of the organisations supported the statement. The Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group representing Weymouth and Portland GPs agreed with the statement.

7 Page 219 The respondents were asked

Q9. “If you feel some areas should not be included within the town council area please say which they are and why you think they should be excluded.”

73 responses were received to this question. However, many comments did not strictly answer the question but were used to give a response on the wider issues. The previous question had suggested an arrangement where all of the Weymouth area could come under a new town council. This supplementary question tried to find out if there were any areas of Weymouth that people felt would be better placed outside that town council area. It also asked people to explain why they felt that. Analysis of the comments show so little strength of feeling that any individual areas should be excluded from a town council based on the old Weymouth boundary. Several areas away from the main town centre were suggested as possible areas to be excluded normally based on their “more rural feel”. These included Upwey/Broadwey, Sutton Poyntz, and Preston all mentioned twice. Radipole and Nottington were mentioned once as areas that could be excluded. Wyke Regis, an overall more urban area was also mentioned twice as a possibility.

8 Page 220 Only one of the organisations/businesses responding had a view on areas that should be excluded, with the business feeling the town council should focus on Weymouth and Melcombe Regis.

Category Number of respondents Other 53 Exclude Portland 8 Include Chickerell 5 Exclude Chickerell 4 Exclude all areas 2 Exclude Broadwey 2 Exclude Upwey 2 Include all of Weymouth 2 Include Littlemoor 2 Only include Weymouth & Melcombe Regis 2 Include Portland 2 Preston should have a Parish Council 2 Sutton Poyntz should have a Parish Council 2 Wyke Regis should have a Parish Council 2 Each area should have its own Council 1 Exclude all areas not currently under WPBC 1 Exclude local businesses 1 Exclude Melcombe Regis 1 Exclude Nottingham 1 Exclude outer Weymouth 1 Exclude outlying inland villages 1 Exclude Radipole 1 Exclude Sutton Poyntz 1 Exclude Weymouth town centre 1 Include Charlestown area of Chickerell 1 Include Lane House Rocks Road 1 Include Osmington 1 Include Sutton Poyntz 1 Only include Weymouth 1 Only include Weymouth Town Centre and Melcombe Regis 1

9 Page 221 The next question then asked:

Q10. “Do you think that a “no town council” option should exist?”

(overall Yes No Don’t responses) know

Number 213 651 54

% 23.2% 70.9% 5.9%

918 responded to this question, with the vast majority having a view either way. Only 54 were unsure. A significant majority (71%) felt that there shouldn’t be a “no town council” option. On the other hand 23% felt there should be a “no town council” option.

10 Page 222 Do you feel a "no town council" option should exist? (overall responses)

700

600

500

400 No, 651 300

200

100 Yes, 213

0

Looking at the responses from specific groups (disabled respondents, residents just from Weymouth and residents who felt more part of their local area than the town as a whole) there was little deviation from the overall results, with between 72% and 79% feeling there shouldn’t be a no town council option.

The response to this question from businesses and organisations was very mixed with slightly more support for not having a “no town council” option than having one.

Other alternatives

The next question asked in an open text format:

Q11. Councillors have proposed a single town council for the whole area as they feel it is the best option. They have already considered and ruled out some other options. If there are other options you think better serve the community that we should consider, please explain your alternative options and tell us why you think that would be better.

216 responses were made to this question. The responses covered a wide range of issues. The responses are summarised below. The full comments are included as an appendix at the end.

The responses can be categorised as follows:

Number of Category respondents Supports single Town Council for the whole of Weymouth 63 Additional tier of local government unnecessary or too expensive 54 11 Page 223 Other 43 A new Town Council should cover a wider area than just Weymouth 15 Supports multiple Parish Councils 14 Supports no change 13 Wants fewer Councillors 10 Thinks a boundary review is needed 7 Representatives of the new Town Council should be non-political 4 Supports a Parish Council for Preston 4 Melcombe Regis should have a separate Town Council 2 Supports a Parish Council for Upwey 2 Supports a Parish Council for Broadwey 1 Supports a Parish Council for Overcome and Bowleaze 1 Supports a Parish Council for Sutton Poyntz 1 Supports a Parish Council for Wyke Regis 1

From the table above it is clear that no specific option has been put forward by a large number of respondents. There is a small amount of support for multiple parish councils and a number of respondents suggested areas could follow this pattern.

How a new town council could work

The consultation asked:

If the whole area was to be brought under a town council, the working party have proposed that:  The first elections would be in 2019 (and every fourth year thereafter)  There would be 29 councillors  The area would be divided into 12 wards  The new wards would match the existing borough ward boundaries

With the question being:

Q12. “To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposed electoral arrangements described above?”

Overall 930 responses were received to this question. As the table below shows 586 (63.0%) agree/strongly agree and 240 (25.8%) disagree/strongly disagree. This gives a net agreement figure of +37.2%. This overall shows reasonably strong agreement with the statement. 11.2% neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement.

(overall Strongly agree Agree Neither Disagree Strongly responses) agree/disagree disagree

12 Page 224 (overall Strongly agree Agree Neither Disagree Strongly responses) agree/disagree disagree

Number 256 330 104 128 112

% 27.5% 35.5% 11.2% 13.8% 12.0%

To what extent do you agree/disagree with the proposed electoral arrangements?(overall responses)

70%

60%

50%

40%

30% ,

20%

10% ,

0%

13 Page 225 Looking at the responses from specific groups (disabled respondents, residents just from Weymouth and residents who felt more part of their local area than the town as a whole) there was little deviation from the overall results, with between 61% and 65% agreeing or strongly agreeing with the proposed electoral arrangements.

There was little support for the suggested electoral arrangements from businesses with 5 of the 6 opposing the proposals, with the main concern being the number of councillors.

The next question asked in an open text format:

14 Page 226 Q13. If you do not agree with the proposals about the electoral arrangements please explain why.

269 responses were made to this question. The responses covered a wide range of issues. The responses are summarised below. The full comments are included as an appendix at the end.

The responses can be categorised as follows:

Category Number of respondents Too many councillors 120 One member per ward (12) 48 Too many wards/redo ward boundaries 43 Don’t need town council anyway 36 Other 32 Arrangements are too expensive 19 Two members per ward 17 4 years is too long for elections 7 Councillors should not be political 5 Have a different electoral style 5 Elections every 2 years 4 Elections every 3 years 3 Have an elected mayor 3

Responses to this question were wide ranging but strong themes emerged. With 120 mentions respondents felt strongly that the arrangement of 29 councillors was too many. 48 people suggested one member for each of the 12 wards (giving 12 members) in total whilst 24 people felt 2 members per ward (giving 24 members) was appropriate. Only three people felt there should be more than 29 councillors.

There were quite a few comments regarding the fact that respondents felt there were too many wards or that the ward boundaries should be re-examined (mentioned 43 times). People who opposed the creation of a town council reiterated their view in this question. The proposed length of time between elections (4 years) also raised some concerns, with people suggesting shorter periods. Finally there were 19 comments regarding the cost of the proposed arrangements which they felt would be too expensive.

15 Page 227 The consultation asked: Q14. “If the whole area was to be brought under a town council what should this new council be called?”

(overall Weymouth Weymouth Weymouth Weymouth responses) Town Council and Melcombe Area Town and Melcombe Regis Town Council Regis Area Council Town Council

Number 501 186 154 32

% 57.4% 21.3% 17.6% 3.7%

873 responses were received to this question. The name Weymouth Town Council (at 57.4%) received significantly more support than the other options. Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Town Council (21.3%) and Weymouth Area Town Council (17.6%) had some support but Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Area Town Council received little support.

If the whole area is to be brought under one council what should this area be called?

600

500

400

300 Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Town Council, 186

200 ,

100 Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Area Town Council, 32 0 Looking at the responses from specific groups (disabled respondents, residents just from Weymouth and residents who felt more part of their local area than the town as a whole) there was little deviation from the overall results, with between 49% and 56% feeling Weymouth Town Council was the preferred name for a potential new council.

Businesses and organisations generally supported the name of Weymouth Town Council.

Q15. Are there any other comments you have about this proposal?

333 additional comments were made in Q15. Many of the comments reiterated comments made previously in earlier questions. The main thrust of people’s comments are drawn together in the 16 Page 228 table below. There are concerns over the cost of the new council and the impact on the council tax. There are also concerns over the information available about the proposal and the consequences of the implementation. All comments are provided in full in the appendix.

Number of Category respondents Other 186 Supports a Town Council for Weymouth 42 Concerned that an additional tier of local government is 29 unnecessary/too expensive Concerned about future increases in Council Tax 25 Concerned that 29 Councillors is too many 19 Would like more information/transparency in relation to the proposal 17 and its consequences Concerned about Councillors’ expenses 9 Councillors should be more independent/less political 6

The council has a duty to take into account the impact of decisions on people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 (age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy, maternity, race, religion or belief, and sexual orientation).

Q16. Are there any positive or negative impacts that you believe the council should take into account in the decision-making process in relation to protected characteristics? If so, please describe below, and suggest any ways in which the 17 Page 229 council could reduce or remove any potential negative impact or increase any positive impact.

There were in total 187 comments included in this section. However, some people appear to have misunderstood the specifics of the question and just included general comments, often repeating previous concerns. The question was looking for positive and negative impacts on people with protected characteristics from the proposal to set up a town council for Weymouth. Responses that appeared to answer the question are summarised below. All responses are provided in the appendix.

Number of Category respondents Other 146 Opportunity to improve the lives of homeless people and other disadvantaged groups 8 Concerned that Councillors will be unrepresentative of the overall community 6 Opportunity to better support people with disabilities 3 Opportunity to improve disabled access 3 Councillors need to be trained in equality and human rights issues and legislation 2 Opportunity to improve bus services for people with disabilities, those travelling with children and the elderly 2 Concerned that the requirement to access this consultation online may alienate vulnerable people in our community 1 Failure to provide a TIC would negatively impact the elderly and disabled 1 Opportunity to better support diversity in the local community 1 Opportunity to better support people suffering with mental health issues 1 Opportunity to better support people with disabilities 1 Opportunity to better support terminally ill people in our community 1 Opportunity to better take into account the needs of young people 1 Opportunity to distribute resources more fairly 1 Opportunity to improve customer access to Town Council services for vulnerable groups 1 Opportunity to improve disabled parking 1 Opportunity to improve road safety 1 Opportunity to improve the lives of old age people 1 Opportunity to support abused women 1 About You

The tables below show the profile of people taking part in the consultation. The consultation has attracted residents covering quite a wide age range. In Weymouth itself 23.9% of the population are aged 65+. In the survey responses 36% were aged 65+. Overall in Weymouth60% of the population are aged 16-64. 61% of the responses came from people within this age bracket

18 Page 230 Under 16- 25- 35- 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+ Prefer 16 24 34 44 not to say

What was your 0 2% 6% 8% 17% 28% 27% 8% 1% 4% age on your last % birthday?

The current profile of the residents of Weymouth show 49.4% male and 50.6% female. As the table below shows the responses from males (54.6%) exceeded females (40.5%), contrary to the age profile of the town.

Male Female Prefer not to say

What is your 54.6% 40.5% 4.9% gender?

The profile of residents in Weymouth show 95.2% are White British and 4.8% Black and Minority Ethnic (BME). From those who chose to answer this question only 1.3% stated they were from a BME background. Hence, there was a below average response from BME residents.

What is your ethnic group?

White 90.6%

Mixed or multiple ethnic groups 1.0%

Asian or Asian British 0.1%

Black, African, Caribbean or Black 0.1% British

Any other ethnic group 0.2%

Prefer not to say 8.0%

19 Page 231 13.3% of respondents considered they had a disability. There is no overall figure for Weymouth. The data has been used when analysing the responses to the questions to see if people who have a disability had a different view to the majority on the key questions in the consultation.

Yes No Prefer not to say

Do you consider 13.3% 79.5% 7.2% yourself to have a disability?

20 Page 232 Appendix 1

All comments from Weymouth Community Governance Review Consultation Summer 2017 (Redacted)

1 Page 233 If you feel some areas should not be included within the town council area please say which they are and why they shouldn’t be included . "they should excluded"...should surely read, "they should be excluded". Poor proof reading can be misleading. Reverting to the Q. all areas of Weymouth should be included but is there a case for revision of current ward boundaries ? "WEYMOUTH Town Council" should include Weymouth, Portland, Chickerell, Preston, Sutton Poyntz; with everything further outlying in West Dorset as semi rural. As an ex Weymouth Estate Agent (over many years), I can confirm that this is what ALL prospective purchasers instinctively thought, especially those from away. Most considered it ridiculous that Chickerell wasn't in Weymouth!

A single town council for the whole of Weymouth would be ok if there were enough councillors to work and represent all of the original wards within this borough. If we are to have a vast reduction of councillors to cover all of Weymouth this will mean the councillors having to do this as a full-time paid position as there will be so much work for them to cover with fewer representatives to do this work. And we must keep our mayor to to represent the good of the people of Weymouth & Portland. All of them. WPBC have systematically destroyed the area. We don't need them or their tinpot decisions. another layer of government no required Another level of governance will cost the public more, 29 councillors will waste public money. Reducing 9 councils to 2 will create imbalance of financial distribution. Better to have a Radipole Parish Council Chickerell Chickerell as they have their own Town Council Chickerell, area should not be part of Weymouth

Councillors personal interests in the past have been to the detriment of the town and Portland. They have no concepts in respect of money is Redlands loaned monies and then wrote off they believe parking is a cash cow they own hotel's which are supported indirectly by tax payers money Millions written due to poor harbour management. They have not been fit for purpose DEFIBATELY GET FAR AWAY FROM PORTLAND! YOU'VE ROBBED US ENOUGH AKRWADY Each area has its own needs Fewer areas say 4 with less councillors say 15 therefore costing less for ratepayers to fund. Given the town centre 'problems' of late, the feeling over here is perhaps that Melcome Regis should remain as such and for Weymouth to regain it's former status? I am concerned that some of the existing councillors would become Town councillors - many Weymouth councillors pander to local popularism, this is one of the reasons for Weymouths decline - we need councillors who are prepared to make the difficult decisions that need to be made for the future of the town I am not too sure whether Chickerell is included in this plan. If Chickerell has its own parish council then I would say they should not be included. I Believe we should include Portland in the Town Council. 1 council would be better as PTC just costs us money with a precept. I do not believe a town council is value for money. The evidence speaks for itself.

2 Page 234 I don't have confidence in local councils to have vision and determination, because of the narrow focus of their interest. I think the main issues that affect everybody's future are regional and national, and to some extent international. Having small, localised forms of government wastes resources, in my view, that could be better used by applying them to bigger, more regional and national issues. I feel the Town Centre has a seperate idenity to the more residential areas of Weymouth. I think it is a coherent area I think that some of WDDC's current area should also be included, in particular Chickerell and some of the surrounding area. WDDC basically surrounds Weymouth and controls it's ability to expand. I think there should be one body representing the whole of Weymouth but I really have concerns on who is on this body. There are some councillors who represent their own views not that of their community

I think this could be very positive for Weymouth, the town has become rather shabby and needs better facilities such as clean new toilet blocks. The seafront and harbour are popular but the shops and shopping could be much improved with greater choice of shops. There is a lot of homelessness in the area which appears more noticeable in the town, another area to be addressed in order to improve everyone's lives, not just the shoppers! I would hope that a new single town council could better evaluate what is needed and action more quickly and efficiently than several councils trying to work together. I wonder about Sutton Poyntz - it's a village within the town... I would be happy for the W&P to be represented within one county council. No separate councils - far too many councillors

If a town council was established it should take in those such as Chickerell, Osmington etc which were ecluded under the 1933 boundary review. The exclusion of the areas has hampered growth. It depends on the personal agenda of the councillors. Some care for their communities, some are opinionated & some use the position for personal gain - thus has it always been. This will not change whether Weymouth has none, 1 or more councils it MUST include Chickerell too - which is a nonsense in West Dorset - all Chickerell residents look to Weymouth for all services and community Local businesses should be excluded The BID has not cared about residents What more people more muddle and extra cost No no No area should be excluded No exclusions no strong feelings either way None

3 Page 235 Nottington should not be included in the Weymouth Town Council as the 2 areas differ vastly in their needs. The creeping urbanisation of the green amenity spaces which are a key component of "the offer" to tourists is a source of constant lament. We run 2 small businesses both of which rely on close interaction with visitors to the area. They all comment on the positives of the rural amenity and, conversely, have nothing positive to say about Weymouth or indeed Portland - as a welcoming attraction that invites visitors to stay and learn about the area. We have an amazing local natural environment and yet it seems that W&PBC have only the most narrow self serving interests of established hoteliers and other noisy lobby groups who themselves appear hell bent on self immolation. We have the highest Council Tax in the whole bloody country and this should not be seen as a point of pride. The River Weymouth is over-abstracted to the point where it is a slow flowing unhealthy nitrate sink. Has anyone considered how to manage Radipole Lake which will turn entirely to marsh if it is allowed to continue as a sedimentary dead end? My wife and I visit dHMS Severn over the Seafood Festival weekend and we both noted that is the first time in probably 30n years that we have ventured that far onto the pier. There is a huge amount of space wasted there, which should be developed as a destination location, not remain a barren unused carpark in the hope that a ferry company may grace us with their presence once more. outer Weymouth like chickerell have different problems and people. Portland - they have their own town and council. Portland and Weymouth are both unique and need to have their own town councils. Portland as they already have their own and Chickerell as theory have one as well Portland should be excluded as it has its own town council. Portland should not be included. Portland already has a town council, and when 'lumped' together with Weymouth would get pushed out further than it is now. Portland gets little or no consideration from Weymouth now, any monies available are always allocated to Weymouth first, Portland is the "poor outsider" Portland shouldn't be lumped in with Weymouth our needs and identity are complete different ... and deserves to be treated accordingly .. current system sucks and new system would suck even more Portland! Preston and Wyle Regis should have their own parish councils. Also, you have included Chickerell as part of Weymouth. Chickerell is in West Dorset, not Weymouth and we already have a thriving Town Council should be a weymouth and portland town council Some areas should be included which are not at present within the area. Namely the Charleston area of Chickerell to Include Granby Industrial Estate and all of Lanehouse; Littlemoor and Sutton Poyntz to the junction with Coombe Valley Road. This would require the Boundary Commission to be involved and they should be asked for a hearing within say 4 years. Strictly within Weymouth Constituency sutton poyntz to have its own parish council due to the fact it is far from weymouth with very poor transport links.

The Council structure should never of been proposed for change, the Borough Council structure for Weymouth and Portland worked well until all the staff were moved over the hill to Dorchester. Now, Weymouth is run by Dorchester, Dorchester is put first for everything, and Weymouth is becoming like the poor relation. Shame on you elected Councillors for allowing this to happen. I feel a "NO" to Dorchester should exist, give us back our town.

4 Page 236 The existing local government boundary has parts of the "town" in West Dorset (e.g. Off Lane House Rocks Road and Littlemoor Road) creating a town council that does not represent these areas is to continue a problem which is only going to get worse particularly with new building off Littlemoor Road and expanding off towards Chickerell.

The Northern area of the current Borough (Upwey and Broadwey) are physically separate from the main area of the town and have a very clearly defined and distinctive character. They are much more rural in all respects with very limited services in comparison with the main town (transport, parks, gardens, sports facilities, employment, education, shops etc.) They already have their own local organisations for local events and associated fundraising and in consequence call on central support far less than the predominately tourism related town centre The Sutton Poyntz area as defined in the Neighbourhood Plan boundary could be considered as a Parish Council if agreed by a majority of the residents. The Weymouth area, because of its history and geography, is unusual in the strength of its outer areas and the very separate and distinct identity of the seafront and core. This is difficult to say with any certainty as I don't really know what they do today, what will be expected to be done by the singe unitary authority and thus what true responsibility will remain with a TC This proposal (a Town Council) would merely be replacing the existing Borough Council - why on earth would a 'Town Council' merit 29 councillors!!! They have made an absolute shambles of the Borough Council so why would it be any different as a Town Council!! This should include all areas , Chickeral and so. Those areas not currently included in WPBC area upwey, broadwey, outlying inland villages - not associated nor heavily influenced by the overiding concerns of "central" Weymouth - viz Tourism, parking, economic growth/survival V We do not need another layer of local government. We are about to see the economies of scale of moving from 9 into two and now you want us to pay, because the councillors are not going to be free, for more government and governance. We should go back to basics - Weymouth and Melcombe Regis We should have individual areas governed by local councils i.e. Wyke Regis, chickerel etc. Weymouth And Melcombe Regis

Weymouth Town Centre and Melcombe Regis has a totally different democratic lifestyle to the rest of Weymouth, other areas can stand alone and do not have to endure the drugs, drunks, loutishness, unruly behaviour of people within this area. The out of hours drinking and noise not only in the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis but also along the Esplanade during all hours of the night. The Residents of the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis have a right to enjoy their surrounding area as much as all other areas within Weymouth Boundary. There is poor attendance by the Police and Community Officers in maintaining an orderly behaiour within the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis which needs severe attention. A Town Council overall would only exasperate these problems and hide them behind the other areas in Weymouth that is more quiet during the evening and night. We have been ignored since being taken over by West Dorset so things will only get worse. Will it stop the money going east all the time? Wyke Regis and Preston could have their own Paris Councils

5 Page 237 Wyke Regis is very much between Portland and Weymouth in all respects You won't need as many councillors as you have now

Councillors have proposed a single town council for the whole area as they feel it is the

6 Page 238 best option. They have already considered and ruled out some other options. If there are other options you think better serve the community that we should consider, please explain your alternative options and tell us why you think that would be better.

* A single town council for the whole of Weymouth is the best option for both residents and business people in Weymouth. It will also add prestige to the town in the eyes of tourists and potential new businesses contemplating re location to Weymouth area. * It is also important that a Weymouth Town Council should be linked with Portland Town council as we all share a common bay and history. Many people regard Portland to be part of Weymouth and Vice Versa - to maintain a link will stimulate community cohesion. *** A Weymouth Town Council should also provide a physical presence in terms of provision of a Town and Tourist Information Centre. On line services should compliment a physical presence and vice versa. If there is no physical Town and Tourist Information point this is detrimental to residents, visitors, tourists and the business community. Failure to provide a Town Council and an Information Centre would be in breach of the Disability Act and the new Equality Act as those with a disability (physical and intellectual) and elderly residents and visitors to Weymouth would be severely and negatively impacted by loss of local services necessary for them to access mainstream activities and services. Currently the lack of a physical Information Centre already impacts on stress levels and a poorer quality of life for the above mentioned category and this should not be tolerated in a progressive and democratic society. * A cheaper alternative with a maximum of 12 "Councillors" with a very low budget and much lower precept on Council Tax A council run by business people who can see that potential in many of the preposed business ideas that would normally be turned down by the existing council. The old cinema could have been turned into a nightclub, or a casino, they turned it into flats of course. A larger joined up Council which encompasses all aspects provides a more joined up approach where there is less likelihood of information not being acted on or shared. This worked at the time for other councils I was involved in with multi council seminars I took part in and the involvement I had with Torbay. To have one part of a road in one council and the other part of a road in another is just stupid A no council question should have explanations attached as many people will not respond/read the supporting paper A single tier unitary authority is the only option worth considering A single town council for the whole of Weymouth is the best option. A single town council is best if it's run by people who live and breathe the town A single town council is the sensible and only way to proceed. It is vitally important that this "one voice" is heard and represented well when resolving issues when the power of the county will sit in the East! It would be too easy to become a poor relation in the new set-up so a strong and robust Weymouth Town Council is essential. a single town council ok as an idea but I think too many councillors and wards proposed in this document. we do not have the resources to have a top heavy management structure. we need to keep resources for services not management. weymouth needs to set a good example to all other areas in dorset A single town council would be OK provided that there is fair representation of each area within that, as shown on the map.

