Decision details

Car parking update; Property Asset/Maintenance issues and other day to day management issues

The Chair asked the Strategic Director (Service Delivery), in his capacity as Trust Board Advisor, to introduce the item.

The Chair invited comments from the public.

Keith Davies said that he had an interest in ballooning and would like to know how many people would constitute a group large enough to be allowed to book the grounds for a flight.

Councillor Watt referred to paragraph 4.1 of the report, relating to balloon flights.  He observed that ballooning was incompatible with certain other activities, particularly where the other activities were charitable and the ballooning was commercial in nature.  It had been unacceptable that on one occasion a balloonist had interrupted a legitimate booking to use the grounds for take-off.  However, balloonists could make a block booking, at the usual rate, so long as no charitable activity would be displaced.

Councillor Pritchard suggested that the Trustees could indicate their intention of continuing to allow ballooning, but at an increased fee of £50, not including any parking rights which would need to be negotiated separately.

Councillor Hawkins supported this.

Councillor Watt asked the Trust Board Advisor to explore ways of devising a package which would include ballooning rights and a specified number of inclusive parking places.

Councillor Watt then referred to paragraphs 4.2 of the report.  He pointed out that the proposals already had planning approval in principle but now required the agreement of the Trustees.  None of the proposals would require a disposal, so all could be decided at this meeting.  He said that the Trustees would need to know whether the proposed scoreboard screen would swing round to enable it to be used for other events as well as cricket; and whether it would display advertising.

Councillor Pritchard said that any request to be allowed to display advertising must be subject to permission from the Trustees.

Councillor Watt asked the Trust Board Advisor to investigate existing controls over advertising on days other than match days.

Councillor Watt then referred to paragraphs 4.3 of the report, relating to grounds maintenance.  He explained that there were two groundsmen, with different briefs, which led to confusion.  There was an urgent need for a review of the use of resources with the aim of improving the service provided.

Councillors Hawkins and Pritchard agreed.

Councillor Watt referred to paragraph 4.4, relating to the letter from the Charity Commission.  He asked the Legal Advisor to provide a context.  The Legal Advisor explained that the Commission's two orders, described in the report, would remain in effect "until further review" and that the Trustees had an option to challenge this.

Keith Bray (Independent Advisor) observed that it would not be timely to challenge the orders while other negotiations were being pursued.

On a motion from Councillor Vic Pritchard, seconded by Councillor Chris Watt, it was

RESOLVED

(1) To note the report;

(2) To confirm their intention to continue to allow balloon flights to operate from the Recreation Ground and to ask the Strategic Director for Service Delivery to prepare proposals for an increased fee and stringent conditions to ensure that the Trust's charitable aims would not be compromised by any loss of public benefit;

(3) To approve the improvement works requested by the Rugby Club, subject to Charity Commission approval where required and subject to enquiries to be made by the Strategic Director for Service Delivery over the matter of any use of the new scoreboard for advertising purposes; and

(4) That the Trust would not at this point challenge the Charity Commission decision to leave in place orders dated 28^th February 2007 and 31^st  March 2006; but to ask Keith Bray (Independent Advisor) to draft a reply pointing out the progress made by the Trustees in improving the management of the Trust; in obtaining appropriate advice; in enforcing the terms of the Trust Deed; and in complying with Charity Commission rulings; and that the Trustees anticipate that the Charity Commission will agree to withdraw the orders at some point in the future.