CHARSFIELD PARISH COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting Held on Tuesday, 21st November 2017
Present: Councillors Pedgrift (Acting Chair), Owen Williams, Moor, Hedger, Murray, Godwin and Pam Hembra (Parish Clerk)
10 Members of the Public
|1.||Apologies and Approval of Absence|
|2.||Declarations of Interest|
|Councillor Pedgrift – Recreation Ground
Councillor Moor – Village Hall
Councillors Pedgrift and Hedger – Item 8
|3.||Approval of Minutes of the Meeting held on 19th September 2017|
|Minutes were approved and signed by Councillor Pedgrift.
|4.||Progress Reports for Information or Matters Arising|
|Nothing had yet been heard from David Chenery about the cost of countdown markers despite several emails. Clerk to continue to contact.
The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 – Public Space Protection Orders – Dog Controls in the Suffolk Coastal District consultation document is now in Cabinet but is considered to be controversial and might not get passed. The Parish Council would still wish to progress with dogs being on a lead in both the Recreation Ground and the Churchyard.
|5.||Points from the public – A chance for the public to raise matters of interest relevant to Charsfield.
All comments were relevant to Item 8 and are reported below.
Apologies were received from Councillor Amoss
A Working Party was held to work on the Recreation Ground. The hornbeam hedge was cut back and there are plans to replace the bark in play area with rubber chippings.
Nothing to report
|SAVID, SpeedWatch and B1078 Calming Update
A flashing sign advertisement had been sent around to the PC. There was no knowledge of how this was powered and the battery life. PC will wait to see what happens with SpeedWatch.
On Wednesday, 29th November at 7:30, Charsfield is hosting the next SAVID meeting and local residents are invited to attend to put forward their issues.
|DC/17/4587/ARM – Land Behind Three Horseshoes Inn, The Street, Charsfield
It was asked if the drainage could be extended to reach the Recreation Ground so that in time a toilet block could be added. (This would be a spur to the boundary). It was also asked if the developers would actually build the toilet block.
The PC asked if residents could also make representation about this when they write to the Council.
Concern was expressed about the hedging around any new properties and would this be good enough to separate old and new housing. Fencing was felt to be better. Nothing was indicated on the plans about what the perimeter boundary should be for those people who already have an existing boundary with the land in question.
It was pointed out that the plan, as presented, used part of someone’s garden.
Concerns were expressed re surface water run off. Originally the run off was to be into Potsford Brook. There is already a problem in St Peter’s Close at the moment due to run off and this could get worse. It was also felt the bore pipe for sewerage was not large enough.
The affordable houses from the outline planning were now one bedroom apartments and it was felt a developer might not build these.
As there are 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom properties on the plans it was felt to be a good mix of homes.
It was suggested the garages might not be large enough to fit a car.
It was asked at what stage in planning are conditions for contractors recommended. The residents would wish for no night time or Sunday working and for mud on roads etc to be kept to a minimum. The PC would ask for these conditions to be imposed.
The PC reiterated that it was really important for all residents to write to the Planning Department to express their concerns.
DC/17/4088/FUL – Proposed Alterations and Extension 2 Hall Cottages, Hall Road, Charsfield – The Parish Council is concerned about the impact on the adjoining property with regard to over shadowing and potential loss of sunlight as the front extension is adjacent to the neighbour’s window. The Parish Council is also concerned that the finish chosen is very different to that of the adjacent property.
9.1 To authorise payments as listed below:
|CAS Ltd – additional insurance
Community Heartbeat Trust
|LA 2011 ss 1-8
LA 2011 ss 1-8
9.2 To note receipt of income as listed below:
– Precept £2,250
9.3 Bank reconciliation was agreed and is attached to minutes.
9.4 To discuss on line banking
PC approved the introduction of on line banking to make receiving statements etc easier. This was proposed by Councillor Hedger and seconded by Councillor Owen Williams. A Finance Sub Committee is to be set up involving Councillors Hedger and Moor and the Clerk.
|10.||Precept 2018-2019 – to discuss and agree
It was agreed to increase the precept by 3% from last year – which would equate to a precept of approximately £4,750.
It was agreed to review the clerk’s salary at the next meeting as per our standing orders.
|11.||Budget 2018-2019 – to discuss and agree
Budget accepted and agreed. This was proposed by Councillor Owen Williams and seconded by Councillor Moor.
|12.||To update and approve Standing Orders, Financial Regulations and Code of Conduct and to adopt Transparency Code
These were approved and was proposed by Councillor Hedger and seconded by Councillor Owen Williams.
Clerk to check for courses at SALC and Councillor Moor will investigate.
The Clerk presented a short presentation on the above (attached).
It was proposed not to do anything initially. The PC was reluctant to pay for a service when so little data was held.
The PC would revisit all the documentation previously sent by the Clerk to see if we could provide our own Data Protection Officer.
SALC to be written to for advice and this item would be added to the agenda for the next meeting.
Some Parish Councils have been using Facebook as a communication aid but the PC considered it was not what we needed at the moment.
The Clerk has written again to Mark Amoss, although some emails had been returned and Ray Herring had also been asked if he had any information of Councillor Amoss but has received no reply to date from either.
It was decided to write an article for the Parish Magazine asking residents for help and advice and volunteers on cleaning and repairing the kiosk.
|17.||Correspondence – A letter had been received from the Disability Advice Service (East Suffolk) asking for donation. The PC do not generally give donations outside of the village.
|18.||Date of Next Meetings|
The following are meeting dates for the year 2017/2018:
23rdh January 2018
20th March 2018
|The meeting closed at 8:50 am|
APPOINTING A DATA PROTECTION OFFICER
The General Data Protection Regulations comes into force on 25th May 2018 before Brexit. This is an EU Regulation not a Directive, therefore the Parish Council is accountable from 25th May. This overrides the Data Protection Act 1998. Post Brexit a new law will come into force which will give us parity with the EU. It as been brought about to protect individuals (you and me) in this social media age. Data is the new oil.
- Effectively reverses ownership of personal data
- Gives control back to the individual
- Puts significant pressure on organisations to protect personal data from loss
- Encourages only the necessary data to only be stored
- And only for the duration necessary
- Obliges everyone in the data supply chain to comply
- Restricts the movement of personal data outside of the EEA
- Imparts obligations on non-EEA organisations handling data on EU residents
This refers to someone’s Personally Identifiable Information (PII). From Parish Council’s point of view it refers to:
Full name, email address, date of birth, IP address/website cookies
The natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data – Parish Clerk.
Natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which processes personal data on behalf of the Controller – Payroll agency.
An identified or identifiable person
A breach of security leading to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of, or access to, personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed.
Data Protection Officer (DPO)
Person within the organisation responsible for overseeing, policing and driving privacy.
Required by all public organisations, those processing High Risk data or data on a ‘large scale’.
Most serious violations €20 million or 4% of global turnover (whichever is greater)
Lesser incidents max €10m or 2% global turnover (whichever is greater).
This is a big stick to threaten with but it is not the intention to put anyone out of business.
- Electoral Register
- Emails addresses
- Outlook File (any attachments)
- Letters filed
Appointment a Data Protection Officer
Value lost if they leave
Needs to be senior
Conflict of interest
Busy doing their job
|Use a 3rd party
Use only as required
Supported by a team