7 Page 239 A small number of councillors e.g. 2 to cover weymouth west and east then one to cover Portland. Two councils for Dorset County on which our councillors would sit. There are far too many local councillors and nothing seems to get done. A town Council along the lines of Portland would provide coherence. Indeed the Portland Council could be extended to cover Weymouth. This would provide greater cohesion and give Portland increased influence A town council for Weymouth & Portland would be better. it is EXTREMELY difficult to comment on setting up a Town Council without knowing what functions it should perform. A town council for Weymouth is the only answer A town council for Weymouth.... and one for Melcombe Regis A town council will require funding and will not add that personal touch that is needed. We should have parish councils reporting directly to the unitary authority. Parish councils, with their elected representatives (councillors) would be more interested in very local issues as opposed to political decisions. A town or parish council will be essential. We must have a voice amongst the 'big boys' of Bournemouth & Poole. Agree with single Town Council All areas have completely different difficulties you can't lump them all together An alternative would be to have paid community leaders for different areas of the borough of Weymouth that are solely responsible for their own area. As a resident of Preston, I do feel this has been a neglected area in terms of development, I would feel better represented by a local Preston council. As long as us o Portland are nowhere near tbis Bearing in mind the lack of expertise of Town Councillors and unwillingness to accept expert advise e.g. Warning not to Building more housing on high risk flooding areas such as Littlemoor & Preston - Weymouth & Portland Council should not make these decisions alone. Dorset Council environmental experts must have more influence over less well informed. Being run by county council with no town council will save costs allowing more money to be put into making Weymouth better & other communities in the county better too. By breaking areas up people will end up paying extra tax, take Portland for example the town council is a useless waste of money that is a drain on the island By telling us this you are trying to influence our decision. Can we have a joint Weymouth and Portland and Chickerell town council? Combine with Dorchester Town Council. Community panels of local residents from each district would be better. Town councils are a waste of time (and I used to be a councillor.). Councillors have presided over a disastrous decade for Weymouth. Therefore their best option should be disregarded

8 Page 240 Councillors have proposed what is best for them and the shortest route to maintaining the status quo. Rural areas such as Nottington (and the Way valley) should have independent representation with a locally endorsed development plan. We should not be treated as the Weymouth hinterland subjugated to the urban requirement to build more houses and extract more money from households in order to support morally abhorrent expansive statism. Councillors may believe a single town council may meet their personal ambitions but this is unlikely to be best for the population as a whole. Within the proposed unitary structure all the key responsibilities will be managed centrally. The new town council or the alternative of a group of parish councils will have the same powers and responsibilities, and these responsibilities are very local. Smaller parish councils will be better able to represent and manage these local issues than a larger town council which will inevitably prioritse central concerns. Where issues are Weymouth area wide, co-operation is the obvious answer. One would imagine that most of the parishes would have unpaid councillors receiving minimal or no expenses, very few staff, if any, and a part-time clerk/RFO. The exception would be the central core which may have more staff and a fulltime clerk all funded by higher level of council tax and busines contributions. To summarise: more representative, more efficient, cheaper. Cut the number of councillors Definitely not the status quo. Hopefully unitary status will be approved soon for DCC. Why not merge Weymouth and Portland into a single town council? District area ward councils (eg. Wyke Area Parish Council) should be elected and would then send representatives to the Town council. Do the existing ward boundaries have equal populations? Is there an opportunity to use a different voting system? Dorset Council only to save money. Either Weymouth and Portland should have one town council, as we are essentially one area. You can't exit Portland without going through Weymouth. We should also explore not having a town council at all, and leaving the management of the town up to the county council. Everyone should pull together Geographically and historically there is only one option, Portland retains its Town Council and Weymouth has a Town Council

Having worked for Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, Dorset County Council and the Association of Parish and Town Councils, I find it hard to believe anyone is even considering this option. Town Councils have limited powers and little influence. I am very sorry to see these new plans for local government in Dorset anyway, but quite worried that Weymouth may be left with nothing more than a parish council looking after it. The other Town Councils in Dorset cover considerably smaller areas and do not have such diverse issues as Weymouth does. I feel that this is an erosion of local democracy. An area containing a population of around 65,000 and supporting the needs of a couple of million in the summer needs a higher level of representation. I suggest there should be a municipal council covering Dorchester, Weymouth and Bridport. Similar but smaller than poole/bournemouth and a separate rural council. So that the needs of both populations are addressed. Otherwise this march towards centralisation leaves democracy high and dry I agree it is the best option

9 Page 241 I agree with rhe Councillors I agree with the councillors - a single town council - but without the trappings and robes. I agree with the councillors on this point I agree with the single town council proposal I am for anything for Weymouth but we always seem to miss out to the East of the county I am happy that decisions to be made at county level, where decisions will not be hampered by councillors that are incapable of seeing the bigger picture. I am happy with the way that the community is currently run and do not believe in or agree with a change I am not in favour of any alternative.

I am sick of hearing various Councils` proposals to amalgamate/sell off certain services or join forces with other councils to `save money`. Once the proposal has been delivered, there is another proposal to go back to the status quo, or having one`s cake and eating it, costing the taxpayer more money. Having paid out vast sums of taxpayers` money in redundancy payments, these same people are re-appointed. I am sick of hearing that the various councils have `no money` and council tax has to increase substantially year on year, and then hundreds of thousands of pounds appear for new appointments, like a harbour manager and a town centre manager. Do you think taxpayers are stupid and should be treated with contempt? You had a Borough Council and CHOSE to move to Dorchester, deliberately leaving the town poorly served. If this is another ruse to put up council tax to secure more money for executives and councillors, I am totally against it. Money does not grow on trees and taxpayers do not have the funds to keep paying for your next little project.

10 Page 242 I am totally opposed to the whole idea of WPBC being absorbed within a Unitary Authority for a great many reasons and consider that the creation of a Town Council for Weymouth will not in any way fill the void. The whole idea of the creation of one/two unitary authorities to serve the whole of Dorset will be a huge mistake, which will not result in the savings or type of governance which Weymouth/Portland residents and businesses deserve. A third way should have been proposed whereby DCC and other county-wide organisations such as DWP assume responsibility for the single management and delivery of a wider range of services in order to ensure efficiency savings and avoid unnecessary duplication of service provision, with the remit of WPBC slimmed down, but not limited to that of a 'Town Council' in the traditional sense. It follows that the new 'lesser' authority should maintain responsibility and accountability for a wider range of services than those normally associated with the remit of a traditional 'Town Council' in order to account for the relative uniqueness of the Borough in comparison to neighbouring authorities, especially as anything less would lead to significant social exclusion given the particular political and economic dynamics of the area and its over-reliance on Tourism. The absorption of the Borough into a unitary authority would be counter-productive in the long-run. Clearly there is an argument to dispense with Portland Town Council under such a model in order to foster greater social cohesion, but I would be reluctant over the creation of a single Town Council (as supposed to a 'lesser' council) across the two areas given the exclusion that many other communities would feel elsewhere in the Borough, especially within more affluent communities. Should the alternative model which I am advocating fail to materialise, it would be important to ensure that a Town Council governing Weymouth is inclusive to the whole of the Weymouth population; not just the residents of the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis in order to ensure the preservation of resident's identity, notwithstanding the many other problems which would result. I am very concerned that councillors have already considered and ruled out some other options,,,,Which options were they? If you want to better serve the community you shouldn't rule any options out before asking the people that you are supposed to represent.! You are ELECTED councillors. I believe a single town council for the whole area is best option - we all use the Town Centre and need to be involved in discussions about that. I believe a single town council is the way forward. I believe having a single town council is important to ensure the future needs and development of Weymouth are considered locally by people who have the community's best interests as a priority. I am concerned as others that Weymouth has a Hun council and this hinders progress. Councillors spend more time arguing and undermining each other and have a duty to work together for the good of the town. Let's rid ourselves of political parties and have Weymouth governed by a non political group who truly work together to develop and improve the town and work for the benefit of all residents. I believe that the main town should have a council but that the Northern part (Upwey and Broawey) should form a separate parish. It is for consideration that the residents of the hamlets of Bincombe and Friar Waddon should also be consulted if they wish to be a part of the new parish. I bought into the idea of replacing multiple councils with a unitary authority Why would you want to create anorher one?

11 Page 243 I do not believe a town council would make any difference to Weymouth. I would not support a town council and I certainly do not want to pay anymore on my Council Tax in order to support one. I do not believe there should be a town council. The whole idea of merging councils was to make savings. If you have multiple councils delivering services they can not be held solely responsible. I do not think that there should be a Town Council at all. I think that the current Borough Councillors want a single town council to perpetuate themselves. I favour small & simple local government, rather than continuing to have layers of local government.

I don't believe a Town Council is necessary. If the new unitary authority goes ahead, the current functions of Weymouth & Portland Borough Council will simply pass to that authority and local governance will continue as at present. The only thing that will have changed is there wouldn't be a piece of local government with Weymouth's name on it, which is a poor justification for another costly layer of bureaucracy. I feel it is imperative that Weymouth retain a representative council to look after the town and Weymouth residents interests. I feel it should be one council - Weymouth and Portland I feel that local communities should have an option of having their own parish council. This is more democratic and would better serve local people. I refer you to my previous answer, restore a full and active Weymouth and Portland Borough Council. Run by LOCALLY eelected members, staffed by LOCALLY sourced employees, delivering for LOCALS. What we need is a Weymouth and Portland Peoples Party, by the people for the people - don't dismiss it - it's coming!.. I think a single town council would make sense. Weymouth needs someone to fight its corner and a lot of regeneration in the town centre. It makes me sad seeing it so run down despite the beautiful beach. I haven't lived in Weymouth very long so longer- time residents may have different opinions I think a town council is best, but democratically there should be an option for residents to agree to do without one.

I think councillors should look at the border between Chickerell and Weymouth particularly where the Granby Industrial estate is situated which is currently in West Dorset and consider how they could work together; there is the opportunity to do so, West Dorset will presumably be in much the same situation as Weymouth Borough. The proposal of 2 councillors for each existing ward seems to take no account of the proposed unitary authority and would perpetuate the complications of the present 2 tier system; some small scale local representatives for contact would seem the way forward.

12 Page 244 I think that Weymouth should have it's own autonomous town council as local issues are then addressed, sometimes it feels as if Weymouth is overlooked by larger councils, it seems to be developing into an area of deprivation, and has particular issues that don't apply to other towns in Dorset. I feel that a local more focussed council will have a better understanding of those issues and be able to effectively deal with them, raise awareness in a larger arena, and be more accessible by the public, and more accountable for things that occur in the Weymouth area. I think the proposal (as above) is the best option; indeed, the sole, viable option. It would create a muddle, an administrative nonsense, let alone 'Divide Et Impera' (Divide and Rule) if Weymouth had four or five separate parish councils. I think the single town council is just another layer of bureaucracy and another way of creating 'jobs for the boys'. They don't really contribute to the community, usually get paid excessive wages and expect people like us to pay increased taxes to support them. I think the town council should work with community drives such as Weyforward and seek to improve facilities which are pretty poor currently... car parking charges are too high and are off putting to visitors and locals alike.. Particularly the decision to ban dogs on the beach for longer each year; it is the dog walkers that keep the town going in the Winter!

I think you need 'normal' every day people on the council who have lived in Weymouth a long time and our passionate about it. NOT jumped up idiots who are only in it for themselves as they think they are gods gift! At present our town is a dump & full of skanky drug addicts and alcoholics making the esplanade & other beautiful areas look horrid - nothing gets down about them. The traffic along the seafront is appalling. The parking costs are a joke. NEED I GO ON ABOUT ALL THE NEGATIVES OF OUR LOVEKY TOWN???? I thought the whole point of a unitary authority was to eliminate bureaucracy and duplication of efforts. Why would you then want to create another council. Makes no sense whatsoever I will support this if it means that we will not need as many councillors as we have at the moment.

I wonder if the problems facing the centre of town (shops and esplanade) are slightly different from those outside of that area. (E.g. homelessness and alcohol related problems.) Another option may be to have different people be responsible for bringing areas of concern to the new town council. I hope that would be the case, since what I don't want to see are the town problems moving further from the town but still being there. I would like a single Town Council ( with a small amount of input from people as the subject of the meeting on the day requires ). I would like No Council as an option, as the existing one has done nothing of value for the town or community for years eg the pavilion being run poorly for years, the harbour crumbling, car parking issues, lack of entertainment in the summer months. And really its total lack of focus on the community as a whole.

13 Page 245 I would like to see those areas within Chickerell Parish which are effectively part of the urban area of Weymouth transferred to be in the Weymouth Town Council area (The developed areas west of Lanehouse Rocks Road inc the Value House site, Fraser Avenue, Granby and Charlestown and Cobham Drive). Similarly those areas north of Littlemoor Road that are already developed as an extension to Weymouth together with those areas shorty to be developed. The exclusion of these areas from Weymouth retains a boundary which now lacks credibility and these areas should be supporting the town of which they form part rather than their revenue going elsewhere. I would prefer as little localised government as possible, while the national government should encourage the participation of local people in more real, campaigning democracy, such as through interest groups and smaller businesses. I would prefer to have a Single town council , so that we have complete control of our own town.

If a Town council is created I feel it is important that it really represents the residents of the town properly so the make up of the town council is important. Historically there have been some very poor decision taken by the old W&PBC (e.g. taking away the roundabouts, lack of spending on some key infrastructure like clearing public pathways of undergrowth and spending unnecessarily on things like lazer beams and replacing fairy lights with ugly modern lampposts. All the above has damaged our main asset, the town and beach itself.

I'm not sure the current democratic arrangements ("councillors") should pre-determine the future democratic arrangements. I suspect the role and effectiveness of local government will go through very close scrutiny in the coming years after the Grenfell Tower disaster and this scrutiny will have an impact on the model that Dorset adopts. For Weymouth I believe a town council for the whole town should exist but this should complement local community bodies (not sure if "council" is the entity) to deal with the specific needs of communities. Littlemoor's needs are likely to differ from Upwey's needs and so on. I think the process should consider whether current models of local democracy are suitable or whether there are alternatives. For example, does the Localism Act have provision for local governance? I'm sure that PORTLAND TOWN COUNCIL would accept the transfer of W&PBC assets and take on the management of the Weymouth area. There would be no need to form a new council for Weymouth as PORTLAND is already in existance In a previous consultation, we have voted for a Unitary council. There is no need for a town council of any sort. In response to merging councils to save money this suggestion is to add back yet another layer of local government. There is no sense to this suggestion. Include Chickerell. The boundary is historical and makes no sense. The border divides roads and communities Individual town councils that can engage with residents and be accountable to those residents. Not share councils that have no insight into the individual areas. Why make one big council, when councils should serve those they represent.

It should be the borough boundary less Portland, which is what is proposed I believe.

14 Page 246 Its another layer of expense with no power other than flower beds. Why does it need 29 people. Just run it from the main council and save the money and lower council tax. It's fine the way it is Just ask the public not one sided councillors. Just get rid of the entire waste of oxygen thieves. Keep it smaller more localised made up of people who better understand the specific needs of the areas. These people can better represent and listen to residents while helping along quotas and needs that need to be met nationally . So wrong that people who are not a the heart of important decisions can make them Keeping the town council as a whole and not separating as this is the best way forwards. leave it as it is. bigger is not better or cheaper what you gain one way and lose in another. less people in different councils mean insulated views. Learn to work together as partners for the good of all area's and not just the town center. Leave it to the Unitary Council. They couldn't do any worse than Weymouth and Portland Borough Council have done. Let the county council deal with it all Weymouth Council are rubbish just want to waste our money Local borough comittees where residents can have more say Local parish style councils to continue. One for weymouth, one for portland etc Make Sure Weymouth does not loose at to other areas

Maybe if went to one council, and Weymouth and the other areas in Dorset. To Have a reprosentative that speaks to many body (New Council) about issues and feelings and views and ideas from each area. This would help keep the identity of each area, and support them. Think that my worry is that some areas will not be support as well. Because new council to far remove from these areas. To Know these areas and it community needs and customs. Minimise the number of Councils and reduce overlap and costs by so doing. Increase effectiveness with minimum number of Councils. My observations on Boundaries as previous. The responsibilities should also be carefully considered. Weymouth should go for the maximum allowed. Include sea front, beach and car parks, and parks. The Unitary should have strong District Committees and no Cabinet governance My one concern is that we will be paying double council tax. My preference is for a town council, failing this it would be essential to convene a number of Parish Councils including one for Upwey. My thoughts are as previously written. N/A n/a New build housing due to start at Littlemoor (bincombe) will sit in East Dorset which is crazy. We should take this opportunity to subsume the portion of land from the north of Preston to NE tip of Upwey into Weymouth TC. This will preserve TC interest on all land south of the ridgeway. New young fresh blood with new ideas

15 Page 247 No No alternative options No alternative options to suggest. No Big Town Council - councillors are simply looking after their expenses - they do not represent people's views - just their own No comment to make at this time No council No council or a town council for Weymouth and a town council for Portland with equal funding No I think that a town council is the best option for Weymouth as a whole No other options for proposal no town council no town council - it's unnessary. funny how councillors ruled out this option! No town council at all

No Town Council is my option. We voted to amalgamate councils within Dorset & get rid of the ineffective W&P Council which allowed the harbour to crumble into the sea, not have a TIC, as well as not utilise the pavilion over a number of years (Note: How well its doing now under a community driven project with effective management & enthused operators in such a short period!) amongst many other things..... we dont need one No town council. But the turkeys are not going to vote for Xmas. No town council. Every extra layer of bureaucracy adds a level of delay, expenditure and confusion. None None None None Not as many councillors. Opportunity to re define The existing ward boundaries Not sure a town council would really address local areas in Weymouth as it is such a large area made up of small villages and parishes. Very suspicious as to where council tax would go and how accountable town councillors would be- is this just another layer of bureaucracy and expenses for too many councillors who the public do not know and who do very little? Numerous separate parishes. One to focus on town centre and all that entails such as tourist industry, how to make the town look better etc, and a second (or more) to focus on the residential areas. Of course, I think the present full Borough Council should continue to exist. It should not be subsumed into a full Dorset Council, losing its powers. A parish council has no power to make decisions in its own area.

16 Page 248 On paper a single council makes sense, however after sitting through an existing borough council meeting I despaired for the future of democracy. Party Politics split the councillors into opposing factions and there was little objective discussion. I was shocked at the patronising, arrogant attitude towards the public. If this is allowed to continue a single Town Council could run the town down, sell Weymouth's assets cheap, give themselves permission to build new houses over the entire region & get rich - with NO accountability. Against all logic I would therefore propose that every area has their own parish council to fight for their own interests. On Portland we pay extra for the privelege of having a council with the Portland Precept. The extra cost of Weymouth town council should not be funded from the unitary budget or we end up paying more One joined up council should be cost effective One of the primary reasons for the two council option is to save money. I support this wholeheartedly. The risk with creating a town council for Weymouth is that you replace one large cost with another. I would support a town council BUT ONLY if it's scope / areas of responsibility are limited, cannot expand or grow and do not and will not in any way compete with the rural unitary authority. One rural council with quality representatives and officials ought to be able to administer our small community of quarter of a million souls One Town Council that each District should have a representative on council to make their local issues known. With having one County Council Weymouth could end up not having no say in the County Council and not get a good share of the Council Budget and other Benefits. As a Summer Season Town we would have to compete with other seaside towns like ie; Lyme Regis, Bridport and other Big towns, for money to support. Our present borough council does not serve the community as well as it should thus it should not have the opportunity of 'morphing' itself into a town council. Outlying areas such as Wyke/Lanehouse/Downclose, Upwey and Broadwey, would be better off with their own Parish Councils, Take the case of Upwey/Broadwey for an example they could later combine with Bincombe /and/or other councils to provide a more influential council for their area which would serve them better than being tied with the urban problems of Weymouth Parish councils so that Dorchester has more control Past councils and current ones have failed this town bitterly. I was born and bred in Weymouth and witnessed a shocking deterioration in so many areas,the blinkered decisions that have been made really does beggar belief. We need a new Town Council that has the common sense and ability to re-vitalise this beautiful town of ours and we need it sooner rather later. Portland Town Council is barely viable. It has no professional, legal or technical staff; few resources, barely sufficient finance to run itself, and is unable to carry out any worthwhile functions. There would be no advantage in Weymouth having a similar setup, so no Weymouth Town Council would be the best option. Possibly a small number of people from each area of Weymouth to discuss issues which relate to their own area on a regular basis. A representative, who is also on the town council can report back/inform. Possibly a whole Weymouth town council but maybe 2 smaller ones for Upwey and Preston

17 Page 249 Prefer to have a local person dealing with local issues Preston and Wyle Regis should have their own parish councils See comment on previous page see previous comment

Services are needed unique to the area. It has been shown that with a County Council, there are areas that just aren't efficiently handled by an overall authority. Dorchester Council is a good example and Portland Council is another. They are effective for their respective areas. For example, the Waste Partnership would not be able to fully sustain local care by virtue of their scope of operations. You need a dog warden or gardening/planting and upkeep of toilets - these are local issues. Single council Single council represents better value for money and a joined up approach to the management of Weymouth as a single entity. Single town council seems to be the best option. Single town council. take Weymouth and remove it and replace as a suburb of Dorchester The community should be treated more holistic. Current councils are wasting money and are defiantly not working to improve or help build a community with weymouth or Portland - the twin is a shambles. This twin has history and historical things - i.e.: the Plague, this alone could be used from tourism. Portland - have you seen Castletown? Embarrassing. The current Borough Council arrangement is the best option. If councillors have voted to abolish this for financial reasons then Weymouth doesn't deserve a town council in its place. The exiting Council in my opinion has overseen Weymouth going down hill since tthe Olympics. The vote was for a unitary coucil. Therefore as the current one has been so ineffective don't bother with a town council. I have witnessed how Portland is ignored already. Therefore I believe it would be a waste of money and just another ineffective talking shop. The object of a unitary authority was to save money, by creating another layer this saving will be reduced, also it seems that your preferred route means we would still be paying for 29 councillors plus all their expenses. A saving of only 2. Plus no doubt extra cost for a mayor or other head. The unitary authority will no doubt have Weymouth people transferred to them, they can fight for anything from that position. The priorities of the residents are very different to the needs of the businesses and visitors to the town centre. Weymouth has two quite clear sides to the town The structure of the town council(s) needs to represent this. I would like to suggest that there are two councils: Melcome Regis Council - representing Melcome Regis and surrounding areas including the harbour & esplanade (and possibly the Granby too). This council should have a business minded remit with responsiblity for tourism and town centre vitality. Weymouth Town Council - representing all the residential areas - representing the residents needs and priorities. The town council have proved themselves continually self serving. There should not be a town council leaving decisions for a larger authority, less connected to the communities it serves

18 Page 250 The town councillors shoud be made up from a representitive from each area of weymouth (wyke, broadwey,radipole, littlemoor etc) so as to get an even representation for the concerns of the borough

The town has suffered from decades of poor management by councillors and council staff with many mistakes made (latest fiasco - sale of North Quay offices.) Management of Weymouth and its assets should be handed over to professionals, which presumably the staff of a large Unitary Authority will be. I have no confidence that a new "Weymouth Town Council" which will consist of existing councillors will be competent. Get the professionals in top spruce up the town. The whole point of a Unitary Authority is to reduce the number of councils and councillors this proposal would just change the name of the Coincil and keep self serving councillors in post. Paid elected officers such as a Mayor and paid support would be a better idea.

