Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Vic Pritchard.

The Chair will draw attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out under Note 6.

The Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the agenda.

To receive any declarations from Members/Officers of personal or prejudicial interests in respect of matters for consideration at this meeting.  Members who have an interest to declare are asked to:

a)  State the Item Number in which they have the interest;

b)  The nature of the interest;

c)  Whether the interest is personal, or personal and prejudicial.

Any Member who is unsure about the above should seek advice from the Monitoring Officer prior to the meeting in order to expedite matters at the meeting itself.

There were no declarations of interest made.

There were no items of urgent business.

A question had been submitted by Ian Barclay and a response was circulated.

Keith McGarrigle had submitted a late question regarding the nature of the discussions with the Charity Commission and the reason for the postponement of the meeting.

In response, Councillor Watt explained that the postponement of the meeting had not been due to timing of discussions with the Charity Commission but had been put back in the hope that this meeting could be used to launch the forthcoming consultation exercise. Unfortunately, that had not been possible.  With regard to releasing details about the discussions, Councillor Watt responded that it would not be appropriate to release details of commercially sensitive information in advance of the consultation.

Keith McGarrigle asked a question about the enforcement of the parking charges.  Councillor Watt responded that the Traffic Order was in place and asked for an update from the Strategic Director (Service Delivery).  He explained that the issue with clubs being on different leases had now been resolved and they would be able to start enforcing in the first week in November.

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of 14^th July 2010 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

This paper gives the Trustees an update on general management issues at the Recreation Ground.

The Board considered a report giving them an update on various issues including balloon flights, planning consents, grounds maintenance and provision of toilet facilities.  With specific regard to the toilets, Councillor Watt mentioned that the provision of the temporary toilet facilities by the Rugby club for all users of the Grounds was a useful example of the more collaborative approach of the new Rugby club management.

In response to a query from Councillor Watt, the Parks and Estates Manager explained the nature and timescales for the de-compacting work that needed to take place.  Two applications had been done in the last year and selective work was planned for the spring.

Keith McGarrigle asked a question about the bar that the Rugby club had put up and the fact that refreshments vans were spreading onto the open side of the Recreation ground.  The Strategic Director explained that he had written to the Operations Director of the Rugby club concerning the bar; an apology had been received and it should now have been removed.  They had also discussed the refreshments vans and the Rugby club had been told that they would have to seek permission for this, they could not interfere with any other bookings and the Trust would want to charge a fee.

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED to note the contents of the report.

At the last Trust Board meeting, the Trustees requested that a business case be produced to evaluate the financial impact of replacing administration services provided by several council officers with a dedicated role.

The Board considered a report outlining proposals for the appointment of a single officer dedicated to the Trust’s affairs, replacing the current arrangement of several officers providing services.  The Strategic Director explained the perceived benefits of a single Administrator as being one point of contact, the officer being on site, greater efficiency and focus and a reduction in cross charging. 

In response to a question regarding the specific savings that would be achieved on the amounts quoted in the business case, the Strategic Director explained that the £15,000 on grounds administration would be saved and approximately half of the £18,500 for property administration.  Some of the legal and financial costs would be reduced and he was confident that the savings would at least cover the cost of the post.

There was some discussion about the amount of the property administration charge and how that was broken down, as Members were surprised at the amount.  The Strategic Director responded that one key role for the new person would be to commission services to keep prices down and enable the Trust to fully account for all costs.

Councillor Watt commented that one of the main complaints he received about the administration of the Trust’s affairs was how complicated it was to make a booking.  One single point of contact for this would make it a lot simpler, hopefully lead to more bookings and ensure that the charging policy was being applied consistently.  Peter Downey welcomed this and gave an example to illustrate current booking problems.

In response to a number of enquiries relating to the range of tasks covered and the recruitment process, the Strategic Director confirmed that the job description would be subject to proper evaluation and standard recruitment practices would apply.  The Chair asked the Strategic Director to investigate any options for the role to be managed by a different body (although it was noted that the Trust cannot be the employer), and the relative merits of the Council or another body being the employer.  The Director agreed to provide full details of the role and employment arrangements to Trustees before any appointment was made.

[NB: a discussion on a later agenda item highlighted the need to add ‘Marketing and promotion’ to the list of responsibilities covered by this role.]

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED

1. to note the enclosed business case analysing the financial impact of appointing a dedicated Trust Administrator to replace services provided by various Council officers; and

2. to approve the appointment of a Trust Administrator, subject to the points raised in discussion.

This paper gives the Trustees an update on the lettings made since the last report to the Board at its July 2010 meeting.

The Board considered a report containing an update on the lettings since April 2010, and known future lettings.

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED to note the lettings update.

This report gives details of the financial position to 30^th September for 2010/11.

The Board considered a report giving details of the financial position to 30^th September 2010.

The Chair highlighted that there were a number of items not picked up in the figures including some cross charges and the income from the East stand, and asked that future financial monitoring reports were either presented as a cash flow report or a year end position.  He also requested that the outstanding cross charges could be chased up.

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED to note the spend to date for 2010/11.

This is a verbal item only.

The Chair referred to the revised charging structure that had been circulated at the meeting and checked that members of the public had a copy.  He explained that the charging structure was largely working well, but feedback had suggested that some issues needed revisiting;

• An increase in the number of parking permits associated with a sports booking;
• A reduction by half for the cost of bookings when they are for the exclusive benefit of children and young people;
• Moving the Rotary fireworks event from category A to category B as it makes no contribution to the Trust’s charitable objectives.

A query was raised about the specific ages that would apply for children and young people and the Chair responded that the age ranges normally used by Children’s Services were children up to the age of 13 years, and young people from 13 to 19 years of age (or longer if specific criteria apply).  He asked that the age definitions could be checked (including consulting Sport England) and then included within the charging structure document.

There was some discussion about schools’ ability to use the Recreation ground, which Councillor Watt would like to encourage.  Further work could be done to explore other facilities and options to enable this.

On a motion from Councillor Hawkins, seconded by Councillor Watt, it was

RESOLVED to adopt the revised charging structure with the amendments proposed during the debate.

This is a verbal item only.

[This was a verbal report only.]

Councillor Watt explained that it now appeared that there was the basis for an agreement and all parties (Trust, Council, Charity Commission and Rugby club) understood what needed to happen to resolve the two long-term abuses.  This will be put into the public domain as a consultation exercise which will set out the proposed land uses and how they resolve the abuse to the Trust.  It is hoped to launch this in November and it will probably include manned displays at the Recreation ground and the Podium, a booklet, details on the website and a series of meetings for beneficiaries to give their views.

Following this consultation, a report will come back to the Trust which will lead to the Trust asking the Charity Commission to publish a new scheme.  The Charity Commission have given a firm deadline of 31^st March 2011 for receipt of a proposal.

There was some discussion about whether other land including Firs Field would form part of the proposals and how land designated as open space would be handled in the process.  The Chair gave an assurance that full details regarding status of any additional land including designation, size, proposed value (informed by independent valuation), long-term security etc would be included within the consultation.