There are to many councillors who have their own interests at heart, a new council should be controlled by independent members who can only take up position if they have knowledge in their departments traffic situation, licensing, holticulture etc. There is no real sensible alternative to a single Town Council for the whole of Weymouth There needs to be a very high degree of transparency in what the single town council do and how they reach their decisions. Possibly a completely voluntary community group would be better. there should be local respective that no there arear There should only be one Town Council and that should be called "Weymouth Town Council". This should be made up of the existing wards with a Councillor from each ward being the elected representative and serving on the W.T.C . It is imperative to keep control of our own requirements and budgets. There must not be an uninterested body of Councillors managing the affairs of the various Parishes of Weymouth. Local knowledge is everything and those elected local Councillors will be able to make valued decisions and collectively sound decisions for the Town as a whole.

Too many councillors proposed. Given that they have just taken extra expenses, I don't think we get value for money. I don't think we should be contemplating paying all the proposed councillors (29) these expenses in the present financial climate. Fewer councillors or I'd vote for no town council at all. They don't listen to us anyway. E.g. Laser lights, selling off public toilets, etc. We only need one councillor per area i.e. 12. Too many forms of government, consider one council sufficient Town Council OK - but - maybe eliminate some of the "super-numary" officer posts and reduce Councillor numbers ("cleaner", more efficient, maybe more effective and responsive) Town or parish councils should still exist. Two councils to cover Dorset is enough. Weymouth, and indeed Portland, does not need its own council. It is just another layer of bureaucracy which will cost rate payers more money. Perhaps a committee made up of business leaders plus our county council representatives. Untill they have persons elected whose personal interests do not cloud their judgements it should be run centrally

19 Page 251 We definitely need to have a good, thorough, accountable and active local representational 'body' for our lovely town of Weymouth. Not having a body to represent the running of our town and local area would be absolute and suicidal madness, and our historic town would gradually fade into an insignificant little part of Dorset; we'd have no voice about what happens in our area, and we'd be 'directed' from on high, by some remote, impersonal council who frankly couldn't give a toss about our town. We don't need another tier of government, this defeats the object of amalgamating the nine councils which is to save money. Duties will all be covered by the new council and don't need to be duplicated in Weymouth.

We have a poor Borough Council, a town council would be the same but even weaker. This is meant in terms of actually getting anything done. Eyes are on Dorchester whilst Weymouth is left to decay, a town council would be even less proactive in improving the area for residents. It will also cost the residents more money for a poorer service. I think it's also a way for Councillors to keep getting their expenses as they're not likely to get a seat with any new unitary body. We have too many councillors for our small town. Nothing ever seems to get decided or done by the council so we have nothing to lose by scrapping the council and being run as part of Dorset, we might even save some money by reducing the layers of bureaucracy. We need a town council

We need good leadership, not what we have at the moment, for the town with a clear sense of direction which will make the town great. Just changing the name will make no difference. I fear there will be little or no recognizable benefits. Make me wrong.

We need local management who should understand nautical reasons for the whole of Weymouth Bay as well as the town together with the ever increasing risks of flooding. Rising tidal heights and having the smallest tidal range in Europe means costly expenditure on quays and sea frontages. Commercial activities produced good Harbour revenues in the past, a section of the existing councllora fail to understand harbour law. We must have local management We need to have a group of people elected by the town to make decisions that best serve the community and have the needs of the town in their best interests to ensure that when work is needed it is done and no unnecessary work is undertaken wasting money We should be looking at Weymouth as part of a bigger picture DORSET Currently the town needs complete regeneration- it is abysmal/ sad with nothing to keep our next generation here! we should have a Weymouth and Portland Town Council We're going to be a Unitary Authority, why would there be need for umpteen Town Councils. Weymouth and portland Chickerell Wyke etc need to be together. wards for voting enlarged and reduced in number. The number of councillors top heavy in number so minimise.also make councillors answerable to independent government body to stop local officials doing things out of self interest.

20 Page 252 Weymouth desperately needs someone, anyone to focus on it! It could be such a beautiful area but no one looks at it through fresh eyes. Park street area is seen by people arriving by train, looks awful, drugs and drink and criminal activities need a stronger focus. The town centre looks so uninviting. The bid seem to do a fab job with events but we need a thriving shopping centre. There is so much more to Weymouth then just the sea and beach!! Weymouth has had its own municipal authority since 1571. I would have preferred to retain the existing borough council but if that is not possible a strong town council would be the next best option. Weymouth having it's own town council would be better. Weymouth would have a voice and hopefully, would have some money objected in to it and make it more welcoming and have a brighter future. Dorchester has already had money ploughed in to it and now more is proposed... what about Weymouth, or is it the intention to run it in to the ground? Weymouth needs a strong, positive identity And I believe a single town council should provide our voice and further the interests of the town and fight our corner.i feel extremely anxious about being swallowed up, i.e. A small town in a large unitary authority "just the town on the other side of the hill". We do not want to be left begging for scraps from the big financial table. Weymouth needs a town council more than ever because if we did have one then we would still have functioning public toilets. It's ridiculous some of the decision made on weymouth town centre by people out of touch and don't know what's best for an up and coming seaside town. No tourist information is a joke! Weymouth needs their own Coucillors to look after the interests of our town ,but I do believe it should non political ,just members who have the interest of the Community at the heart of everything Weymouth should have a town council as the people of weymouth would be represented Weymouth should have its own town council ~ full stop!.

Weymouth Town Centre and Melcombe Regis has a totally different democratic lifestyle to the rest of Weymouth, other areas can stand alone and do not have to endure the drugs, drunks, loutishness, unruly behaviour of people within this area. The out of hours drinking and noise not only in the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis but also along the Esplanade during all hours of the night. The Residents of the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis have a right to enjoy their surrounding area as much as all other areas within Weymouth Boundary. There is poor attendance by the Police and Community Officers in maintaining an orderly behaiour within the Town Centre and Melcombe Regis which needs severe attention. A Town Council overall would only exasperate these problems and hide them behind the other areas in Weymouth that is more quiet during the evening and night. We have been ignored since being taken over by West Dorset so things will only get worse. what about Portlan What ever structure is finally decided upon and should be purely administrative and preferably a political.

21 Page 253 What is the point of reducing the number of local bodies only to then increase that number again 'just because everyone has got one'. A better option would be to remove the other town councils and save more money in those areas too

What powers will this Town Council have? Portland Town Council has existed for years without any authority to do anything, but has cost the residents of Portland an additional precept each year - so how can a Weymouth Town Council make things cheaper? Will monies be devolved from DCC? Will they have ultimate decision making? If so, then a Weymouth Town Council will be completely pointless - and costly, just as Portland Town Council is Why am I finding this out through Facebook if it's so important, more backdoor legislation ? Why bother merging the council levels to one Dorset authority, to then replace town councils? Expensive waste of money. Either keep it as it is, or scrap ALL town councils. why do you want a town council???? another layer of bureaucracy ! Why must there be an "alternative"? Slimming down governmental structures has never worked. Local governing bodies work better for the communities they represent. If any change were to be made I would recommend a governmental wide scheme (MPs down) would be, the representative must LIVE in the area they take charge of. This allows local knowledge and actual needs to be heard. With regard to parish councils, I support the creation of a parish council incorporating Preston and Sutton Poyntz, Overcombe and Bowleaze. This would create an economically sustainable and commercially active community.

Would a consultation group/committee as part of the unitary be an option. They would be tasked with consulting the residents of the area on issues that concern them and ensure these are considered at full council. This would reduce costs of setting up a full town council. A centre would be needed to allow residents the opportunity to engage, not all are line yet! Perhaps this could be used wider and reduce the need for other town/borough councils, reducing costs further WPBC are not fit for purpose....Central control would be far better and ought to cut tax payers liability. Wyke Regis should be included.

22 Page 254 If you do not agree with the proposals about the electoral arrangements please explain why 1 councillor per ward. Elections every 3 years 1) Cost 2) Too large a number of members 3) duplication of decision making process 4) A lower tier authority would attract "b list"members with a parochial attitude or vested interest. 12 Councillors - one per ward- would be more than enough 12 Councillors (one for each ward) would be enough to fulfil the reduced role of a super parish council under the new local government arrangements - minimise the gravy train. 12 councillors , 1 for each ward 12 into 29? Why not 24 to give each ward two councillors that would be much fairer on every ward 12 Wards = 12 councillors. Weymouth does not need 29. 12 wards and 12 councillors only. 12 wards and 29 councillors isn't enough information, what would be the split. Are certain wards getting more councillors? I'd propose looking at boundaries and having a 13th ward, (or combining two smaller wards into one for an 11th) and only having a single representative per ward. 12 wards is too large. I consider that 5 or 6 is sufficient. 12 wards is too many and would no doubt lead to disagreements between wards. 29 councillors seems a large number when real decision making will be made by DCC in Dorchester. So I feel that 15 to 19 (an odd number) is sufficient and rather than splitting it into wards it is better to split it by function. e.g. Crime prevention, infractructure & roads, housing and urban development etc 12 wards should equal 12 councillors - too many cooks spoil the broth/ 29 councillors are too many. Town councils traditionally look after cemeteries, allotments, public areas etc. I would have thought 12-15 council members would suffice. 29 councillors for 12 wards seems excessive. Does this just water down their role and do residents need 1:2000 respentation when less than 30% vote and probably less than 1-3% contact councillors. Save a few quid and reduce the red tape by keeping 12 councillors for 12 wards or potentially add a few more for high occupancy wards 29 councillors for 12 wards seems too many. Surely only one per ward is needed. 29 councillors for such a small town is too many. Especially when one considers the greatly reduced responsibilities the Council will have. 29 councillors in 12 wards would represent a very large town council, almost as large as the current borough council, however, a parish/town council has a lot less responsibilities and less councillors might be preferable as a result. 29 councillors is far too many and will lead to accusations of over spending and duplication - there should be only one per ward 29 councillors is to many why 29 for 12 wards 1 per ward will be plenty after all they will have no power 29 councillors is too many 29 councillors is too many for a town council 29 Councillors is too many. 24 max 29 Councillors sounds a disaster in the making. Nothing will ever get done, constant wrangling over issues, committees and yet more committees being formed, endless talking and nothing will happen. Lots of putting off whilst expensive consultants tell them what they cannot afford with our money.

23 Page 255 29 councillors with their own agendas when you could have half that and save a fortune 29 is to many in number and needs to be reduced in size by amalgamating some of the wards. This reduced number would provide representation but also be value for money. 29 is to many, cut them down to 12 29 seems rather a lot of councillors 29 would mean the same as now. Let's get rid of some of the people who have held Weymouth back for years. 1 rep for each ward. 4 years is too long 4 years too long for re-election on local level 29 councillors/12 wards too much for a town the size of Weymouth - more unity 4years, to long between elections 2years would be better 6 wards, why so many Councillors, how about 12 or 15 at most? PLUS - can we get more Councillors who actually know something about small business, preferably tourism-related and who are NOT totally swayed or dominated by their officers - ie Councillors who actually represent the electors and NOT the unelected officers! A large number of councillors for a relatively small place A 'replacement' financial burden by retaining 29 Councillors, 12 wards, etc. A town the size of Weymouth cannot justify 29 councillors. Therefore bigger wards need to be considered. A target of 12 councillors seems reasonable to me as a maximum. A town the size of Weymouth does not need 12 wards, or 29 councillors. Absolute waste of money. The current council does very little to enhance the local community & the town has gone stale & gone backwards over the past few decades Agree with proposals except for the number of Councillors. 29 far too many. Should be lean and mean at one per ward = 12. Agree, but feel there should be fewer Councillors Another cost which we can't afford. We're wishing to cut costs not add more! Another layer of local government which the new proposals seek to eradicate! There is no valid reason for the town council to be retained or resurrected. Area councilors living within the local community know more about local requirements than an individual from a completely different area. As at q11 , are the ward boundaries based on equal population numbers? Do they consider where more houses are ring built? What about a different voting system? As I have explained previously there should be no town council but a split up of Weymouth into wards. Town councils do not serve the local population at all well. Catering only for areas they live in. As previously stated as stated previously there are already far too many councillors. If we are forced to have a council then just divide the town into three wards i.e. town, east and west. 2 councillors for each with one outside chair selected from the church i.e. no political persuasion. As the current set up shows Weymouth councillors would hold a majority and make decisions with little regard for Portland At the present time there are already far too many councillors and far too many wards. As I see it everything would be just the same as it is now - so no improvement then! Because I don't agree with the proposal for a town council. Looking at what's suggested above, it looks like W&PBC by another name! 29 Councillors? This surely isn't a serious consideration.

24 Page 256 Because I think the area requires extension to represent the whole of urban Weymouth. Because it will be an ineffective legislature wih no real powers and even less effective than the current Weylth Council Because they are not doing their jobs properly hardly and maintenance is being done they are just wasting our money Because we don't need a town council But I think chickerell should be part of the area too change for change sake, not needed or wanted look as the mess changes have already made( dorset waste partnership) and the cost of change and waste waste waste. cheaper on lunch maybe. Name your either one name or don't bother to go to one council Change is going to happen, but no need to make unnecesssary changes - wards need not change. Chickerell should come under Weymouth & Portland, it has no relevance to the Dorchester. Councillors are incompetent cut down on the number of councilors, join smaller areas together and they should be held more responsible for their actions, if the do well for the area then they should be rewarded. This sould be decided by a voting system. Do not agree to a town council. Do not agree with a new Town Coucil Do not agree with the proposal to have 29 councillors, the number of councillors representing each would should be 2 per ward. Do not consider a town council is needed Do not need money wasted on town councillors when a county council will suffice. Do not see the need for a town council Do we need so many Councillors? There is a danger of recreating the Borough Council, but without the executive powers of the Borough Council, might just become a huge talking -shop !would Do we really need 29 councillors? I think fewer could be more pro-active don't see a need for 29 persons to represent. if 12 wards, which I accept at this stage, need only 2 per ward thus 24 councillors. If requiring a deciding vote at any time then chair would take. Don't think you need as many as 29 councillors as much work will be undertaken by the new unitary authorities. Max of 2 per ward. Each ward should have one councillor. Plus a chair and a rep from the rural unitary authority ONLY. So, 14 councillors NOT 29. I see absolutely no need whatsoever for so many councillors. Elections should be every 2 years Elections should be every three years. every 4 years in first instance is too long; should be a pilot before making it policy to have elections every 4 years. I would suggest pilot is 2 years. Far to many councillors now. Far too many councillors proposed. Eight to twelve is the maximum needed. Far too many councillors, 29 to represent a small town is ludicrous Far too many councillors. Fewer councillors and lower costs Fewer councillors would be better For the relative Trivial nature of the work the council would now be doing 29 is far too many.

25 Page 257 Four years is too long Four years is too long a gap to suffer ineffectual councillors Have an elected Mayor who selects their executive from the councillors who have been elected. Also 29 is too many and should be 1 per ward so a maximum of 12. Currently there are too many councillors with too little ability to serve the town to the residents expectation. Whatever, system is employed it has to provide a better service for current and future residents Have fewer councillors (12). Each councillor represents one ward. having 29 councillors is appalling vfm for an organisation whose biggest budget will be for grounds maintenance. reduce it to about 12 and it makes sense. The proposed arrangement feels more like an attempt to not upset the existing councillors rather than an attempt to make the right decision for the governance arrangements of a relatively small town Having 29 Councillors would be unnecessary and too expensive. 2 for each ward would be more than enough I.e. A maximum of 24 How can you ask people to elect councils to a role they don't understand and have no experience of. Four years is too long to serve! How can you have 29 councillors for 12 wards and hope for any votes to be understood by all councillors. They will only have a vested interest and understanding of their ward. I agree with all of the above apart from the 4 year tenure before re-election. I would be more comfortable with a three year tenure. I agree with the elections in 2019 but consider elections every four years to short, the minimum should be at least five maybe six to allow planning, approval, assembly and completion to be achieved under the elected council. I would suggest that a maximum of 24 (two per ward) councilors would be a workable option. This would reduce cost, allow council meetings to be manageable and provide a fair proportion and balance of each ward. I agree with the electoral cycle as saving money is critical. Please see my earlier note on the expansion of Littlemoor. More thought needs to be given to the number of councillors. Selecting 29 shows lack of imagination being simply what we have now (after removing Portland). I have two ward councillors and they share the tasks which means you never know which one is working for you. Please give serious consideration to rationalising the numbers. I see no reference at all to TC owned real estate. Real costs are achieved by reducing real estate and public sector jobs. We must be absolutely certain that replacing a Borough Council with a TC will not generate more jobs. If it were to do so then I would need to re-assess if a TC is the best way forward. I agree with the principle of 12 wards but not run by political parties. We should have independent candidates who have experience in town management and development. I am never sure why we have so many Councillor. Surely one, or max. two per ward should be sufficient. i.e. max 24 Councillors. I assume that the elections every 4 years means that the whole council would apply for election, not just part as now. I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE FAR TOO MANY COUNCILLORS WHICH IS A DRAIN ON THE COUNCIL'S BUDGET AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE a) NECESSARY, NOR b) VALUE FOR MONEY I BELIEVE THAT WEYMOUTH HAS TOO MANY COUNCILLORS ALREADY, THE NUMBER NEEDS TO BE REDUCED TO A MAXIMUM OF 12 I can see no justification for more than a single councillor for each specific ward, we don't have two MP's for one constituency! I cannot see the point

26 Page 258 I do not believe a town council will serve the needs of the community, it's not worked here. I do not think it should be spilt up into 12 wards I feel that less wards would be better I do not want a larger town council, . I don't believe that we need as many as 29 council lots. We are supposed to be cutting back on the red tape and reducing costs. We should have a much smaller group who are really dedicated to improving the town, making it an exceptional destination for visitors, and a real community for the locals. I don't think we need 29 councillors for only 12 wards, especially since the "Dorset Council" will be taking over much of the responsibilities of the existing council. I don't think we need as many as 29 I don't understand how you arrive at 29 councillors from 12 wards. Do some have greater representation than others? I dont want a Town council I feel that the number of wards/councillors should be reduced an amount that is capable of making decisions. A maximum of 10 councillors would suffice. I feel the number of proposed councillors is too high, wouldn't two for each ward be sufficient. If the wards are of unequal population, maybe the ward boundaries should be changed. I generally agree but it doesn't sound any different to today's arrangements. Would this provide empowerment to low enough level within communities? I have made my views clear earlier in this consultation. I have no idea how busy a councillor is and therefore how many are needed. I only disagree with the ward boundaries. The Westham North ward includes Southill which is very different to that of Westham itself in many respects. As Southill is part of Radipole (land deeds) with a boundary with Westham in the region of Chafeys Lake/Goldcroft Road, I, like many others in Southill, believe it would be better placed in the Radipole ward or maybe a new ward for Radipole West. I refer you to my previous comments. I see local elections as wasting the energies of people in the community. They will always result in frustrations and cynicism, whereas people getting involved in campaigning groups, small business enterprises etc. - basically taking actions themselves to improve the lives and environment - will often lead to success and positive results. I think a town council is unnecessary and a waste of money. I think that other Town Councils and Parishes should be abolished. I think it is good opportunity to reduce numbers and reduce costs. I also think less councillors may allow decision making to be more expedient and bureancracy reduced. I think the number of councillors could be reduced. Most company boards and charity governing bodies have far fewer than 29 members. I wonder why there should not be three councillors per ward. I would advocate a lesser number of wards and of Councillors to ensure that more is achieved, with greater power and accountability given to a smaller team of Councillors. With respect to the question below, none of the names are suitable given that they intimate exclusion of the majority of the current Borough's population e.g. residents of areas such as Preston, Sutton Poyntz, Littlemore and Broadwey do not identify with either the Town Centre or Melcombe Regis.

27 Page 259 I would not want to have less opportunities to participate in local democracy. As I live in a 3 member Weymouth and Portland BC ward, I am able to vote every year. Moving to all out elections limits my decorative participation. Further, currently elections to the district council do not fall in the same year as County Council elections. I think it is important that very different tiers of local government are considered separately If 12 areas, which I agree, then each should be represented by equal numbers. Therefore only 24 councilors (2 in each area. If a new town council is brought into being, and represents the welfare of Weymouth as poorly as the current council, then we shall be no better off.The usual suspects will simply continue imposing their personal foibles on the town. This is the major problem I can see with introducing a town council. If a single council is the way forward, I would agree with the above. If a town council is in place it should cover the whole town, there is no need to have wards or so many Councillors. Recognise the town as one and let Weymouth Town Council work for us the people as one community. Listen to the residents more, not just make decisions based on a Councillors oen personal opinions and views, they are far from bring experts on subjects raised. Run the town for thr people, not for thr benefit of Politicions. If there are 12 wards then we do not need 29 councillors , 24 at the most . If these councillors are to be given some say on how Weymouth should be run and developed then 12 councillors is too few to prevent a dictatorship developing or a single political party overruling every decision which may not be in the Towns benefit . In fact the Town Council should not be a political entity , the current Borough Council is about as much use as a 'chocolate teapot' and is keen on turning the town into the Spanish Riviera and obliterating its heritage . When did the Borough Council last spend serious money maintaining its properties instead of paying out large sums of Councillors expenses ? How many civil servants are going to be allocated to manage Weymouth Towns business and what areas of Local Authority management are they responsible for ? Finance , Transport and Parking , Social Care , Housing , Business Development , Planning , Social/Entertainment use of the local beaches and harbourside ? Attachment to West Dorset in these respects will bleed Weymouth dry , no one will be left to champion the towns assets and advance its tourism potential . Who will be responsible for applying for the Grants and Fund Development Aid share that currently is dominated by Bournemouth ? Will a Weymouth Town Council have anyone ?

If you wait until 2019 to implement a new town council,it could be to late. In a previous consultation, we have voted for a Unitary council. There is no need for a town council of any sort. Is it possible to to hold elections more regular than 4 year intervals? Things can really go wrong in just a year and so say someone really screwed up in year 1, they then have a further 3 years to make things even worse! It is no use a resort and harbour being run by farmers It is not needed, it will be very costly and will be just a talking shop dealing with very minor issues. It should be restricted to 12 elected members without a set expenses budget. It is too many councillors. 15 - 20 would be plenty. Combine wards and have 2 members/ward It smacks of trying to protect councillors own interests and just carry on doing the same old thing even if change is needed. It's a replica of the existing Borough Council. So it would be an expensive option considering it will have only parish-level powers. I do not think it is needed at all because it has no work to do, but it there is to be a town council it should have less wards & fewer councillors, say 6 wards & 12 councillors maximum.

28 Page 260 It's got to be cheaper than the current electoral arrangement. Personally it would be cheaper for residents not to have a town council at all. Keep it simple! Less is more. Waste of money. Likely not to consider Weymouth and be as passionate about making change for the town. Living in Portland I see no benefit whatsoever of the parish council and would only see it as a waste of taxpayers money for Weymouth residents. Make sure weymouth has adequate representation on the new unitary authority commensurate with the population Make sure weymouth has afequate representation on the unitary authority Minimise number of Councils More councillors More wasted money on bureaucracy No council needs no councillors No Large Town Council No need for 29 Councillors , we are a small borough and already over represented . The one's we have aren't fit for purpose. No town council, no wards. Our council tax to remain in our pocket. not neede Not personal enough Not sure the council tax extra payment of £150 per property for the town council would be well spent. I think we need to know what will be funded and controlled by the town council and. I would like a smaller more customer facing parish council run by volunteers who would spend the locally raised money on the area the tax payers come from. Would the new town council be just another Weymouth and Portland type borough council which was pretty ineffective and will not be missed. Not sure there is a need for 29 councilors. I feel sure with some work on the boundaries this could be reduced to a maximum of 20. Number of councillors is excessive unnecessary and expensive. NUMBER OF COUNCILLORS. 29. WARDS 12. THERE SHOULD BE 15 WARDS.1 COUNCILLOR IN CHARGE OF 2 WARDS. One Cllr for each ward. Only 12 councillors should make up the town council. I agree with the other 3 points. Ore red tape and cost. Please see my last comment. Re wards, see my answer to the previous question reduce the number of councillors and wards. See previous comments See previous comments a waste of money. Seems like a large number of councillors, but I guess this is OK as long as they produce results to benefit the town. Fingers crossed there will be more independent councillors looking after their ward and less political affiliation Should be fewer Councillors preferably 12 but perhaps larger Wards currently with three reduced to two, 29 is still too many. I also believe we should have an Elected Mayor. I would prefer total of votes casts and then each Party has an allocation of seats to move away from Ward focused similar to European Elections. Should be new boundaries or you will end up with same old councillors doing the same old 29 Page 261 thing!! Should be two councillors per area but still allow other parties to lobby for a seat Slight risk of simply rebranding the existing district as a town council. I would probably reduce the number a little, say 10 wards and 21 councillors Some of the ward boundaries make little sense. This should be an opportunity to take a fresh look Surely it should be 12 councillors for 12 wards That is far too many councillors for the area, if there are to be 12 wards then 1 Cllr per ward is sufficient, with the potential of an additional 1 or 2 Cllrs acting as lead officers to oversee the entire council. The administration costs would be far out of proportion to the functions and powers likely to be available The area should be divided into 11 parish and one town council in order to enable local people take more control of their own environment and their own ciuncil tax revenue. The boundaries need to be realigned THe changing (often increasing) population of each area within Weymouth needs serious consideration as regards representation which in some cases might need adjustment of voting district boundaries to get fair representation. The current ward Boundaries do not match the current The way the town has evolved over the years The current wards are NOT split fairly. I live in 1 area and am forced to vote in another because of some false electoral boundary. This needs to be readdressed & we should be consulted on our electoral boundaries. The following question is NOT objective and presumes we are in support if it is already coming up with a single name The number of Councillors appears excessive. Weymouth has twelve wards and a Parish council with few powers which acts almost entirely in a consultative role to the new unitary does not need this number of members. One per ward would be adequate, allowing extra in larger wards could possibly justify up to 15 or 17 members but certainly no more. The number of councillors is far too many. One per ward with another 3 for the larger wards would be ample, with a reduced number of wards. Who really cares what the Council should be called? The number of Councillors is the same as for the Borough Coincil so no savings are being made. There are already too many councillors so we dont need any more and those we have need to change and be fewer if this town is to ever be a decent town again. There are too many wards and too many Councillors - any such Council would become expensive, cumbersome, inefficient, factious and unable to serve the purpose for which ti was elected. A much smaller Council would be needed for the proposal to have any material impact There is an opportunity to review the wards and reduce the number of councillers that would be required for the town council. There is no need to add another layer of council. There seems to be too many councillors in weymouth already looking after their own Interests and 29 councillors seems excessive There should be fewer wards and fewer councillors There should be less councillors- only one per ward. Why can't the new body be called Weymouth Borough Council?

30 Page 262 There should be no additional wards or councillors than currently exist to represent the same population and geography than currently pertains to the borough There should be only one councillor per ward, this would cut down on bureaucracy and stream line the decision processes. There would possibly be too much interference from people who know nothing about Weymouth There would still be too many councillors who won't be able to agree and will be after their own political gain. They have not put the best interests of Weymouth forward as it is so I am hesitant to have so many. Think there are too many councillors This appears to be simply a new way of retaining the existing Weymouth &Portland Borough Council, with too many councillors This begs the obvious question; why if Portland already has a Town Council do we need a 36 person W&PBC Borough Council in the first place? I have tried, and failed, to see how 12 wards breaks down into 29 Councillors, but in any event I would expect only 12 Councillor to represent local issues at the next level of Unitary authority. Councillors beget local Government Officers and I thought the whole point was to drive down headcount and liability. An appropriately empowered councillor does not need a phalanx of ward councillors to get his/her point across at the County level. This is almost repeating the existing council and would only introduce another layer of bureaucracy. This is too many wards and too may councillors for such a small town. This just sounds like a new WPBC! This perpetuates the existing confusing, expensive and inefficient situation and takes no account of the proposed stream- lined unitary Dorset. This proposal is given because it would be the most easily created without having to go through boundary commission changes. The time table and ease of implementation is for the convenience of the new Unitary Councils and not to create a properly function 2 tier council structure. Current proposals have the seeds of an inevitable failure of the town council. This seems to represent a "reinvention" of existing arrangements. It is hard to see where the savings would be made as this would not reduce the local authority tiers which is the purpose of local government reorganisation. Local residents would pay council tax to a unitary and a local town council. 29 councillors are far too many - each having an allowance and ability to claim for expenses. It is hard to see where savings would be made and result in additional council tax payments for residents. This should be a sufficient number of councillors over 30 would be cumbersome. To big to much cost To many Cllrs To many councillors To many Councillors. How many of these Councillors would be from the old council, useless at best. To many wards and councillors, TOO EXPENSIVE Too many cllrs .... It would still be like the Borough, reduce number of cllrs Too many councellors, not convinced value for money. What 'value added' would they provide? Duplication and confusion. Too many councillors

31 Page 263 Too many councillors too many councillors Too many councillors Too many councillors Too many councillors too many councillors and to many wards. we need to be more streamlined so that resources go to service commitments Too many councillors means too much wasted money Too many councillors will never agree and will spend a lot of time arguing and the net result will be nothing acheived Too many councillors, suggest one per ward. Too many councillors. Too many councillors. Too many councillors. Less would be better Too many councillors. I would say no more than 15 to make quick decisions Too many councillors. Let's streamline the whole thing. Too many councillors. There are some already in the chamber that are incapable. Fewer Councillors would hopefully mean less dead wood. Too many councillors; two per ward is more than enough and there is no need for any extras! Too many councilors, 12 (one for each ward) would suffice. Perhaps then there would be less talk and more action, which would make a pleasant change from the present situation. Too many wards and too many councillors. ! for east weymouth and one for west Weymouth, all on County Council only. No local councils. Too many. Some of the current wards should be combined to reduce the number of councilors. There will be less responsibility for the councilors as more control will be handled by the unitary authority. I assume we will still have unitary authority councilors. So we need to cull the numbers. Too much red tape total waste of money Town council should be NONE political Twelve wards are to many. Two councillors per ward would be adequate for a Town Council with far fewer responsibilities than the current council would be enough ie a total of 24. Ward boundaries are not meaningful. People don't live by ward boundaries. People live in communities, often comprising a few streets or a distinct area, e.g. the Park district. People should be allowed to decide the boundaries and that will denote how many representatives there will be on the COMMUNITY PANEL. Four years is too long. Two years is enough as people can be nominated for subsequent terms. There should also be an upper age limit of 50 for all members - no more dinosaurs. The panel should have an advisory role only and not be allowed to make decisions without a vote from the residents. It's not hard to do - 75% of people are online and simple voting booths could be set up in public libraries for those who are not online at home. There have been so many appalling - self-serving individuals in power over the years that panels members must be by nomination only (and not the current system where business associates and friends nominate people - that is inherently corrupt.) . What about the under 25's - how will they be represented? Waste of money and just creating new governance where none is needed Waste of taxpayers money. Unitary authority, less councillors and staff covering same areas as

32 Page 264 at County level. We are going to get exactly what we have now and I do not think the current situation is doing the best for Weymouth. We do not need 29 councillors on a town council. One per ward? Max 9. We don't need 29 councillors. One per ward would do. Why should we support so many greedy people with their expenses when they don't listen to us. E.g. Laser lights, selling off vital amenities such as public toilets and what about the North Quay council offices? They just do their own thing. We DON'T NEED a SEPARATE council We have no detailed knowledge of the remaining Council responsibilities so 29 councillors seems to be an arbitrary number replicating 36 councillors for W&PBC which has many more responsibilities. we need someone local that wants to help[ weymouth if not we will be the poor relations if portland has one why not us Weymouth and Portland Town Council would be better. Weymouth Council has a history of no interest in surrounding area. e.g. Building on well known flood plains and hills. The council shows no understanding of its ecological area. Weymouth should not have a further layer of local government. My objection is the prospect of a new precept to finance its administration and councillors expences. What can they do that the new unitary authority can't. What about an elected mayor? Where do you get any change if you disband W & P BC and replace it with a Town Council? It seems to be going round in a circle. While I agree on principle, there may be a case for slight ward boundary adjustments in order to (a) allow for population movements/increases(b) adequate representation with anticipated work load in each ward. This may have already been factored in. why 29 councillors for 12 wards, seems over manning to me why 29 councillors for 12 wards, surely max 2 per ward enough Why 29 councillors for 12 wards, why not 12 councilers and a chairman, saves money why 29 councillors when there is only 12 wards there should either be just 1 or 2 councillor for each ward. as someone who grew up in melcombe regis i have never agreed with it being one area it is spilt by king street and the 2 area are very different and have been for a very long time despite being put together since 1517 or whatever it is. Why 29 councillors. It would be better with 13 wards and a councillor for each. Why another layer of local government. Useless. Why do we need 29 councillors. If there are 12 wards one from each is enough Why do you need 29 councillors for 12 wards. Why does there need to be so many councillors? With 12 wards surely it should be 12 or 24. Why is it proposed for there to be 29 councillors? If that's because there are 29 boundaries, is it necessary to have that many areas? Why not one representative for each ward I.e. 12 This would reduce cost and provide a strong sense of resposibility and comitment from each candidate Why on earth would you need 29 Councillors for such a small town!!!!! Why so many councillors? Why wait until 2019?

33 Page 265 Why would 29 Councillors be required?- This seems an excessive number and I fail to understand how this allocation has been calculated. Why would you need 29 councillors to cover 12 wards and let's have councillors that care about what happens in Weymouth. with the building of new estates such as pemberly a rethinking should take place on the make up of the wards you are creating another band of public servants paid for by everyones council tax which would no doubt rise you assume people want to go ahead with this You chose to amalgamate with other councils. Now get on with it. You left the town. We don`t need you and should not have to pay extra for something we previously had. You have not explained the rationale behind the proposals You only need 24 councillors, two for each ward You only need one councillor per ward

34 Page 266 Are there any other comments you have about this proposal? *The proposal needs to take in the needs of the people residing, working and conducting business in the area. There needs to be more opportunity for face to face consultation sessions and improved notices to advise people of such. Currently there is an over dependence on the 'on line' services which is neglecting at least 60% of residents, visitors and people conducting business in Weymouth. this is especially true for people with disabilities i.e. sight impairment, physical and intellectual disability and those unable to access 'on line services. ** I would like to take this opportunity to bring to the attention of the working group on these proposals that it is shameful that a beautiful Town like Weymouth does not provide for it's homeless community. It is visually and phonetically obvious that there is a serious homeless problem in Weymouth. I recently re located myself and my business to Weymouth and had the unfortunate experience of being accidentally 'locked ou't of my new premises late at night. I was amazed and disappointed that there was no night shelter or safe house to go to in such circumstances and I really felt for your homeless community having nowhere to go to keep safe and well. Please attend to this very important issue before winter and the cold weather sets in. All people should be respected and kept safe. 1. How was the figure of 29 councillors decided? 2. Who will set and control said 29 councillors wages/expenses? 3. Will the councillors be independent or campaign under political party allegiances? A complete waste of our money and more of an exercise in protecting as much of the old empire and their salaries and expenses. Weymouth can be looked after by the unitary authority without more local empire building.

A seperate town council is necessary to ensure that local matters, opinions, local knowledge and financial needs are not ignored by being part of a larger unitary authority. A town council should have a chaired responsibility and open to the public in appropriate areas for decisions to deal with the area and sufficient support staff, some with specialist duties to serve their community. A town council would just be paying lip service. The borough council have over the years ruined this town, a town council would effectively have no powers to bring back the old Weymouth it would just be a waste of money A waste of time and money

35 Page 267 A Weymouth town council should be made up of a mixture of persons who work and live withing Weymouth and should have strong knowledge of the needs of the area, residents and visitors. The councilors should also be a mixture of persons who live in home ownerships, private rented and social housing. They should be persons who live on national minimum wage so they have an empathetic opinion on the way of life in Weymouth. They need to have realistic ideas for a way forward. There needs to be a supportive approach towards residents rather than expecting us to be able to afford a higher life style, like some local councillors do now. All local employers should be supported so that wages can reflect the higher living expenses, prices are increasing but wages stay the same. The council tax money needs to be spent on crucial projects rather than wasting it on such items as lazer lighting on the sea front. Funding for TA's in our schools could be increased as more SEN children come into mainstream schools. Recreational facilities need to increase to give the youth of today a safe environment rather than hanging around on the streets. Funds need to be sent out to areas such as Littlemore, Wesham, Upwey and Broadwey as there are no recreational facilities in those areas. More social housing needs building instead of properties for sale as only the wealthy can buy properties and the people struggling cannot. Bike users need to follow cycle routes as they are dangerous road users and do not follow the road rules, many of them dangerously jump red traffic lights causing near misses. Motor bikes need to stop over taking as this is dangerous and cause car driver distractions and accidents. Something needs to be done about the traffic lights at Asda as the merging lanes are not working, vehicles do not merge they race eachother. There is no longer a supermarket at Littlemore and residents find it difficult to get to the other supermarkets if they have no transport or money to pay for busses. A whole council for Dorset would get my vote why should Weymouth consider themselves extra special. Absolutely crazy idea Additional costings to council tax bills should be included in any proposals for the formation and running of a town council. All current councillors must be made to step down and re elected Change the ward boundaries to encourage new members and new blood. We need to take this opportunity to revitalise the council All political parties have their own agendas. How about all independent councillors, who actually live and possibly work in the wards they want to represent? Although I live outside the boundaries , ours is the first house in the street that is in West Dorset so we think of ourselves as Weymouth residents so feel able to complete this consultation. Any council or councillors should be completely voluntary. There is too much money spent on old gas bags' expenses. The county council should hold community consultation events in each area.

Any new council needs to not just replicate the many poor decisions that have been made in the Town in recent years - it needs to be dynamic - gets things speeded up, and sort out the homeless issue that is blighting our Town - people with young families do not want to see alcoholics sitting in the shelters - they are beginning to go to other seaside towns. Councillors that are 'fit for purpose' are needed, qualified and really prepared to work for the Town - I want to see their credentials listed prior to any elections.

36 Page 268 Any new Council should be set up and run with as small a budget as is reasonable, each ward only needs a single councillor so a reduction from 29 to 12 would represent a substantial monetary saving in expenses claimed. As a rate payer and a Weymouth born individual, I have been increasingly disillusioned by our council. Individuals do care but there is too much old boys club with the same names. I would like to see a much wider range of age groups in the representatives.

As a resident of the existing Weymouth and Portland borough (Portland), I object to the creation of a Weymouth Town Council. There would have to be a degree of parity between Portland and Weymouth. If Weymouth chose to take over some functions from the current WPBC, e.g. parks, cemeteries, rights of way, litter, public toilets, there would have to be compensatory financial adjustments. In turn that could give disadvantage to Portland's council. If none of the 2nd tier council's functions are transferred, then what is there for the Town Council to do, other than to be a toothless advisory body, as Portland now is? The administration costs of imposing an additional layer of local government would be an added burden. A Town council would be an additional hurdle between the people and the authority with the real powers and functions. As a resident of Weymouth I think the proposed arrangements would suit the needs of Weymouth best, in ensuring it continued to be strong and successful and built on what it already had. As a Unitary Authority Weymouth will only become a backwater, with what remaining funds being available being sucked out of the area to places such as Dorchester, as has happen over the past few years since services have been moved to Dorchester. A return to District Councils should be set up again, and better managed by professional experienced personnel, rather than run on a shoestring and being bled dry. AS a Weymouthian who has lived, worked, and retired in Dorchester for 60 years, and has seen the importance of a strong forward looking Town Council since !974, the reorganisation of Local Government, It is vital that Weymouth sets up a similar Town Council covering the existing authority area. As an early retired public sector worker, I feel bigger may be better financially but is not better for close ties to our community and developing a community feel. We need people to represent us who are local and understand the nature,history, & needs of our town and surrounding areas.

As for the name of a future town council, the important thing is that we have a robust, viable council, with appropriately delegated powers in order to manage specific functions pertinent to a large coastal resort. As for the name, per se, not terribly important but 'Weymouth & Melcombe Regis' would enhance a sense of continuity, whereas 'Weymouth' only might give the impression of 'no change' to some. No need to include 'area'. bland, superfluous and stating the obvious. I am certainly in favour of this change -as well, of course, with the unitary authority.

37 Page 269 As I understand it, the only other 'non-parished' part of the current DCC area is Christchurch (the second largest conurbation in the area). Irrespective of the precise configuration, should some portion of the current DCC area become a Unitary Authority, Weymouth's residents would in my view be seriously disadvantaged should we not have some form of 'second tier' representation. As the largest conurbation, with (along with Portland) the most concentrated levels of deprivation on a whole range of indices, we need strong and cohesive representation. Whether that would transpire remains to be seen, but it must be the goal. My only question would be that, given our economic interdependency, whether a 'Weymouth and Portland' option should be considered. I can see many arguments for and against!

As Locality Chair for Weymouth and Portland NHS Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group, I would like to reply on behalf of the GP body of Weymouth and Portland. I speak on behalf of all of the GP practices and have been asked to write in support of your plans to create a town council. It is our opinion that it is of vital importance that there is a council created to speak on behalf of this town. There are many challenges we face and these are often different from those in other parts of the borough. In health, we face significant challenges. The high areas of deprivation we see in parts of the town impact directly on the health of the town. Creation of a town council will facilitate engagement with both the local NHS and with local communities on area-specific issues and I would welcome the opportunity to work with a newly formed council on these local issues.

As long as it makes weymouth better, cheaper parking, free resident street parking , better shops, something to bring in the holiday makers other than the beach and keep the local people entertained throughout the year, then I'm happy. Possibly better, safer kids park at the lodmoor, water park, inflatable water activities in the sea in the summer, shopping centre, less coffee shops, lodmoor country park used as a winter/Christmas fair with local stalls, real ice rink, trees all decorated with lights, something to bring people to Weymouth even in winter. as long as it saves me money do it as long as the town council elections coincide with the new council/county elections so we only have 1 election day every 4 years its fine having elections every year or 2 years is annoying and a waste of money As mentioned, please please involve local people who have the skills and enthusiasm to help Weymouth grow. No more silly spending, councillors should also be paid in line with local pay rates, fine to be paid more but only if results are achieved. As stated previously, I do not agree that Weymouth should be reduced to a parish, but should retain its full powers as a Borough. As things are certain aspects are fragmented and the servicing of some areas are neglected As you have moved out of North Quay offices, where will you be housed? If this proposal does go ahead, its HQ MUST be in Weymouth at what cost to the public is this going to be ?. any help for cost from government? .does it mean even more council tax in future ??

Both Weymouth and Portland Town Councils should be given full parish council responsibilities in line with the other town and parish councils in Dorset, as should Burton and Hurn Parish Councils. Personally speaking I deplore the asset-stripping that Weymouth and Portland Borough Council is currently engaging in prior to this reorganisation by selling property assets that were inherited from Portland Urban District Council in 1974.

38 Page 270 Can't see any changes making a difference to what we have already. Seems to me that the same old problems such as begging, drunkeness, litter, lack of policing byelaws would not be addressed anymore than they are already. Concerned that Weymouth area will miss out with this arrangement. If main Council is in Bournemouth Poole area will they have control on where the money will be spent? Consider calling it The Town Council of the historic Borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis; or an indication that there are two towns and not one. Consider people with disabilities. We don't always get the support we need. Consulting residents like this one is good for the local people to give there opinion and help with proposals of this nature Cost of the proposed Town Council would be additional to the current 'Council Tax', how would it be monitored and who would administer it? Would it be a separate 'Tax' or rolled into one, what say would the populace have as to the cost, who would be the arbitrator should it become out of sync with local wishes? Theseare but a few points to be addressed, and published, before total commital to such a move. Cost will be "about £150" - too high and too vague. Residents should be given a firm commitment that the cost will "not exceed". Overall the whole process seems extremely undemocratic since it is the existing Borough Councillors, who are largely wannabe Town Councillors who will make the decision. Council Tax is capped if an increase above the cap will trigger a referendum will this apply to the Town Council precept? Councillors must be competent. The new town council needs to prioritise empty shops, beggars, clean streets, provision of free car parks within walking distance of beach and town centre and free toilet facilities. If not there will be additional mess to clear up. Also, remove angle iron laser light columns which are an eyesore and replace the fairy lights. Encourage local people to welcome visitors with a smile.

Do not care what it is called. I have yet to see what responsibilities the new 'Town (Parish) council' will have The statement that it "could deliver community services, which might include parks, cemeteries, play areas, and grounds maintenance". is a bit vague. Only when exactly what these services will be and their associated costs are decided should a decision be made as to the number of wards and councilors needed. You seem to be putting the cart before the horse here. Will the Town council have a budget of £1000 or £1,000,000.. Does it need one councilor or 29. Do not waste council tax payers money. Do way with political parties and let's have independent representatives with proven expertise running our town. We do need a town council to work in the best interests of Weymouth. I truly believe it would be more beneficial to abandon local political elections. A Hun council does not work for a town and greatly stifles innovation and development. Do we really have to have a full merger of all these Councils. A lot of the administrative work has already been stream-lined, being shared in facilities serving all the Councils. Can't the Councils retain their individual status? don't do it. Don't want Weymouth to loose its identity and get lost agmost the "richer " towns which are seen to have more priority in terms of funding etc

39 Page 271 Early realisation and formatting of Weymouth Area Town Council is imperative to plan and organise a new and prosperous future for the town; strong leadership, a can-do attitude and 100% participation by all Weymouth residents to achieve the best for the area! Kick out the dross/scum from the town with a firm and no-excuse policy of smartening up all area's. This is where a Town Centre Manager would have an overarching effect by combining Police, bar owners, shop managers, the successful litter/dog fouling patrols into providing the smart, welcoming and prosperous town that Weymouth could become by providing an up-market alternative to Bournemouth/Poole in the East. It is also important that a local organisation have the ability to remind and deter the do-gooders, ie: SalvationArmy, soup kitchens, etc, that although they presume to provide a service all they in fact do is encourage more dross to the town - they have to realise this and work for the good of the majority of the legally abidding community. Expenses and other costs claimed by potential councillors should be minimal ( a return to undertaking the role voluntarily without remuneration would be welcomed) Far too many councillors. They have failed to sell the old Council building, they have failed to tidy up the streets, they have failed to deal with anti-social behaviour, they have failed to deal with the lack of public toilets, they have failed to deal with generating business. Any proposal to change what the council looks like is simply re-arranging the deck chairs (for which they would charge us) on the Titanic. Get on with it and don't dither - be positive! Get on with it! Grants for town councils need to be realistically assessed as east dorset is the poor relation to west dorset. great idea!! Having a town council for Weymouth is a good idea if the councils are to merge at County level. However, there is a great need to bring new people onboard as councillors in the area. Many of the existing borough councillors have served the town (in the main, well) for a long time but the town does need to be better represented with a more representative age/diversity demographic.Town/parish councillors are not all going to be political party members and so there is a role for DCC to make the whole process of being elected as an independent (something I'd be keen to do) much easier and more transparent. Maybe some training, better information on the website and a preliminary meeting for interested parties guiding them through the process. Hopefully more people will put there name forward to join the new council as this council seem to drag their feet. How are the councilors success to be measured. There should be clear agreed goals which can be seen by all. There are better ways to conduct consulatations than this narrow method. Ask whats wrong, ask what can be done to improve and who should do it. and translate that into an action plan with critical success factors. So we can measure how good our council is. How can this survey provide a basis for councils to be more responsible in housing planning. In other words heed the advise of environmental experts and longer term effects of building on known flood areas Littlemoor &Preston. This weeks decision to discount expert opinion is a prime example, where decision was based on fact that flooding would be in the future not right now !!!!!!

40 Page 272 How much did this consultation cost, and how much would it cost to restore the fairy lights. You only waste money because its not yours!..... How we did not get the new road to Portland is completly mad, also councilors must have more of a vision. How will this effect existing services offered by DCC? How would voting be done? I'd like to see voting come to the digital age.

I agree that a singular town council should be made. Someone who lives in another part if town may have a vested interest in another part of town, be it that they use that part frequently, have relatives there or maybe even a business. This means that they should have a say on what happens in that area. We all live in the weymouth area, we would all benefit from a successful, well looked after/prosperous town, no matter what area of it you live in. I am fully in support of having local representation as well as that for the new unitary body, especially as Weymouth is the largest urban area in West and North Dorset. Thereby, it has a wider range and size of needs. For example there are specific problems such as more homelessness and need for "social" housing and fast increasing risk of flooding due to rising sea levels. I realise these issues would ultimately be the responsibility of the unitary bodies but having a local forum for consultation and gaining and contributing local knowledge is essential. I am very angry. It is just daylight robbery and another ruse to charge more council tax. You chose to move and amalgamate. Now everything in the pond is not going swimmingly - what a surprise - not! Heard it all before with waste disposal, and look how that turned out. No road sweepers from one year to the next. Weeds over two feet high all by the side of the road near the town centre. Broken glass left on the ground. The worst I have seen it for years. Then there is the exorbitant garden refuse collection. No more collecting Christmas trees. Parking permits. Pay more and more, get less and less. The only areas getting some attention are the town centre and beach. The rest of us just pay the huge bills. We don`t need a council with more pay outs to the old boy network. You made your bed now lie in it. I believe it is essential for the Weymouth area to have a local voice able to make relevant decisions for the benefit of the local community, rather than rely on a unitary council responsible for a large part of the county to make informed, local decisions I believe the demographics of Weymouth vary considerably from that of the county as an entirety. Being represented solely by a County Council would not reflect a healthy democratic representation for Weymouth. I do not agree with setting up a large town council - 4 Parish/town councils based on Weymouth, Melcombe Regis, Wyke Regis and Chickerell will suffice - Preston and Upwey can have their own too I do not believe that this change is required and am therefore happy with the way that the council currently exists and runs I do not support a Town Council I do not want a Weymouth Town Council and 29 town Councillors!! How can you justify that 29 Councillors are required for such a small town!! I certainly do not want to pay more council tax for a Town Council and it's Councillors. I don't feel that individual areas would be sufficiently reprenseted I don't think one large council would be good for Weymouth as some areas may be not given the same opportunities as other parts of Dorset and this should be voted on by the people that live in Weymouth not just by councilors as it affects everyone

41 Page 273 I expect it will cost us council tax payers more not lerss I fear if Weymouth was within a 'Dorset' wide umbrella funding would be uneven with Bournemouth / Poole gaining a lion share (as with health provision) Weymouth is special and deserves a focused 'Weymouth' team in order that concentration can be made in projects such as addressing the 'empty shop' concern which is at risk of dragging Weymouth down. I feel it is important for Weymouth to have a Town Council as it serves a substantial population. I feel strongly that every other nearby town is vibrant, except Weymouth, which seems to be devoid of new development and vibrancy. For instance, one particular thing adds the whole thing up: there is a sign to "Arts Centre" by the Swannery roundabout, but we have not had an Arts Centre for some 14 years, if not more. Nobody seems to care. There is no forward thinking and no imagination. We need more of that! I feel strongly that there should be fewer levels of government, not more. I suspect this proposal is from the councillors themselves, in order to keep their "status", feelings of power & generous expenses. I feel that the Council Tax in this area is already high and I would not like to see any overall increase in Council Tax with the implementation of these proposals. I feel very strongly that the local communities within the Weymouth area should be represented by those who live there and have a clear understanding of local issues. I feel what the council wants to achieve has worked for over 400 years. Why change it when it is not broken. I have made my feelings clear in the other comments. However, I think listening to residents would give a better idea of what is needed for Weymouth. Not having money wasted on ideas, which provide no benefit to Weymouth and residents having no say in how their money is spent!

I have read this in despair, I want my council Tax to go down as a proportion of my income, I want the 3% social care precept to be centrally funded and not coupled to my Council Tax band (which does not reflect my ability to pay) and I want democratic accountability. That is to say that Councillors should have the final say on planning decisions and not be overruled/undermined by unelected Council Officers; Weymouth Esplanade should be sold off (under Lease) and allow private enterprise to invest and bring in the next generation of holiday makers. I want Park District cleaned up and cleared of the criminal element, classing n'er do wells as vulnerable should not mean that they should be spared from personal accountability. I want a more overt Police presence in the trouble spots of Weymouth and a zero tolerance (a la Mayor of Sunderland) of criminality. I want Portland to be brought to heel with companies like Coamer homes etc forced to finish the development of the old Naval Base, what are cruise liner passengers to think when they see the bomb site that is. You should engage someone like Peter de Savary (if he is still alive) to build Jurassica, and Betterment properties should not be allowed to continue its apparent (in my alleged opinion) monopoly over Weymouth. My 16 year old daughter related a news article that Millennials will need an income of £64k to afford a house in the very near future. We appear to be regressing to an almost feudal society where those with the money to afford assets, hold those who don't to ransom, with no realistic chance of ever owning their own homes WTF

42 Page 274 I hope we get sensible forward looking people to get us on the map we have a great deal of assets in our Weymouth. I just can't help feeling that this proposal, although on paper might look like a good idea, would eventually morph into something even more bureaucratic and certainly much more expensive. If we are going to have a unitary authority why will we need so many councillors to rum this borough?

I just hope the change happens for the people of weymouth and surrounding area's not for the benefit of the council members themselves who have been found wanting in a multitude of instances of late some of which are still in question. Weymouth has no ferry, no toilets to speak of no council offices of any merit, a major litter problem,antisocial behaviour, violence, massive car park charges. Which begs the question what's being done.????

I largely agree with the concept of a town council to recognise and address the needs of the local community but I would like some more information before I could give it 100% backing. . . What would the powers of a town council be and could their decisions be over-ridden by the new unitary authority who would have less concern for the Weymouth local community. There is little merit in having our own council if they are a 'toothless tiger'! We need to have a realistic projection of what this luxury is going to cost us in addition to the current council tax burden. There are lots of things I would like in this world, but can I afford them? I like the idea of Weymouth & Melcombe Regis Town Council but it does not include all the other significant parts of the town (eg Preston, Broadwey, Upwey) so Weymouth is probably better as a simplification but one which most people will identify with. I live on Portland perhaps this should be a combined Weymouth and Portland Area Town Council. Currently Portland appears to receive less support with the majority of money being spent on Weymouth. I my experience 'consultations' are a tick in the box needed to implement a decision already made paying lip service to the opinions of those 'consulted'

I retired to live here from London 8 years ago. I chose Weymouth as I perceived it to be a proper, self contained town with a strong sense of its historical roots and decent infrastructure. Over the years I have been involved with many projects and enjoy the strong sense of community. I agree with councillors feels that residents would benefit from a council for Weymouth, West Dorset is very rural;East Dorset has conurbations; Weymouth stands alone and its need should be met by people who know it and can run services and make decisions at a very local level. I'd prefer the name to be "Weymouth Area Town Council" and although I live alone, solely on a pension, I would like to pay more council tax to ensure services and to invest in and develop those that have been scandalously underfunded. I strongly feel that Weymouth should have its own town council or it will lose its identity under a large unitary authority. Weymouth councillors and its residents should have a say on the future of weymouth and how budgets are spent. I think a Weymouth town council would provide the focus Weymouth needs to reinvigorate itself post the Olympics I think I have said enough. I would love to have the time to be on the council cause I would damn well ensure changes were made asap before our lovely town becomes an utter skanky hole for druggies, alcoholics & immigrants

43 Page 275 I think it essential for there to be a Town Council to represent the old area of the Borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis, if the unitary proposals go through. From 1933 [when the old borough took in the rural parishes] it was called the Borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis and should be so called after the proposed changes. We need a town council to keep some form of closer local representation, since inevitably the new unitary authority will be far away from most of us. I would also like the new town council to have the maximum powers that such councils are allowed to have I think it should be "Weymouth Area" to make it clear it's not just focused on town centre areas. I think strongly that town has to have a town council to define its identity. I think that there should be a body to look after the Weymouth area

I trust that many more local residents will express there views. I have served on Parish Councils at previous areas and know the importance of local knowledge and being available to discuss with residents businesses their concerns and plans. A very good read would be the two volumes of pictures and descriptions "Weymouth the Golden years" photographs by Graham Herbert and captions by Maureen Attwool. Notice how changes are made and then often reversed in later years.. some good and some very bad.

I trust that there would be a total re election for all positions and no sideways moves allowed for existing councilors. If ever a town needed a complete shake up Weymouth certainly does. More importantly than even that though would be to ensure what power any new authority would have. If it didn't have any ability to make decisions and simply had to go cap in hand to County the whole time then there would be little point in it's existence. This to my mind is crucial to its whole point of being. I used to live in London. I was very active with the local on many things from housing management to open spaces. Since moving here 8 years ago I.am constantly surprised by the state of disrepair of walls and bridges. As a concerned resident I am frustrated by the apparent ignorance of council staff. Moving departments out of Weymouth to Dorchester is awful. No clarity as to who is responsible for what.

I was delighted to hear that major public decisions are, in the future, to be taken by a council less close to Weymouth, as I do not believe that Weymouth is well-served by its council. The 'local' aspect of councillors too often is NOT a plus. Councillors have their own agendas and pursue them in the face of public need and desire. The hubris is astonishing. One could hope that a new town council would not be heir to these ills. But one is pretty much bound to be disappointed. I welcome a new Town Council but let's not fall into the new arrangements, let's get it right. This is an opportunity to change and create a more efficient and effective council. Is there any grant funding available to make sure we get things right up front e.g. IT! I would be more than happy to discuss my ideas further as a former employer of the Borough Council. I would like the Weymouth Harbour Board (with a reduced membership of councillors) to remain under the control of the new single town council and NOT transferred to the new unitary authority. I would like to redraw the electoral boundaries and have local parishes. I would like to see a panel of residents for each ward that have lived in the borough for 25 years consulted by councillors for their opinions on any matters that would change the towns appearance. 44 Page 276 I would like to see the council merge into 2 large boards and these would cover the whole of Dorset, as this would be a more cost effective solution. I would propose a "town hall" type meeting where all interested residents can attend and pose questions and give input. I ythink the idea of reverting to Weymouth and Melcombe Regis would give a sense of historical continuity that would be good for the town. If a town council is elected we hope they will listen to the community and deal accordingly as at present our requests go to deaf ears! Too many people have to be informed over any one thing at present so nothing gets done. If the re-organisation happens and Weymouth does indeed have a town council it is most important that the new authority focuses on LOCAL matters. These include adequate public conveniences for both residents and visitors and a decent TIC in a prominent location. The current authority's stewardship of the harbour undertaking has been extremely poor in recent times and consideration should be given to putting the management of this invaluable asset into the hands of private agency such as Portland Port. There is no longer any meaningful maritime expertise available in W&PBC, and in order to get the best out of this outstanding natural resource it is desirable that the successor authority works with a proven organisation that knows what it is doing. If there was to be a new Weymouth council, the council should be closely monitored as to make sure all wards are represented equally and fairly. If this is saving money then we should see a much smaller town council especial as they have less to do. If we adopt a TC we must be able to ensure that the elected members are truly working for the Town and don't have higher strategic ambitions. Likewise the public servants are also focused on the town and are working to improve quality of life for residents. To this end and linked to an earlier question we need to consult very closely on the role of the TC and hence its defined objectives and desired outcomes.

If we do not form a local town council, people will feel less engaged in the local area and wonder who is looking after our interests in the greater scheme of the counties proposals. i'm broadly supportive, but only because it's been forced on the area. it's important we have a town council if we're getting sucked into the unitary authority. In a previous consultation, we have voted for a Unitary council I.e. One council. There is no need for a town council of any sort. Please stop wasting money on progressing one. in my opinion the Town Council should be NON political and work for Weymouth, and councillors should NOT be salaried only claim expenses.

In my opinion, the proposal is too narrowly focused. Let's us this opportunity to enable the new county council to make more important, radical changes that could improve Weymouth, its environment and peoples' lives. Do away with all the local borough/town/district councils and make bigger plans through the newly empowered county council. Included in other notes

45 Page 277 Is that really all we have a say in? This is not any form of constructive engagement but with your less than 2% response you will pick out that 60% agree, so it's done. We as residents want to know the benefits to us and wider Dorset if say housing goes into the super council, how many staff will the town council have and how many will move to super council - this would then go some way to help us give an informed view on if 50% of the current WPBC council tax is a good step with less than 25% of the staff and little power to boot. Stop treating residents like mushrooms and let's have some transparency Is there an on-line forum of points raised by residents, if not would suggest the results are published by Weymouth & Portland Borough Council in due time to allow a full and final proposal to be presented to the local authority. Thank you for providing this option of viewing our points and any positive feedback would be most welcome.

It is about time that Weymouth Council sorted out the problem with our road system .Also Housing for the locals so our youngsters have affordable housing . We need control of our own Council , it is mad that it is even suggested we club all councils together . It is currently very frustrating to have to go to Dorchester to deal with things that used to be done in Weymouth and we get the feeling that the people in Dorchester are not really concerned with matters down here. Also who will control Tourism and Leisure such an important part of our economy? It is important that Weymouth looks after the interests Of Weymouth It is long overdue. It is most important the Weymouth is represented as a community after the changes in April 2019. Local issues matter and these can only be fairly represented by Local Councillors elected by local people. It is not clear from any of the text on the email or various websites what services would be provided by this new council and who would provide them if the no council option was adopted, please provide this detail. If they would have to be added to the scope of the unitary authority uniquely for Weymouth this would not work as they would disappear over time as they would be a troublesome bolt-on. I read the unitary authority proposal when it came out and feel that it may work for other areas but Weymouth has unique needs that can be best served by a borough council so should stay out of the unitary authority but contract some of it's service where it makes sense to do so. Will the people of Dorset get to vote on the change? It is not clear what powers will be delegated to this council. It needs to have suitable powers to match its budget. It is normal for councillors to provide democratic oversight of the performance of the executives. How is this proposed to work - will there be dedicated responsibilities for executives?

It is not stated how many paid officers would be employed by the new Parish Council. No more than a Clerk with an assistant and possibly a Cemetery Registrar if the council remain responsible for burials and cremations are required. No mention is made of the proposed arrangements for the harbour and present harbour Board, what is intended here? It is really important that Weymouth is thought of as more than just a holiday resort. My children have had to move away to get decently paid jobs. Invest in local industry and support our next generation of workers.

It is vital that residents of Weymouth as currently understood should have a Town Council.

46 Page 278 It isn't clear to me that town councils serve sufficient purpose to justify their expense (I presume councillors receive some recompense and there is also expense for this consultation, running elections, branding, stationery, website, etc.). All so they can manage parks and cutting verges? It seems a bit pointless. We are effectively losing devolved decision-making through loss of our borough council and this has the look and feel of a poor replacement. It might be a good idea if is not just a talking shop which cost extra with no power. It needs to include the word 'area' as just 'Weymouth' conjures up the idea of the town centre, whereas the area includes places as far apart as Preston and Chickerell. Melcombe Regis is the area to the east of the River Wey, but then so is Preston, so why single out Melcombe Regis? The word, 'area' covers all the wards equally. It should be arranged to not add any additional amounts to the council tax bill for each household. It should be called Weymouth and Portland Town Council It should ideally stay as it is but town council is better than no local council

It smacks of pontificating a little - as the Wards don't change, and there is no real perceptible benefit to Portland, it seems to be just creating senior and top-down superstructures, which seem to me to be more likely to gobble up funds without benefit to the people of the area, rather than delivering tax money into the roads and resources of the county. It was suppose to save money now you are trying to make a new council out of an absolved council. It would need to stand up for the people of Weymouth and not role over to the landed gentry of Dorset. It's a no go area and should not even be considered. I'm sure the new authority will look after our interests within the framework already set up and help to further the aim of reducing duplication within local government and further the whole great idea of costing less. It's important for Weymouth to have a voice rather than be lost in the unitary authority. An impact on planning is vital. It's not clear what powers a Town Council would have compared to the current Borough Council. More? Less? And what happens to the assets of the current council? How are they to be shared with Portland? Just another waste of time and money. Just don't let Weymouth slide into oblivion, becoming an insignificant little area with very little voice of its own please! Just in case my previous comments have not been clear, my view is that there is no need for a town/parish council, either in weymouth, Dorchester, Portland or anywhere else in Dorset. Just keep Weymouth ~ Weymouth (and Melcombe Regis) Keep a town council in weymouth or we will be forgotten and our needs overlooked. Keep any new structure simple and straight forward to manage and deliver its priorities Keep it simple, don't get hung up on silly details like names & revised boundaries Keep local democracy keep totally separate from Portland LEAVE PORTLAND OUT OF THIS let hope you listen to the comments

47 Page 279 Let us move forward and generate pride in our town and a real sense of community here. Let's have some new blood every four years Let's just hope that the new council and those who are chosen as councillors, are there because they love the town and its history and heritage and not just to enrich themselves. Little point in this "consolation" exercise as it has already been decided upon. Creation of a town council will lead to a precept added to council tax, at further cost to tax payers. Dorset works could maintain the parks and open spaces, DCC look after property, DCC councilors reprensent Weymouth residents etc - there is no justification for a Weymouth Town Council, complete and utter waste of time and money. Local representation should, if listened to, help avoid the issues caused by previous projects under Dorset County Council management, particularly in the areas of planning, traffic management, and local facilities such as transport and parking. Madness, when we are stuck with austerity make it work better for the public Make sure it is strong to get any money for Dorset equal with other parts. Make them the right people. Melcombe Regis should definitely remain in the naming of the Town Council as it is historically significant, having been a major part of Weymouth's origins. Money wasting exercise. Costs borne by the council tax payers to implement a system they are being told to. Only lines the pockets of those involved and businesses in having to change all the administration, paperwork, signage, logos, etc, etc, More councillors from Weymouth we always come second fiddle to Dorchester and this is where the tourists come. Weymouth need the regeneration that Dorchester is had. The new system is open to corupition and back ganders for councillors. Need more councillors. Election every 3 years. More info should be given about which services will be town council responsibility. Where will borough assets go? Unitary or Town? More information about how the proposed unitary Dorset council and its councillors are expected to operate would have helped us to answer these questions with more understanding. My comment is, Weymouth is not the place it was and the visitors and all the businesses are showing it through their feet and local people are actually all very annoyed. We must move forward NOW not wait till 2019,we are on a very slippery slope. Hopefully a new town council will listen to the pupils.and make Weymouth a place that people will want to return to. My view is that it would be more effective to have one council for weymouth and portland combined. i appreciate that this might go against local tribal rivalries and be subject to criticisms of unfairness in allocation of resources etc, but this area is one one connurbation and needs to be run as such. Need to consider the whole area and not self serving counsellors need to get away from the same old faces on the council and encourage new people to join - who aren't just concerned about their own business interests and how much money they can skim from the local area, but people who actually have a vision for Weymouth.

48 Page 280 New blood, councillors in touch with community and what their priorities are. ie empty properties in town centre etc NIL No No No No No No No No No No No No No political party affiliation should be allowed by councillors - they represent the people not party ideology. They ought to stand or fall on their personal record. No politics should be involved at all No thank you No, just keep it simple and cost-effective. No. No. No. None None None None None Not at this time, thank you. Not enough information is given to provide a fully informed opinion. A fact sheet at least if the proposal, and alternatives should have been provided. Not really Number of councillors proposed are too many. Only one option allowed for a name. My second, and close to the first, is Weymouth Town Council. Pathetic excuse and attempt to save money by discarding a community. People need to find all the brains with logic and common sense to make Weymouth great again. Not the drug beggar infested dump its become Please do not create a town council - let's have small parish councils based on Melcombe Regis Weymouth Wyke Regis Rodwell etc Please don't do it and leave each area to their own council Please put this out to more public consultation stating all the responsibilities ,costs and payments the new council will make. This is going to cost the poor old council tax payer more and you need to tell them what they are paying for. Will any land be included in the councils control?

49 Page 281 Please stop. Portland is called the Royal Manor of Portland. Pre 1974 was Weymouth not called the "Royal Borough of Weymouth & Melcombe Regis? If it was pre Local Government re- organisation in 1974 could the previous Royal Accent not be explored to see if we could not revert to our former name? Potential councillors must reside in the ward in which they seek election. Provisions should be in place to avoid possibilities that individuals be elected where the role will be self-serving Or benefit their business/financial interests, remuneration should be minimal and proportional and lessons learnt from the inept mismanagement and incompetance of the previous local authority. Publish the results of this consultation to the residents of all wards. Really confused as to why this is being pushed through . Looks like self interest to keep councellors in jobs. Strange as several councellors are on multiple layers of government already! Weymouth council has not effectively steered the town into the 21st centuary by 'reinventing itself' (stuck in the 1060s) as well as other areas seem to have. Fresh thought is needed and a joined up policy for the wider Dorset area not silos and bunkers. Clearly need better transport links (bypassing the town centre) in order to grow Portland which with the Port the potential of Jurassica, great industrial heritage and lovely costal walks. Weymouth is becoming a dormitory town for Dorchester as far as good quality jobs are concerned, a town council will not be able to influence this, the wider Dorset council might! Representatives should preferable live in the ward that they choose to represent. See previous comments Seems a good idea ! Should Chickerell be included? What is happening about Dorchester? slight bias towards the 'fete acomplis' of a single council - sorry! Something must be done asap Something needs to happen and we need some young family orientated members on the board who know what weymouth needs going forward for both residents and holiday makers alike. Sorry about the negativity in my response but I am totally disillusioned with the calibre of some,(not all) of the current council. Stop wasting our money. The argument seems to be that Weymouth will be the only area without a Town Council, yet residents of Portland previously had a referendum to discontinue Portland Town Council, the results of which were ignored. If this additional tier of local government were to continue then it would be better to have one Weymouth & Portland Town Council rather than two separate town councils. The central area should be called Weymouth Town Council, the other areas would be called Littlemore PC etc

50 Page 282 The changes SHOULD represent a great opportunity to thin out the dead wood, especially certain officers who block everything, always say "no", rub up the residents and local business owners the wrong way and, ultimately, cause almost ALL the problems between the local government and the local community (e.g. just what on earth is "Assets and Infrastructure" and what use is "Property Services" if the property owners and/or leaseholders feel ignored, bullied, treated like second-class citizens, denied rights and opportunities commonplace everywhere else in Britain and burdened by excessively restrictive lease terms and conditions).

The concern is what will be the responsibility of Weymouth Town Council and its source of income. Will it just become very busy in minutiae rather than development of the economy. Failure to manage the Harbour and current assets will not be improved by a Town Council. The consultation is a paper tiger and a waste of time because the decisions have already been made by people who won't want to relinquish power. The cost/benefit in this proposal are not clear at all. How much would this cost? What are the expected benefits of this additional cost? The council in its future state will not be doing anything particularly important and so will need very few Councillors. Since the work involved will not be that taxing or require specialist knowledge a far reaching review should be carried out regarding the pay received by the Councillors. Having small area councils(elected and maybe based with community groups) in addition would reduce the need for so many on the area council. These groups could then send a representative to the Town council and maybe the views of the public might be listened to more often-we hope so. The council should be made to be accountable on all fronts The council will, no doubt, need staff and only individuals with the highest ethical standards should be engaged. Their contacts of employment should also make it clear that evidence of fraud, corruption or unethical behaviour will result in instant dismissal AND loss of pension entitlement. The current borough councilors have not worked in the true interest of the town. We do not have attractive curb sides, we have heavily reduced policing. We should have a pedestrianised esplanade, with little coffee shops, etc. We should have a pier that's an attraction, not a disused parking lot (ex Condor ferries grounds). We need a small group of councilors who have the means, knowledge, ability, and the will to really make Weymouth change for the better. It's about time that we had councilors that run Weymouth as a business, and open it up to business more and more. The current proposals just looks as if they are designed to enable the existing group of Councillors who have generally not served us well to retain some kind of place in local government. They will have very little power but cost us a lot of money in Council Tax. Whatever happens the "Councillors" should no longer have a personal expenses budget but have to make claims for expenses under normal business rules.

51 Page 283 The current WPBC is not an organisation to be proud of with very few Councillors doing much to look after and improve the towns lot . The younger elected Councillors on whom the older generation and the younger generation alike are looking to improve the town with new ideas and enthusiasm do not appear to be allowed make their mark on our society as many would want . The political party system rules with a rod of iron , stifling any rejuvenation ideas that may or may not be good for the Town . Being a Town Councillor should not be a job for life . A time limit of 5 years service should be imposed for every one of them , the Town Council Leader/ Chair should be an elected member from the entire group of Councillors and not the largest group leader and can only hold the position for 5 years . There should be a system of booting out ineffective or 'criminal' elected councillors by the Wards they are elected to represent and any Councillor who lives out of town should be removed from office . The Town Council should have at least one member elected to the County Council and cannot be the same person elected by the public as a County Councillor . The existing Weymouth an d Portland borough council have made a pigs ear of the town and i cannot see how a town council would do any better and would just be an additional cost to the residents. The expectations of the town and the town Cllrs should be managed as Central Govt set budgets and cost saving targets. Local Cllrs must be realistic in the role. The idea is to have a local voice to represent Weymouths views not keep the existing council with a new name. The idea of Councillors supporting for the demise of their council, or any reduction in their numbers, is akin to asking turkeys for their opinion on the value of Christmas. There should be cuts in the number of Council staff, with functions outsourced to the new unitary authorities.

The name should be simply Weymouth Town Council as it encompasses the WHOLE of the town. As long as it allows representation from roughly the same voting areas as now, all areas will have a voice. The elephant in the room will be who will be the chairman and have the final say as some will no doubt scream "fix" or "bias" if their area is not treated as they think it should be. There has to be a regulated formal council of some description to govern the area - the main concern is that the present incumbents will get back in and the present levels of seeming wastefulness, incompetence and bias will continue. You really should have successful business people on the council as affiliate members and this should include representatives from the tourist/hotel industry. The Police & Fire authorities also should also be represented, as well as DCH. They should be inputting into the council from their perspective to allow policy to be formulated - coming at a problem from a different view point is often a valuable tool and asset to any decision making process. You should also try to encourage teenage/early twenties affiliate members to have a voice, as well as the silver surfer age group. Above all, it must be transparent, fair and honest in all it does - too many seem to have vested interests in decisions being made and this needs to stop if you want the residents to get on board and back it. No more new offices, no more wasted money on consultants, give us visible value for money for our council tax. Do something with the boarded up shops -don't let them become yet more charity shops, move on the beggars, rescind all licences for bars and clubs that go on past 1.00am, clean the streets, paint buildings, repair pavements and signs, make it feel safe to venture out into the town centre after dark, encourage smaller businesses to come here, sort out the park and ride properly, give residents and visitors alike decent car park fees - this is what residents want, all basic things, but get them right, and the backing you will get will be off the charts, then see how word of mouth spreads about what a lovely place Weymouth is and we all reap the benefits.

52 Page 284 The name should be Wey Town Council as that more clearly defines the actual area covered by the proposal, running from the source to the mouth of the Wey The number of elected councillors should be be no more than 8 The obvious question is what would its powers be, how much will it cost and who will pay? Council Tax should not have to increase to pay for this. The old town Councillors need to be replaced. Cronyism is rife. Decent people cannot get past this 'brotherhood'. Some in it for their own gain, the town is not put first. The people who are in the council do not represent Weymouth well at all. They do nothing to push the town forward in to the 21st Century or make any form of progress. Serious change needs to happen The quality of councillors, not the number is the key. The reason to revert to two councils is suppose too save money, forming a town council will add an extra expense in the form of a town precept! The remit of this council must be explained and laid out prior to any formation; expectations should be set at a realistic level, knowledge of budget and service level must be made clear. I have worked for local govt authorities for a number of years and find that some small town/local councils have high unrealistic expectations beyond budget constraints set by central govt. The supporting documentation is not very clear on the council tax situation. This really should be very clear as to the impact on the overall amount that council tax payers will be paying. The wards that have East and West should be amalgamated to reduce the number of councillors The Weymouth area needs representation if the new administration goes ahead - the area has it's own identidy and needs to protect it. Also if the area had no voice it will become the 'dumping' area for the other Administrations ... and the Town & Environs would be totally neglected. There is a serious lack of publicity of consultation about these new proposals....It looks like the council has already decided , There is no detail as to the costing or set up of this new Town authority, ie do the councilors get paid or just expences i.e increasing the costs to us the ratepayers. What services will be in the remit of the authority, Will the new authorities headquarters also be a point of referal to the New larger authority, Currently Weymouth's works depot is ouside it's boundaries will this have to be changed. Weymouths main business area is currently outside of it's area i.e Granby is in Chickerell ,should this be a case when a boundary needs changing?. Comments are asked regarding the changes but as ever the detail is very lax. There need to be maximum cohesion between all the 12 areas, although they are different social and business communities and therefore different interests. These differences should be recognized/acknowledged but Weymouth needs to "hang together" as a town with its own identity. There needs to be representation of very local issues at the New Unitary Authority. I don't see how else it could be done. Weymouth is on the brink of regeneration that must be carefully managed There should be an absolute guarantee that Council Tax must not increase as a result of the new unitary authority and any new Town council.

53 Page 285 There should be an option for the residents to have no council, there is an assumption by councillors who may have vested interests in keeping a system that the community of Weymouth may not want at all. There should be fewer councillors. They should all look at other local town councils were town council have brought about a strong community sprit. Councillors should leave party politics at the front door, I know this is a big ask There should be no town council. A not needed expense. Only serves to increase council tax. The money would be much better spent on services They are not printable This consultation was not widely publicised. This council gravy train must come to an end NOW. More cut =less taxes. This idea is done mearly for political gain by the Conservative party and also there will be a lack of local government funding for the proposed town council This is a complete waste of time and public money. The council tax is already too high and will increase. Later council reviews are bound to deduce more money is required at county and parish levels therefor creating a double impact. Services have worsened, litter is rife in Weymouth, the local 'bobby on the beat' no longer exists. Society is unravelling and diluting by the day and all your concerned about is how to prize more money out of residents to line your own pockets. When did the phrase 'piblic servant' become obsolete? This is a very low income area, so any increase in council tax can be detrimental. Therefore, any rise should be minimal. I would like to see the town council work more on improving tourism income, especially at the peninsula. This proposal is being put forward by Councillors who do not wish their influence to be lost however this could better be met by paid officers including an elected Mayor which could cost less and be more productive. This whole sham is wrapped as a consultation but it's a done deal. 27 councillors who would have to go and get proper jobs are creating new ones for themselves. Shameful self interest. This whole survey appears to assume that a Weymouth town council is inevitable. to many getting on the gravel train again Total waste of money; why wasn't this consultation being undertaken by those undertaking the Unitary Authority decisions? Town council if agreed should be forward thinking & put Weymouth first. Look at the town currently it's an eye sore, so sad

Town Council should have more evening and weekend meetings to allow working people to stand. Should be more representative especially having more young people as councillors. Town Councils need to be well resourced and I trust that the Borough's assets will largely pass to the Town Council (and to Portland Town Council as appropriate) rather than to the Unitary Council. Weymouth and Portland have lost status and influence as a result of joint working with West and North Dorset District Councils and a strong well resourced Town Council is needed to provide some redress. Unfortunately the present district council has a very poor record for decision making e.g. sale of council offices, management of the harbour, general decline of the area and I feel that if a town council was established similar incompetency would be perpetuated. No doubt it would attempt to perpetuate Cabinet government which has proved to be a farce and inappropriate for an authority this size.

54 Page 286 unsure of the extra £150.00 levy is this to be added yearly or as a one off Very disappointed that this situation historically has been allowed to evolve There must be a starting point of debate and discussion at a local level or else people far removed from the local issues have no idea and make uninformed decisions Let's encourage all local people to take responsibility for their own community Waste of money again. waste of time and money....jobs for the boys idea We are already paying one of the highest community charges in the country. We believe that is due to the incompetence of some of our present council members. However"better the devil we know". At least we can put names and faces to the people who, supposedly, represent us. Not some faceless bureaucrat in another part of the county. But Is this going to be another layer of bureaucracy.? Having read the information on the new arrangements, which is ambiguous,I do not understand whether our community charge will increase or decrease! As a former civil servant I was advised to keep explanations simple. We await the Government's agreement to the Unitary plan before any concise details can be set We cannot afford large and multi councils - small numbers might make councillors etc more accountable. No salaries above that of a Staff nurse. We could have an elected mayor . therefore we would get problem solved a lot easier as one person has the deciding vote. We definitely need a local council to look after local community issues. I firmly believe that giant unitary authorities do not work - they are too remote from the people they serve - County Councils already prove this point. We do really need voice so it is imperative that we have a town council of some sorts. We MUST have a Town Council We must not end up being the only area within Dorset without a town/parish council one the unified county council comes into being. It may be too large to give serious consideration to the local problems within Weymouth, which need addressing. We need a forward looking , proactive, council who are able to take residents views on board and act on them - not like now where the council spends huge amounts of money on 'consultantions' and nothing ever happens. We need a local management structure - we have different requirements to other parts of the county and we also need a council to stand up for this side of the County otherwise Bournemouth will swallow up all funding and development. We need good comonsense policy's controlled by people who know the town and are aware of its problems like drunks and street peoplewe need more police on streets and where are our traffic wardensand litter patrol men We need local representation by people who live in the area. We need our own council to deal locally and we know where to go in case of problems. Don't want to spend time on the phone being put through to the right person. We need Weymouth to have a strong voice locally. We need to work toward a healthy funding budget to increase investment into this beautiful place. we need young blood on the council! We should have local representation to maximise and develop our beautiful borough. We should look to the history of the borough and retain Melcombe Regis in the name. One of only 5 Regises in the whole country!

55 Page 287 Weymouth always seems to be the poor relation of Dorchester and Bournemouth will the new council stop this? Weymouth and Melcombe Regis is a large area with its own set of special needs which is served best by locally based Councillors. Its historical links and being an since ages past attractive seaside town makes the place unique for its residents and these make the seaside town a special place to people who live here and to those who come here to enjoy our beaches and explore the countryside with its many historical sites. Its character is different from other places and these need to be preserved so it retains this flavour going into the future. The area has also become attractive to pensioners for it provides fresh air, leisure opportunities, annual events and has services to support them. All these need nurturing and only by having locally based Councillors can we residents feel reassured that our needs will be looked after well and the town's future which needs some regeneration will be given due importance. Weymouth and Melcombe Regis needs a town council and should have one. Reduction in council tax charge.

Weymouth and Portland borough council seem to be unable to deal with matters affecting the town, drunkenness, unsocial behaviour, crime litter general deteriation of the town, haven't had the street where we live swept, for months, unable to deal with seafront lighting, dog mess and walkers on the beach, cyclists on the promenade, weeds everywhere in the streets, what do they do with the income, needs a new set up so no l don't support a town council Weymouth definitely needs to have a town council of its own to deal with the local needs and improve the town in particular which now receives a large number of overseas cruisliner guests who need to be impressed with our town and encourage others to visit too and this will generate much needed tourist income. Also we need to get back into encouraging ferry services to return, and get on with regenerating the harbour area and the pavilion. We have some fantastic assets with a potential to generate lots of income if managed correctly Weymouth is too large not to have democratic representation at a local level when the inevitable unitary authority comes about.

Weymouth must retain some say in what happens As far as the rest of Dorset is concerned it thinks their responsibility ends at the ridgeway and that little bit called Weymouth is of no interest and the poor relations. At least with a town council you have some sounding board and can make strong representations, without we can be ridden over roughshod as the rest of the county would like. Keep shouting for the town and the best way in the future would at least be in the form of a representative body such a this Weymouth needs a strong Town Council that will have some assets like car parking and local government, plus enough finance from council tax to do what is necessary to administer Weymouth. Weymouth needs a Town Council as a counterweight to a new unitary authority Weymouth needs a. Voice!! and should not be neglected! New blood needs to be pumped into this Town- we are behind everyone else- e.g. Look at how the Pavilion has performed - so well - we need new shops - new Councillors whose are not just thinking of their own pockets! They should be looking after the local people inthis town who pay high council taxes- we want a return for our money! On a Sunday we are still paying car park charges? Our wages are low we have been fleeced over and over! Small businesses are struggling because of high rents- Decent New. Counsellors- Decent New Town Centre!! and Overhaul of Our Beautiful Harbour please! please! Make This Happen Don't Let Weymouth Deteriorate any Longer!!!

56 Page 288 Weymouth needs to have a voice and a new vision for the future. Weymouth should not have a town council. The current councilors are out of touch with the communities they serve and only carry out the role for the gain of themselves and their friends and family. Weymouth will need a voice orbit will be left behind with other council's obtaining benefits and Weymouth being left behind, we are already a very tired and scruffy looking town we cannot let it get any worse. We after all a seaside town were parents bring there children in summer for for enjoyment, without stepping over beggars and smelly sleeping bags. Sorry i love Weymouth and we will need a strong unified town council What assets and responsibility would the council have? Parking, toilets, planning and harbour are all big ticket items in this area. Who controls them drives the need for and nature of any level of local representation. what is the point in dismantling one council to set up another??? What is the point of this new layer. It has not been explained anywhere. It looks like jobs for the boys instead of eliminating useless bureaucracy. Whatever the outcome I think more effort needs to be made into listening to the views of residents of Weymouth. The way I see it, local elections currently are a waste of time because none of the councillors do anything with their title. I believe Weymouth has so muh potential but nothing will change unless people's views are heard. Why 29 Councillors for 12 wards? Why 29 councillors? Could there be less? 25 for instance.

Why ask for a name when you are still considering if it is a possibility...or is it fate a compli... Why do this survey, because the Councillors wil do what they wsnt at the end of the day. Why is there nothing in this consultation about what the community would like the Town Council to do and nothing about the desire or otherwise of having a Mayor. Another way of creating a community council for Weymouth might be to have an elected executive Mayor with a small number of elected Councillors. 29 is far too much particularly if they are dealing with almost no services Will the new Town council have economic responsibility for tourism? Important issue for the area along with regeneration With the new unitary authority coming into force it would be wrong that a community as large as Weymouth would be the only town without it s own council Work smarter - build a community which we can be proud off. In fact travel and get ideas - stop wasting money Would any comments I make be seriously considered??? PROBABLY NOT!! Would we have a mayor ?Would we have a cabinet ? Yes no one is saying how much this will cost the council tax payer. Yes, councillors don't get paid, or have an allowance! Get rid of all current councillors and start fresh. Too many of them are only there to line their own pockets. You had your opportunity, why poor more good money away...... You should not be wasting money on numerous councils etc. Your questions were leading. You have clearly already decided the outcome and allowing us to voice our concerns is a charade.

57 Page 289 Are there any positive or negative impacts that you believe the council should take into account in relation to equalities or human rights? If so, are you able to provide any supporting evidence and suggest any ways in which the organisation could remove any potential negative impacts and increase any positive impacts 1) Each area (ward) must be Appropriately represented 2) Each should acknowledge the different issues of the others 3) Social characteristics and financial allocations need to be fairly and equitably provided for. A fair representation of all human rights needs to be observed, and a move from Victorian views. About time all taxpayers were treated EQUALLY instead of some having special rights. Absolutely none....the above statement is exactly where local govt are going wrong. Whatever happened to people standing on their own two feet. Less reliance on local govt please. Actively Encourage and listen to all members of the community without discrimination and fear of recrimination Additional consideration needs to be given to disbaled access. Pathways in the area are in a poor state of repair and crossing roads is a challenge for those in wheelchairs All agencies should work together and involve people with disabilities. Already stated. any funding granted to the area would need to be distributed with wisdom, as per the 5 point strategy. appointment of councillors to be made on the basis of populations representation on the council. Are we not all equal ? As a suggestion, a regular bus service, rigged to carry only buggies and wheelchairs. At a recent Planning meeting we attended to object to a development near us a Labour councillor said "we must move all these old people out of their houses and move families in" We feel that elderly people, who have already downsized in moving here, are being discriminated against. We have already lost our free use of deckchairs on the Esplanade. I suppose the next thing will be our bus passes. Best person for the job should always be employed no matter what they're sex, religion, persuasion etc by having quotas you miss out potentially on employing the best person for the job. Cannot imagine how anyone could regard a decision on whether to have a Weymouth Town Council is affected by equalities and human rights considerations. Should we also specifically consider the rights of cyclists, dog walkers and vegetarians? Can't think of any, but not in a good position to judge. Clean up the streets, remove the beggars and drug addicts that are destroying out community and work harder at attracting back the businesses and visitors who have been put off coming to Weymouth by the squalor. Clear and transparent declaration of councillors vested interests such as masonic membership, land and property ownership, licensed premises ownership, property rental. A properly funded town council is essential. Council go there own way and have yet to listen to public opinion.

Council needs to recognize people with hidden disabilities better and to be more inclusive.

58 Page 290 Cycle paths wrongly marked out by Radipole lake. I use a Mobility scooter and have to change paths for the cycles.Left up to a point and then marked on the right in a straight line

Disabled access to every area and shop in Weymouth there are shops that wheelchair and mobility scooters can't access some pavements are too narrow get rid of A boards looking at the town nearly every shop has a sign hanging out to say what they are and all are visible from a distance don't need A boards too! They're just pedestrian and wheelchair hazards Diversity in any population enhances a community. However a responsibility of all who live here to be part of the whole community not isolated groups where others are not welcomed or feel afraid Diversity is reflected more in an urban area than a rural area. There is sufficient diversity in the town as a whole from my point of view but perhaps some training would be necessary in some instances. Does this 'council' mean the new unitary authority or any local representatives on a town council? Ensure disabled parking can only be in designated areas NOT any street corner Equality is a fancy notion but there is no such thing. Focus on the 'empty' shop areas. Supporting 'drop in facility' which helps the 'real' homeless to help themselves i.e. washing, job search, Free parking at weekend , bring more shops ,make Weymouth a nice proud town. If you asking today Weymouth is a town without spirit . Get rid of the rough sleepers, the drug addicts, the all night drinking and make sure landlords tidy and repair and paint their buildings. Forceempty properties into the rental sector and get buildings back into use and deal with rhe litter on our streets firstlly by enuring there are plenty of suitable well maintained bins around which are regulaly emptie. Good links to all youth groups. Young people are our future Having, low cost parish councils will represent the people better. Current councillors should not be permitted to make this decision. A ballot/referendum of all should make the decision here we go the 1st level of bureaucracy Homeless people from outside the area turning our town into a disgrace with open air drug trading, drunkenness and antisocial behaviour. Human rights also involve a right to a house, Weymouth council should be more proactive in helping initiatives such as the Street bus. Also when contacted by their constituents they should be civil enough reply. Having recently contacted our three local Councillors only one was civil enough to reply. Other areas have had the same lack of response. Human rights are great but just don't get too carried away like that "genderless baby" case I read about the other day. ;) Human rights need to be kept in perspective, not a lever or excuse to control the whole of the community. I am fortunately healthy, I work, I am white, I am Christian, I am heterosexual and I am male - what about my rights? I am in support of a new body acting in a way that takes into account the diversity in our community.

59 Page 291 I am not aware of the "old" Weymouth Council having a particularly good record in this area, or at least I am not aware of any data. With the great reduction in the services that will need to be supplied, this will be quantatively less serious and will largely be resticted to employment practices. Training of councillors will be vital to ensure awareness of the issues and the law. I believe the demographic electing a weymouth Town Council would be more likely to be concerned about these issues than the county council. I feel that having two large councils will enable resources to be pooled and to be spread accross Dorset more fairly I have a protected characteristic, white, male, christian who believes in nationhood and self reliance, the impact of the Equality Act 2010 is that I am no longer able to voice an opinion without being branded as a non-believer. I have already stated that failure to provide a Town Council and a physical Information Centre would severely impact upon a large percentage of the community especially those with a disability and the elderly - those who most need services and support. To fail to provide a physical presence would be in breach of the Disability Act and the new Equality Act and would be failing our whole community. I have no comment on this subject. I have no idea what this means. I passionately believe in equality and we should ensure that Weymouth is open to all regardless of any differences.

I think mutual respect is a positive for equality without dicecting different issues to complicate matters, it's a generational fallout that's created much of our problems. family units broken by a permissive society that has lost its own self respect .where to heal first is a puzzle. I think the council should disengage from such' kafkaesque' nonsense I was hoping that coming out of Europe might allow us ti do away with Human Rights. I wish you weren't obligated to do this. Once you have divided us all into our appropriate 'boxes' it just encourages division. The less of it we have the better. We should be looking at this as a united group. If someone wants to be represented in the borough it is up to them to ensure that they either put themselves up for council or have someone who represents their view. If they are human they are equal!

In addition to the matters above covered under the Act, it's also important for the Council to consider the effect that any decisions will have on those members of our community that can be considered to be "disadvantaged". By this I mean those who are homeless or in some other way are sometimes considered "undesirable". A caring and inclusive Society must care for all its citizens, not only the groups specifically mentioned in the Act as above, but also those who have somehow fallen on hard times or other unfortunate circumstances. Involvement of locals...volunteers within the community...look at the Weymouth Carnival Committee. A real success. It would be lovely to have an event each year to bring everyone together on matter what colour, religion or disability to show what people have to offer the town a fun day for everyone. I know you have a food fest but we need a mix of all things together people will stay longer then.

60 Page 292 It's important that the town plays a part in supporting Refugees that are looking for sanctuary in the UK. Racism needs to be challenged where ever it occurs, head on. Just treat every one with respect & as equals , I think every one has the same rights . Let's just ensure that councillors are not dominated by white, retired males. Listen to the residents of Weymouth! Look around town open your eyes be brave walk by the station at night see what you think ?????? Maintain green spaces and ensure new developments incorporate green spaces for the wellbeing of residents. Mental health - we need more resourses. The elderly more resourses. Start making things happen and protect the people that need us. More benefits for council tax payers over those of visitors. More consideration for the vulnerable members of our town and not use the local newspapers to denegrate the less fortunate members of our community, My human rights not to have my money taken off me to pay for some councillors expenses. No representation allows no taxation. Need to be clearly accessible and accountable. W &P was not customer friendly. Need to encourage more councillors from diverse communities- current lot are too homogenous a group. Negative effects are clearly on the well being of existing residents who chose to live in & invest in areas only to find Councils totally disregard the commitments existing residents made.Rights of privacy, stability of the area. No No No No No No no No No No No No No no No No no No No No No No No

61 Page 293 No No No No No No No No no No No No comment no comment No comment No comment to make at this time, with the exception that local residents should have preference in housing, social services, etc. No further comments to make No further comments. No Impact No, the council should focus on its job for its population rather than worrying about things that don't concern it! No. No. No. None None None None None None None None None None None at all. None, The TC will serve all members of society with bias. nope Not 100% sure not applicable nothing to add Nothing to do with equalities or human rights, we're just downsizing full stop!

62 Page 294 Obviously the council should adhere to the laws relating to human rights and equality and should encourage an attitude of benevolence to all in the community. Problems of homelessness and drug addiction have to be tackled in a fair but firm way and the source of these problems needs to be properly identified and dealt with in a proactive and preventative manner. Criminal activity needs to be firmly dealt with as does petty criminality, burglary, violence, domestic abuse and racial hatred . Councils need to apply their "rules, local laws with a fairer degree of discretion rather than the current "tick box" mentality. Only comment is that we spend far too much time pandering to the minority instead of focussing on the majority. Only the people who shout the loudest get heard! People are and should be shown equal respect but we need to face the facts that some need more help in order to achieve equal opportunities.

People attending church should not have to pay to park their cars within half a mile of the church on a Sunday. They could be issued with passes to display in the car windscreen, which could be valid from 10-1pm. There should be better provision for disabled toilets, especially near the seafront, east of the Jubilee Clock, as there is an ageing population. Toilets can be a big decider about where people choose to go for a day out. toilet provision also needs to be increased in the Pavilion. This would greatly enhance the theatre going experience. At present, queues get too long for the length of interval. People earn human rights by their behaviour and conduct. Too many people who commit crimes etc are shielded by human rights - this is not right and should not trouble or be taken into account inthe future. Perhaps when the town council asks the local population for their views on matters (such as dogs in leads in certain areas) they could be a little more democratic in their response. Please do not forget that us white heterosexual Cof E British working tax paying people should have rights too - not just the so called minorities as define under the act above Please refer to comments made in my response with regard to the need to avoid social inclusion. Such potential ramifications of the approach being advocated towards the reorganisation of local government would, in my view, result in considerable inequalities, impacting on resident's human rights such as the need for quality homes and living environments. Plse see previous statement. Better support from DCC for the election of independents and new councillors would help Weymouth to be better represented from a Diversity point of view. DCC has one chance to get this right before the whole endeavour becomes bogged down yet again with the same small group if people 'representing' the town. Provide a proper "campsite" funded by rate payers in unused council office car park or on the beach for all the beggars Provide free beach huts for the beggars. removing the council is the ideal solution Residents of Portland to be considered for some preferential options like Chickerell and Bincombe residents have or have had. Restore women's refuge. See as before. Too many white males over 50 on council Ssee last comment. Stop the begging in the shopping areas

63 Page 295 Take account of the fact SC&H are accepting UASC but have no provision for dealing with multi cultural members of our community. take into account the needs of wheelchair users. That does this mean, look after the whole of Weymouth regardless The best person for the job should ALWAYS get the position, not based on their gender, creed or religion The council finances should be supervised by the county council. The council should have an equal number of men and women, as well as people representing minority groups. The era or 'middle aged white men' needs to end The current bus services for pensioners using the Freedom Pass permit its use only after 9.30 am. This is quite restrictive as those volunteer pensioners [many in the town are which is commendable] travelling to places like Dorchester / Poole find it difficult to attend meetings / seminars like arranged for volunteers which usually start early. Either run more buses between 8 am to 9.30 am allowing use of the Freedom Pass from 8 am or remove present restrictions or provide an additional exempt pass for those retired pensioners doing Voluntary Service. The high business rates and lack of businesses in the town. the increasing quantity of residential homes for elderly. Need to promote to younger generation The homeless should be taken into consideration and facilities createdto help them to return to a healthy style of residency. It has a great impact on the whole are? The Human Rights Act needs to be completely rewritten or scrapped entirely. The immediate area caters for lage mummers of near erased persons or those on parole, in rehabs. Will you nclude them? The local community should be encouraged to participate in developing creativity and solving problems. The right to safety: The classic train tracks on the quayside have thrown me and countless others off their vehicles. It causes more problems for the public than it doesn't. Please hear my plea to remove them as soon as is efficiently possible. These should always be thought about and taken in to account. Are town should support these. None are these are negative or positive in my view. They should respect the rights of the residents and actively discourage the settlement of child molesters repeat sex offender's and return the town to decent people who are not represented by persons with their personal interests Think about the whole community This is a very complex question and you do human rights and its complexity a disservice by asking for general comments on an issue that is complex but will allow you to tick a box as you have asked the question! Appalling! This is not relevant. This question is superfluous in this context. This town now has a diverse and ever changing population and I don't think enough consideration has been given to them...... I didn't see the word diversity anywhere.

64 Page 296 To be effective on local or individual issues I believe it is important that decisions are not taken too remotely or by an organisation whose members are representing a large geographical area. Whilst many services will require the scale of operations of a Unitary Authority there are many examples of services and decisions which can be more effectively and fairly taken on the basis of a strong understanding of local circumstances. However it will be imperative that Town Council members and officers are trained in Equalities Awareness. Try not divide people in to groups , all should be treated individually. We are all equal with equal rights. That means no one get priority treatment e.g. Muslims over and above everyone else. Equal means equal. We can't realy do anything these days without policaly correct human rights. We just want a clean and safe environment for everyone. We need the rights of the disabled/ terminally ill to be taken into account locally. this means that someone is looking at Their rights to safe accessibility- i.e. Good, safe drop curbs. My husband has MND and only gets out in our mobility vehicle or electric wheelchair - drop curbs and the need for smooth pavements and the reduction of bumpy roads ( even Sleeping policemen) are a real issue for him. Weymouth council should be disbanded because they don't allow any improvements unless they can some way line their win pockets Weymouth is a welcoming Town and is frequented by all nationals and ethnic groups of varying religious faiths without cause for concern. As Weymouth is such a lovely area there is a tendency for the retired and aging generation to live and visit and it is my belief that the council could do more to cater for this group of citizens, by increasing there consideration, facilities and welfare. What a load of rubbish the above gobble de goop Common sense, come on guys Whilst a unitary council might save money, it does not, and will not, reflect the wishes of the people of Weymouth &Melcombe Regis. Therefore, a town council should exist to support those living in their homes within the boundaries of the town council. As a mother (and former wife) of those who would be in the 'sexual' minority, and an aunt of a potentially racially discriminated against nephew ~ I would want my town council to help them (and possibly myself in the future) ~ let's keep Weymouth & Melcombe Regis a place that listens to their townspeople. Whilst I appreciate the historical appearance of the town, there was no problem with sticking us with laser lights. How about allowing properly fitted lifts to Esplanade restaurants for the disabled.

Yes do not allow this town to become a Islamist haven. Send all prisoners who have finished their time at the prison back to the towns where they were born for a 5 year period. Yes hostels should be made available for homeless and transitional people. Jobs should be made available to help some of these people back to normal, as we se it, life. Drug and alcohol councillor should also be available Yes stop dividing us into separate groups we are all human beings. Yes. Clean up the area with stricter enforcement. Remove informal roadside shrines (and the like), that just end up "littering" the environment & setting awkward precedents that it appears no-one wants to deal with. Create a proper planning policy to deal with this issue (rather that just turning a blind eye), and implement. Let's get a grip, and make the area smart again. Rubbish breeds rubbish.

65 Page 297 Your online consultation may alienate a large number of the population. Not everyone can use the Internet - being very wordy you have not appealed to those with additional needs.

66 Page 298 Appendix 2 Community Governance Review Consideration of a new Parish Council for Weymouth Draft recommendations following public consultation

Introduction

A Community Governance Review considers whether the electoral arrangements for particular areas are appropriate, and if there should be any changes in community governance to make sure communities are represented fairly and appropriately. The Review looks at the number of councillors and the parish boundaries and takes into account expected changes in the area, such as large scale developments resulting in a change in population.

In January 2017, the 9 Councils in Dorset considered a report for the reorganisation of local government in Dorset. The 6 Councils supporting the recommendation of the report have submitted a case for change to the Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) seeking the creation of 2 Unitary Councils in Dorset. If the Secretary of State is minded to create 2 Unitary authorities in Dorset, this decision, if implemented, would result in the abolition of Weymouth & Portland Borough Council, and therefore the Borough Council is undertaking a Community Governance Review which is the mechanism to create a Parish Council for the Weymouth area. Portland is already represented by an established Town Council.

The Community Governance Review is being overseen by the Steering Group for Democratic Improvement, a working party of Weymouth & Portland Borough Councillors, and is being conducted in accordance with the Local Government & Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, and also taking into account the Local Government Boundary Commission Guidance on Community Governance Reviews.

The Council carried out a public engagement exercise between 26 June 2017 and 1 September 2017 asking for views on the Council’s draft proposals that included an option for a single Parish Council for Weymouth, and also seeking any alternative proposals for consideration. A series of roadshows were held across the Borough throughout the Summer, and a survey was available both online and in paper format in a number of different locations in the Borough.

The Council spoke with many people at the roadshow events (876 face-to-face interactions), and 944 surveys were completed and returned.

Page 299 Key facts and challenges of the Area

At 16 square miles, Weymouth and Portland is a densely populated borough with a total population of around 65,170. The population of the Weymouth area is approximately 52,168. The population is becoming increasingly elderly as residents live longer and because many people who come to live in the area are close to retirement age. Over one in five residents consider that they have a long term health problem.

The Borough falls within the most deprived third of district/boroughs in England suffering from low levels of income, child poverty and health needs. Earnings are lower than average and unemployment rates have remained at around the national level. *Three of these areas are in the top 10% most deprived nationally – Underhill, Melcombe Regis and Littlemoor. (*using the 2015 Indices of Deprivation released September 2015).

There are just over 2200 businesses, and 46% of working people in the Weymouth and Portland area are working in knowledge-driven industries, and 82% of local firms employ fewer than 10 people. 14% of employees are working in the tourism industry.

With regard to the diversity of the Borough, 94.9% are White British, 5.1% are black and minority ethnic and 2.1% do not have English as their main language. (2011 Census – Office for National Statistics).

Weymouth and Portland has just over 31,000 dwellings, and of these 67% are owned or part owned and 3.1% are second homes. The number of households that live in privately rented accommodation is higher than the Dorset average. More affordable homes are needed and this will help with the retention and recruitment of a skilled workforce.

The quality of the natural and built environment is a major asset and a key element of the identity and prosperity of the area. Over 800 hectares of land in the Borough are designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and there are also over 800 listed buildings. The coastline is protected as part of the Dorset and Devon World Heritage Site.

With its beaches, gardens, RSPB reserves, castles, museums and leisure facilities, Weymouth & Portland offers a host of attractions and activities for all the family to enjoy.

The Borough has road links through Dorchester or Wareham to the Bournemouth- Poole conurbation, and rail links to London and Bristol.

Area covered by the Review

The Review considered the community governance needs of the whole of the area represented by Weymouth & Portland Borough Council with the exclusion of Portland (Borough Wards of Underhill, Tophill East and Tophill West). As a Town Council

Page 300 already exists in Portland, the decision was taken to exclude this area from the Review. In developing the proposed recommendations, in addition to the responses received to the public consultation exercise, the Council also had regard for the Guidance issued by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England and the Department for Communities and Local Government. This included the need to ensure that community governance within the area under review;

 reflects the identities and interests of the communities in that area; and  is effective and convenient

The Council has also taken into account other factors including;

 the impact of community governance arrangements on community cohesion, and  the size, population and boundaries of a local community or parish.

It was recognised that there are a number of public organisations working within the Borough that do not split the Weymouth area in to small areas, and aligning any new Parish Council boundaries with these structures would enable effective and convenient partnership working to be established. Examples of these public sector organisations that treat the Weymouth area as a whole, in some cases including the area of Portland, are:

 Dorset Police with a Weymouth Team.  Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group’s Weymouth & Portland Locality Team including the Weymouth Integrated Assessment and Service Project, and the Weymouth & Portland Health Network working with patient participation and health groups.  Wellbeing Weymouth & Portland that is part of Dorset Health Care working with people with mental health issues.

Reflecting the identities and interests of local communities

Parish Councils have an important role to play in the development of their local communities, working with residents to help people and local groups to create cohesive, attractive and economically vibrant local communities.

In considering the proposals for governance of the Weymouth area, Borough Councillors considered that a new Parish Council should be created, and that this should be warded replicating the existing Borough ward boundaries. It was recognised that the current warding pattern for the Borough Council worked very well in enabling communities to work positively together responding to challenges in terms of economic, social and cultural trends. The creation of a single Parish Council will also offer strong and accountable local government and community leadership, either taking the lead locally on specific issues, or representing the local community as an important partner with others. It will also enable the local representatives to be responsive to challenges and opportunities in the area in a co-ordinated way. A single Parish Council will also facilitate

Page 301 the effective delivery of services at Parish Council level eg parks, that might prove more difficult if more than one Parish Council was created for the Weymouth area.

There are a number of organisations working within the area that cover Weymouth & Portland without further division, and creating a single Parish Council for the Weymouth area will enable local residents to be clear with regard to their local representatives whereas creating a number of Parish Councils could leave to confusion.

Examples of other organisations working in the area that cover either Weymouth alone or the Weymouth & Portland area include:

 Weymouth & Portland Chamber of Commerce  Weymouth & Portland Access Group that looks at access for all including wheelchair users, those with prams/pushchairs etc  Weymouth Community Volunteers

The survey responses demonstrated that there is a strong feeling of Weymouth being the area that residents see as their “community” (68%), compared to their own ward (20%). There was a clear and decisive response to the proposal for a single Parish Council, with 77% of respondents to the survey indicating that they agreed or strongly agreed with this concept.

The Council is proposing that a single Parish Council is created covering the Weymouth area.

Council size

Parish councils vary enormously in size and in the type of activities and services they provide and can represent populations ranging from less than 100 to up to 70,000. Guidance suggests that they continue to have 2 main roles: community representation and local administration, and for both these roles it is suggested that it’s desirable that a parish council “should reflect a distinctive and recognisable community of place with its own sense of identity” and that the “views of local communities and inhabitants are of central importance”.

National research undertaken in 1992 found that typically councils representing a population of over 20,000 had between 13 and 31 Councillors, and there is no evidence to suggest that this had altered significantly since the research was conducted. Legislation requires that the number of any parish councillors shall not be less than five but there is no maximum number.

Examples of Council Size in some local Parish Councils in the area are set out below:

Page 302 Area Population Council Size Dorchester 19,143 20 Councillors Blandford 10,541 16 Councillors Gillingham 11,871 17 Councillors Lyme Regis 3,637 14 Councillors Salisbury City 40302 23 Councillors Proposed 52,168 29 Councillors Weymouth

In undertaking the Review, Members considered the appropriate Council size in relation to the warding pattern that is proposed for the new Parish Council in Weymouth. In proposing the Council Size, Members had regard to the important democratic principle that each person’s vote should be of equal weight so far as possible, and have worked to ensure that each Councillor represents approximately the same number of people. The Council has also taken into account future demographic trends and influences, such as new development, that may alter the population significantly in the 5 years following the commencement of the Review. Whilst in reality the achievement of absolute electoral fairness is unlikely to be attainable, the warding pattern proposed keeps variances to a minimum.

The consultation responses with regard to Council Size were wide ranging but strong themes emerged. With 120 references, respondents felt strongly that the arrangement of 29 Councillors was too many, and 48 people suggested one member for each of the 12 wards (giving 12 members) in total whilst 24 people felt 2 members per ward (giving 24 members) was appropriate. Only three people felt there should be more than 29 Councillors.

The Council discussed this issue in some detail, and looked at the Council Size of a number of established Town Council in the local area. The electorate that would be represented under the proposed Warding pattern would be between 1305 and 1490 electors per Councillor, which is significantly higher than the other existing Town Councils in Dorset. In order to reduce the number of Councillors, it would also be necessary to review all the Ward boundaries to ensure that the democratic principle of electoral equality was maintained. Whilst the Council recognised the concerns expressed through the public consultation, it is recommended that the Town Council is initially established with 29 Councillors serving 12 Wards, and that this is reviewed after a period of time of the Town Council operating to ensure that this remains appropriate.

The Council is proposing that an appropriate Council size for a new Parish Council for Weymouth is 29 Councillors.

Proposed Warding Pattern and Good Community Governance

Page 303 Government Guidance indicates that characteristics of good community governance to be considered in assessing the options when undertaking such a review include:

 a sense of civic pride and civic values  a strong, inclusive community and voluntary sector  a sense of place - with a positive feeling for people and local distinctiveness  effective engagement with the local community at neighbourhood level  strong leadership  the ability of local authorities to deliver quality services economically and efficiently  an area that is of a size that is viable as an administrative unit of local government.

Parish warding includes the number and boundaries of any wards, the number of Councillors to be elected for any ward and the names of wards. The 2007 Act requires that consideration be given to whether:

 The number, or distribution of the local government electors for the parish would make a single election of councillors impracticable or inconvenient, and  It is desirable that any area or areas of the parish should be separately represented.

Weymouth and Portland Borough Council is currently divided into 15 Wards; 12 Wards covering the Weymouth area and 3 Wards covering the Portland area. There is already an established Town Council for Portland and, as stated above, for this reason it was decided not to include this area as part of the Review.

The 12 Borough Wards covering the Weymouth area are served by 29 Borough Councillors and include Littlemoor, Melcombe Regis, Preston, Radipole, Upwey and Broadwey, Westham East, Westham West, Westham North, Wey Valley, Weymouth East, Weymouth West and Wyke Regis. There are currently no Parish Councils serving the Weymouth area.

The boundaries for Weymouth & Portland Borough Council were last reviewed in 2002, and, whilst this was 15 years ago, officers are not aware of any significant migration of people or large scale developments in the Borough area since the review. The electoral numbers for each of these Wards would support this view.

The Council considered whether more than one Parish Council should be created to represent the residents of the Weymouth area, and believe that it would be beneficial to all residents in Weymouth to have one Parish Council representing the whole area to avoid any confusion with regard to the local representative body.

An important aspect to facilitating sustainable communities is enabling effective and inclusive participation, representation and leadership, and it was considered that by having one Parish Council for the Weymouth area, residents would be able to identify clearly with the Parish and it was also considered that this sense of identity and community lent strength and legitimacy to the parish structure, creates a common interest in parish affairs, encourages participation in elections to the Parish Council. It also leads to representative and accountable government, engenders effective leadership and generates a strong, inclusive community with a sense of civic values, Page 304 responsibility and pride. In addition, one council representing the whole area will create a unified structure, better able to respond to the key challenges facing the area.

The Borough Council also believes that a single Parish Council would be able to effectively engage with the community at neighbourhood level including capacity building to develop the community’s skills, knowledge and confidence. It will also offer the opportunity to continue with strong community engagement and participation that the Borough Council currently enjoys with people from different backgrounds. The Council is keen to receive responses from local residents with regard to community cohesion recognising that challenges are often very local in nature. The Borough Council will assess and consider any challenges made to the proposal for a single Parish Council that it is believed will promote community cohesion.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s Guidance recognises that “the identification of a community is not a precise or rigid matter and that the pattern of daily life in each of the existing communities, the local centres for education and child care, shopping, community activities, worship, leisure pursuits, transport facilities and means of communication will generally have an influence.” However, the Guidance also points out that whilst historic loyalty may be to a town, the local community of interest and social focus may lie within a part of the town with its own separate identity. Community cohesion is the recognition of the way in which people perceive how their local community is composed and what it represents. The Council considered this point in some detail and believe that a single Parish Council for the whole of Weymouth would be appropriate taking all these factors into account.

The Borough Council believes that the warding pattern proposed reflects the distinctive and recognisable communities that already have a clear sense of identity and feeling of local community – the Borough Council is clear that the interests of local inhabitants are a primary consideration in this Review. It is felt that the residents will benefit from a single Parish Council for the Weymouth area, facilitating the empowerment of its residents to work with public bodies, including the Parish Council, to influence public decisions.

There were quite a few comments via the survey responses regarding the fact that respondents felt there were too many wards or that the ward boundaries should be re- examined (this was referred to 43 times). The Council considered this view carefully and discussed the proposed Warding pattern recognising that, as with Council Size, the proposed Ward boundaries ensured that the democratic principle of electoral equality was maintained ie that each vote cast by an elector carries equal weight. The Council recommend that the Town Council is initially established with 29 Councillors serving 12 Wards, and that this is reviewed after a period of time of the Town Council operating to ensure that this remains appropriate.

Effective and convenient local government

The Government believes that the effectiveness and convenience of local government is best understood in the context of a local authority’s ability to deliver quality services economically and efficiently, and give users of services a democratic voice in the decisions that affect them. It is believed that, as stated above, the proposals will give Page 305 residents a sense of local identity and make an important contribution to cohesion facilitating a strong base from which to rise to challenges and new opportunities, and additionally will ensure that more efficient and effective provision of services such as beach and parks.

The proposals for one Parish Council will enable local communities to have access to good quality local services that will be in one place, making them easy to reach and accessible to local people.

Electoral Arrangements

The Local Government Act 1972 states that ordinary elections of parish councillors should take place in 1979 and every fourth year thereafter (ie next elections due in 2019), and recognised the importance of ensuring that this coincides with the cycle for other principal council elections so that costs can be shared.

An important part of the Review has been determining the Electoral Arrangements for any new Parish Council. The recommendations are that:

 The first election to the proposed new Parish Council will be in 2019 and then every fourth year thereafter;  The number of councillors to be elected to the proposed new parish council (Council size) will be 29;  The proposed new parish will be divided into 12 wards for the purposes of electing councillors;  The boundaries of the wards of the proposed new Council will be as indicated on the maps attached at Appendix A; NB – appendix A is not attached to this draft version but the proposed boundaries follow the existing Borough Ward boundaries  The name of the proposed Wards and the number of Councillors to be elected to the proposed wards is as indicated at Appendix B;

Council name

Weymouth and Melcombe Regis was a borough in England formed by a Charter of Elizabeth I, amalgamating the towns of Weymouth and Melcombe Register in 1571. The borough continued in existence until 1974 as a municipal borough (a type of local government district which existed between 1835 and 1974) when it was merged under the Local Government Act in 1972, into the district of Weymouth & Portland Borough Council. With regard to the name of a new Parish Council, Section 245 of the Local Government Act 1972 allows a parish council to have the status of a town. This also entitles the Chairman and Vice-Chairman to use the style of “Town Mayor” and “Deputy Town Mayor” respectively.

It is proposed that the new parish council for Weymouth will be

Page 306 called Weymouth Town Council.

This name was supported by 56% of the respondents to the survey during the consultation on the initial proposals.

Procedural Matters

The effective date for the new parish council will be 1 April 2019.

If the decision is made to create 2 new Unitary Councils in Dorset, the existing Borough Council will be abolished on 31 March 2019, but the Councillors for the new Parish Council will not be elected until the first Thursday in May 2019. To ensure that Weymouth has democratically elected representation at parish level during this short period, the new parish would be represented by those persons who were Councillors for the relevant areas of Weymouth & Portland Borough Council on 31 March 2019.

What happens next?

There will now be a period of public consultation, during which the Council encourages further comments on the draft recommendations for local governance arrangements for Weymouth contained in the report. The Council will take into account all submissions received by 12 January 2018. Any submissions received after this date may not be taken into account.

How to submit your views

Online at www.futureweymouth.gov.uk By email to [email protected] In writing to Democratic Services, Weymouth & Portland Borough Council, South Walks House, South Walks Road, Dorchester, DT1 1UZ

Page 307 This page is intentionally left blank Page 309 This page is intentionally left blank Page 311 This page is intentionally left blank Page 313 This page is intentionally left blank Page 315 This page is intentionally left blank Page 317 This page is intentionally left blank Page 319 This page is intentionally left blank Page 321 This page is intentionally left blank Page 323 This page is intentionally left blank Page 325 This page is intentionally left blank Page 327 This page is intentionally left blank Page 329 This page is intentionally left blank Page 331 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix B

Proposed Parish Wards for a new Parish Council for Weymouth

(based on electorate Figures for Weymouth & Portland Borough Council as at 19 January 2017)

Ward No. of Electorate Electorate % difference Councillors per from electoral Councillor average Littlemoor 2 2,726 1,363 -1.52 Melcombe Regis 3 4,421 1,473 +6.43 Preston 3 4,353 1,451 +4.84 Radipole 2 2,980 1,490 +7.66 Upwey and Broadwey 2 2,830 1,415 +2.23 Westham East 2 2,798 1,399 +1.08 Westham North 3 4,101 1,367 -1.23 Westham West 2 2,898 1,449 +4.69 Wey Valley 2 2,835 1,417 +2.38 Weymouth East 2 2,662 1,331 -3.83 Weymouth West 3 3,917 1,305 -5.71 Wyke Regis 3 4,302 1,434 +3.61

Page 333 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 13

Management Committee 31st October 2017 Weymouth Town Centre Christmas Parking

For Decision

Briefholder

Cllr Colin Huckle

Senior Leadership Team Contact: M Hamilton,Strategic Director

Report Author: N Keyworth-Wright, Parking and Transport Manager

Statutory Authority

The council sets parking charges for off-street parking places by virtue of powers granted by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984

Purpose of Report

1 The parking policy for the borough states that businesses are supported by free or discounted parking for specific periods in the lead up to Christmas, determined each year in consultation with Weymouth BID. This report is to request approval for the proposed concessions for 2017

Recommendations

2 To repeat the 2016 Christmas parking concessions offered for Weymouth Town Centre in 2017:

(a) To offer free parking from 3pm daily from Friday 1st December until Sunday 31st December in the following car parks:- Harbourside, Swannery, Melcombe Regis, Cosens Quay, Royal Yard, Governors Lane, Park Street, Pavillion and Council Offices. (b) To offer a combined promotional Ice Rink / Santa Grotto / parking ticket for the Swannery car park only giving a 50% discount of the daily charge for parking- BID will sell the package and reimburse the council for the parking element. (c) To allow Weymouth to use one of their five parking days to support Small Business Saturday by giving free parking all day on Saturday 2nd December 2017

Page 335 Reason for Decision

3 The offer of parking concessions which were offered in 2016 provided a simplified charging mechanism for both users and the enforcement team. This concession did not start until the first Saturday of December last year however to support the Lighting up Ceremony for the town and Small business Saturday it is proposed that the concession runs for the whole month of December 2017.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4 The council has agreed to support the efforts of the BID to attract additional visitors to Weymouth Town Centre in the lead up to and throughout the Chistmas period.

5 The councils parking policy states that free or discounted parking will be offered for specific periods in the lead up to Christmas in consultation with BID.

6 Consultation with BID was undertaken by the briefholder and a response detailing their requests was received at the end of September.

7 A request was made, by BID, to extend the concessions to include free parking all day on three Sundays in December however, based on last years income, this would potentially cost the council an additional £24,000 in lost revenue and was considered to be too costly for the council to support.

Implications

Financial

8 The parking income in December 2016 with these concessions in place showed an increase over that which was achieved in December 2015. It would therefore suggest that the concessions offered last year did not materially impact detrimentally on the income. In fact it could be argued that it increased footfall and may have resulted in increased revenue.

Economic Development

9 It is anticipated that this will have a beneficial impact on the commercial viability of the town centre by attracting more visitors.

Consultation and Engagement

10 Weymouth BID have been consulted prior to this report.

Page 336 11 The concessions will be advertised clearly on all of the machines and on promotional material in conjunction with BID to ensure that the public are aware

Footnote

Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Nicola Keyworth-Wright Telephone: 01305 838349 Email: [email protected] Date: 4/10/17

Page 337 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 14

Management Committee 31 October 2017 Application for Discretionary Rate Relief For Decision

Briefholder(s) Cllr J Cant - Finance & Assets

Senior Leadership Team Contact: J Vaughan, Strategic Director

Report Author: S Dawson, Head of Revenues and Benefits

Statutory Authority Local Government Finance Act 1988 (as amended)

Purpose of Report

1 To consider the applications received for Discretionary Rate Relief.

Officer Recommendations

2 That Committee considers the applications for Rate Relief listed at Appendix 1.

Reason for Decision

3 That the applications for relief are considered having regard to their individual merits.

Background and Reason Decision Needed

4 Under the Local Government Finance Act 1988, registered charities are entitled to apply for 80% Mandatory Rate Relief in respect of charges due. Councils have the discretion to top-up any relief awarded to a registered charity up to 100% of the rates payable.

5 Committee has agreed guidelines which are to be used when considering an application for Discretionary Rate Relief. A copy of the guidelines is attached at Appendix 1.

6 Applications for Discretionary Rate Relief have been received from the ratepayers listed at Appendix 2. As the Council is required to meet 40% Committee will want to satisfy itself that it is in the interests of the Council Taxpayer to award any relief. Page 339 Implications

Footnote

Issues relating to financial, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.

Report Author: Stuart Dawson Telephone: 01305 211925 Email: [email protected]

Page 340 Appendix 1

Guidelines for determining applications for Discretionary Rate Relief

These guidelines are to be used when considering an application for Discretionary Rate Relief. It should be remembered that each application should be considered on its own individual merits and that these guidelines should only be used to help ensure consistency in decision making.

All applications for Discretionary Rate Relief must be submitted in writing and should include a copy of the Organisations Memorandum or Articles of Association together with accounts for the last two years. If the applicant is a national organisation, it should provide the local and national accounts (where possible).

In determining an application the following guidelines should be considered. . If the organisation already receives 80% Mandatory Rate Relief, no top-up of Discretionary Rate Relief should be awarded unless Committee consider the applicant’s circumstances are exceptional and warrant the additional relief. In such cases, up to 20% relief may be awarded. . The organisation should be open to all sections of the community. Membership fees should be reasonable and not be at a level where it restricts membership. . Preference will be given to applicants who provide recreational and/or sporting facilities for the benefit of those living within the Borough. . Does the organisation actively encourage membership from particular groups (e.g. the young, elderly, disabled, the disadvantaged etc)? . Does the organisation allow their facilities to be used by people other than members (e.g. schools, casual public sessions)? . Discretionary Rate relief will normally be awarded up to 80% of the rates charged (unless Committee consider the applicant’s circumstances to be exceptional). . When determining an application, Committee will have regard to the funds held by the organisation. Any profit earned should be reinvested into the organisation. . If the organisation provides a bar for its members, Committee will consider the main purpose of the organisation. In making its decision Committee will have regard to the balance between playing and non-playing members and whether the prices charged for drinks are significantly lower than those charged by commercial organisations. . Does the organisation provide training or education for its members? . Does the organisation provide facilities which indirectly relieve the Authority of the need to do so, or enhance and supplement those which it does provide?

Page 341 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 2

Applications for Discretionary Rate Relief

Name of applicant British Red Cross Address of property Shop, 96 St Mary Street, Weymouth concerned What are the aims and To provide assistance to victims of armed conflicts; objectives of the To work for the improvement of health, for the prevention of disease and for the prevention and organisation? alleviation of human suffering in the British Islands and throughout the world. Is membership open to all Yes sections of the community? How much is the No fee is charged Page 343 Page membership fee? Does the organisation Yes provide training and education to its members? Are its facilities open to non members? How does the organisation Donations, grants fundraising and retail. raise income? What funds are held? The accounts for the year ended 31/12/16 show that income totalled £253.4m and expenditure £237m. The applicant had reserves of £166.8m as at 31/12/16. This is broken down into £115.5m unrestricted funds and £51.3m that is restricted.

What would be the cost to The applicant already receives 80% Mandatory Rate Relief and is applying for Discretionary Rate the Council if relief was Relief to be awarded from 01/04/17. If Discretionary Rate Relief was awarded in respect of the awarded outstanding charge of £4,721.59, the cost to the Council would be £1,888.64. Name of applicant Steps Club for Young People Address of property 110 Chickerell Road, Weymouth concerned What are the aims and To provide young people with opportunities that are educational, developmental and preventative objectives of the enabling them to grow to full maturity as healthy and responsible members of society. organisation? Is membership open to all Yes within the age range 12-25 sections of the community? How much is the £3 annual membership (optional) membership fee? Evening subscriptions: - £0.50 (Members); £1.00 (Non Members) Does the organisation Not formal but work undertaken is classed as “informal education”

Page 344 Page provide training and education to its members? Are its facilities open to non Yes members? How does the organisation Through fundraising events, grants, sponsorship and income from lettings. raise income? What funds are held? The accounts for the year ended 31/03/16 show income of £9,333.26 against expenditure of £2,518.25. Reserves at 31/03/16 total £25,432.36. The Club states it has £30,000 annual building costs to meet and aims to raise annual funds of £90,000 to meet these costs as well as the costs of employing staff to deliver its programme of youth work.

What would be the cost to The applicant became liable to Rates from 01/09/16. It already receives 80% Mandatory Rate the Council if relief was Relief and is applying for Discretionary Rate Relief to be awarded from 01/09/16. The charge awarded (after Mandatory Rate Relief has been applied) is £1,602.11 (in respect of the period 01/09/16 to 31/03/17) and £2,524.23 (in respect of the period 01/04/17 to 31/03/18).

Unfortunately, some of the information submitted in support of the application was delayed and only received in September 2017. Legislation does not permit Councils to backdate the award of Discretionary Rate Relief to a previous year unless that decision is made within 6 months of the end of that year (i.e. in this case, 30/09/17). However, Committee may decide that it does not want the Council to pursue the charge for 2016/17 if it considers the case to be exceptional.

If Discretionary Rate Relief was awarded in respect of the charge of £2,524.23, the cost to the Council would be £1,009.69 Page 345 Page This page is intentionally left blank Management Committee Four Month Forward plan 1 October 2017 To 31 January 2018

This Plan contains the decisions that the Council intends to make over the next 4 months, but will be subject to review at each committee meeting. The Plan does not allow for items that are unanticipated, which may be considered at short notice. It is available for public inspection along with all reports (unless any report is considered to be exempt or confidential). Copies of committee reports, appendices and background documents are available from the council’s offices at Council Offices, Commercial Road, Weymouth, DT4 8NG 01305 251010 and will be published on the council’s website Dorsetforyou.com 3 working days before the meeting. Page 347 Page Notice of Intention to hold a meeting in private - Reports to be considered in private are indicated on the Plan as Exempt. Each item in the plan marked exempt will refer to a paragraph of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 and these are detailed at the end of this document.

Brief Holders  Community Safety - Cllr F Drake  Corporate Affairs and Continuous Improvement – Cllr A Reed  Economic Development – Cllr J Farquharson  Environment and Sustainability - Cllr R Nowak  Finance and Assets – Cllr J Cant Agenda Item 15  Housing – Cllr G Taylor  Community Facilities – Cllr K Wheller  Tourism, Harbours and Culture – Cllr R Kosior  Social Inclusion – Cllr C James  Transport and Infrastructure – C Huckle KEY DECISIONS Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author North Quay To determine the strategy through which 3, 5 WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 to secure the redevelopment of the North Finance and Assets - J Quay site. Cant Martin Hamilton, Strategic Director Festivals and Events To consider the adoption of the Festivals Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 6 Feb 2018 Policy and updated and Events Policy and updated Portland Tourism, Culture and procedures procedures. Borough Harbour - R Kosior Page 348 Page Council Nick Thornley, Head of Policy Economy, Leisure & Development Tourism Committee 27 Nov 2017 Non- Key Decisions

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Management of the To inform members of progress made in WPBC Briefholder for 6 Feb 2018 Verne Common Nature respect of the work plan scheduled in the Finance and Assets - J Reserve and High current Higher Level Stewardship Scheme Cant, WPBC Briefholder Angle Battery, Portland for this land and related budgetary for Community Facilities outcomes. - K Wheller Greg Northcote, Estates To consider potential options for future Manager land management and approve

Page 349 Page recommendations.

Community To agree draft recommendations for local Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 18 Jan 2018 Governance Review - governance arrangements for Weymouth Portland Corporate Affairs and Consultation responses for further consultation, for agreement by Borough Continuous and draft Full Council. Council Improvement - A Reed recommendations for Management Jacqui Andrews, local governance Committee Corporate Manager arrangement for Weymouth & Democratic & Electoral Weymouth Portland Services Borough Council Steering Group for Democratic Improvement 31 Oct 2017 11 Oct 2017 NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Weymouth Town To consider the findings and Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Centre Conservation recommendations following the review of Portland Economic Development Area - report of the the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Borough - J Farquharson, WPBC Scrutiny and Area by the Scrutiny and Performance Council Briefholder for Performance Committee. Scrutiny and Environment and Committee Performance Sustainability - R Nowak Committee Lindsey Watson, Senior 5 Oct 2017 Democratic Services

Page 350 Page Officer, Councillor Claudia Moore Quarter 2 Business To provide the strategic overview of WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Review performance, risk, revenue and capital Finance and Assets - J expenditure and income. Cant Chris Evans, Financial Performance Manager Financial Regulations To consider the Financial Regulations Joint Advisory NDDC Portfolio Holder 30 Oct 2017 including Procurement including Procurement Strategy and Accounts and for Environment - M Strategy and Social Social Value Statement. Audit Roake 31 Oct 2017 Value Statement Committee 2 Oct 2017 WPBC Leader of 2 Nov 2017 Council - J Cant

WDDC Portfolio Holder for Corporate - P Barrowcliff John Symes, Financial Resources Manager NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Planning Enforcement - That additional funding be made available WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Financial Resources to recruit an additional enforcement officer Environment and and Officer Workloads for a 2 year period; plus additional funds Sustainability - R Nowak to cover the cost of major enforcement Debbie Redding, cases, to include consultants and legal Development Manager fees.

Response to To agree a response to the Government’s WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Government consultation on Planning for the Right Housing - G Taylor,

Page 351 Page Consultation: Planning Homes in the Right Places. WPBC Briefholder for for the Right Homes in Environment and the Right Places Sustainability - R Nowak Trevor Warrick, Spatial Policy and Implementation Manager Weymouth Town To request approval from Management WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Centre Christmas Committee to repeat the Christmas Transport and Parking Concession parking concessions for the town centre Infrastructure - C Huckle as per last year. Nicola Keyworth-Wright, Parking & Transport Manager NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Draft Masterplan for To consider the draft Masterplan for The Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 12 Dec 2017 The Marsh Marsh Portland Community Facilities - K Borough Wheller Council Tony Hurley, Leisure Policy Commissioning Development Manager Committee 27 Nov 2017

Page 352 Page Weymouth BID - report To consider the findings and Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 12 Dec 2017 of the Scrutiny and recommendations following review of the Portland Economic Development Performance Weymouth BID by the Scrutiny and Borough - J Farquharson, WPBC Committee Performance Committee Council Briefholder for Tourism, Scrutiny and Culture and Harbour - R Performance Kosior Committee Lindsey Watson, Senior 23 Nov 2017 Democratic Services Officer, Councillor Ryan Hope 2018/19 Budget To consider budget and feedback from WPBC Briefholder for 12 Dec 2017 consultation. Finance and Assets - J Cant Julie Strange, Head of Financial Services NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Dorset Waste To consider the Dorset Waste Partnership WPBC Briefholder for 12 Dec 2017 Partnership Budget Budget. Finance and Assets - J 2018/19 Cant, WDDC Portfolio Holder for Environmental Protection and Assets - J Russell Graham Duggan, Head of Community Protection

Page 353 Page Calendar of Meetings To adopt the Calendar of Meetings for Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 18 Jan 2018 2018/19 2018/19. Portland Corporate Affairs and Borough Continuous Council Improvement - A Reed Steering Kate Critchel, Group for Democratic Services Democratic Officer Improvement Weymouth & Portland Borough Council Management Committee

12 Dec 2017 NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Harbour Budget To present the budget request for the harbour WPBC Briefholder for 12 Dec 2017 Requirements 2018/19 for 2018/19 including considering feed and Finance and Assets - J charges in 2018/19 Cant Nick Thornley, Head of Economy, Leisure & Tourism Proposed New Policy To approve and adopt the draft policy. Weymouth & WPBC Briefholder for 18 Jan 2018 prohibiting the release Portland Environment and Page 354 Page of sky lanterns and Borough Sustainability - R Nowak helium balloons from Council Roger Greene, Legal land and premises Policy Services Manager owned by the Council Development (Property and Litigation) Committee & Deputy Monitoring Weymouth & Officer Portland Borough Council Management Committee 27 Nov 2017 12 Dec 2017 Corporate Sponsorship To consider the adoption of a Corporate WPBC Briefholder for 6 Feb 2018 Policy Sponsorship Policy that is aligned across Finance and Assets - J the Dorset Councils Partnership to provide Cant an opportunity for each Council to Matt Ryan, Tourism & maximise income generating Events Manager opportunities. NON KEY DECISIONS

Title of Report Purpose of Report Consult Exempt Portfolio Holder & Decision Date Committee Report Author Applications for To consider the applications received WPBC Briefholder for 31 Oct 2017 Discretionary Rate requesting Discretionary Rate Relief. Finance and Assets - J Relief Cant Stuart C Dawson, Head of Revenues and Benefits Page 355 Page Private meetings

The following paragraphs define the reason why the public may be excluded from meetings whenever it is likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that exempt information would be disclosed and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it to the public. Each item in the plan above marked Exempt will refer to one of the following paragraphs.

1. Information relating to any individual 2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) 4. Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the Page 356 Page authority. 5. Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings 6. Information which reveal that the authority proposes:- a. To give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or b. To make an order or direction under any enactment 7. Information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime. Page 357 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 18 By virtue of paragraph(s) 3, 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 359 This page is intentionally left blank