Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
Resolved: that under Section 100A(4) of the of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph(s) 13, 14 & 15 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act. During the discussion, it was clarified that the criteria followed for the appropriate site allocation had been a combination of Welsh Government guidance and DCC guidance. The site allocation had been agreed but it was confirmed that the final decision would be taken by Planning Committee. Members were not in agreement that the only suitable site was Site A and requested further work to take place to evaluate another specific site to assess whether it could be suitable. The Chair recommended an alternative recommendation, PROPOSED by Councillor Brian Jones and SECONDED by Councillor James Elson A vote took place by a show of hands and all were in favour of the alternative recommendation as follows – RESOLVED that – (i) the Committee confirms that it had read, understood and taken account of the detail of the process and criteria used to assess “suitability”. (Appendix No. 1a – Part II and Appendix 1b – Part 1) as part of its consideration. (ii) They accept the Task and Finish Group had done what it was asked to do, but were unable to accept that Site A was the only suitable site at this time and requested officers to do further work to investigate a particular alternative site.
RESOLVED that the Committee noted the contents of the report and recommended it to be presented to Cabinet.
RESOLVED that the Communities Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme be agreed.
None.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
The minutes of the Communities Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 16 October 2025 were submitted. RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
Decision as recorded
Resolved: that under Section 100A(4) of the of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph(s) 13, 14 & 15 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act. During the discussion, it was clarified that the criteria followed for the appropriate site allocation had been a combination of Welsh Government guidance and DCC guidance. The site allocation had been agreed but it was confirmed that the final decision would be taken by Planning Committee. Members were not in agreement that the only suitable site was Site A and requested further work to take place to evaluate another specific site to assess whether it could be suitable. The Chair recommended an alternative recommendation, PROPOSED by Councillor Brian Jones and SECONDED by Councillor James Elson A vote took place by a show of hands and all were in favour of the alternative recommendation as follows – RESOLVED that – (i) the Committee confirms that it had read, understood and taken account of the detail of the process and criteria used to assess “suitability”. (Appendix No. 1a – Part II and Appendix 1b – Part 1) as part of its consideration. (ii) They accept the Task and Finish Group had done what it was asked to do, but were unable to accept that Site A was the only suitable site at this time and requested officers to do further work to investigate a particular alternative site.
At this juncture, the Monitoring Officer, Gary Williams, clarified two points to all present: · the Gypsy Traveller Site Assessment contained both public and private appendices. Any questions around the Part 2 documents or any specific sites then the meeting would have to move into Part 2. · that any members on both Communities Scrutiny Committee and Planning Committee would have to demonstrate an open mind and be able to consider any alternative points of view. The Chair of the Member Task and Finish Group, Councillor Peter Scott, introduced the Gypsy Traveller Site Assessment (previously circulated) to provide information on the options for a permanent residential site. Councillor Scott also provided details on the information provided to the Task and Finish Group, to arrive at its conclusions, which was required to ensure that the Council discharged its statutory duties as required by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014, section 101. Councillor Scott summarised the report and reiterated that following numerous meetings and votes, members of the Task and Finish Group maintained Site A as the most suitable site. Councillor Scott took the opportunity to thank all members of the Task and Finish Group for all their hard work. The Corporate Director: Economy and Environment (CD:EE), explained the reason for the report was to report back following the Communities Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 4 September 2025. At the meeting it had been resolved that following the analysis of the site assessment exercise which had been undertaken, the Lead Officer and the Chair of the Task and Finish Group liaise with the local members and Member Area Group to discuss the site analysis and to provide a report detailing how the process for identifying suitable locations had been undertaken, together with details on the information provided to the Task and Finish Group to arrive at its conclusions. The CD:EE confirmed numerous meetings had taken place and all were in agreement that Site A would be the most suitable permanent site. Following Communities Scrutiny Committee meeting the decision would ultimately be made by Planning Committee. At this juncture, Councillor Gwyneth Ellis, stated that she found the whole paper difficult to scrutinise as the process had been started prior to when she was appointed on Scrutiny Committee. Councillor Ellis queried whether it would be reasonable to recommend that in future all Task and Finish Groups report on a more regular basis to Scrutiny Committees. Councillor Ellis emphasised this could apply not to just Task and Finish Groups but to any Groups set up to look at any particular issue, ensuring there was a reporting mechanism in place they reported back to Scrutiny Committee or Cabinet. The Monitoring Officer confirmed it was possible that if a Task and Finish Group were to be set up then report frequencies could be included in the terms of reference. In terms of constitutional and legal issues, if a Task and Finish Group were to be created by a Scrutiny Committee then the Task and Finish Group should report back to Scrutiny. Following which, Scrutiny would then make recommendations to Cabinet. It was suggested that an information only report be provided by the Task and Finish Group which would ensure updates were provided to members. If members felt the update merited further discussion at Committee then it could be processed via the Scrutiny Chairs and Vice-Chairs Group. The Chair stated that, in her opinion, it appeared that the site assessment process had been fundamentally flawed as it had failed to comprehensively evaluate all potential options and justifiably limited its scope to a single town. Welsh Government guidelines recommended considering established local connections but, in this case, those connections were set as a temporary measure. Therefore, whilst this could be a suitable site, the report lacked sufficient evidence that all possible sites, including both DCC owned land and private land, as requested by the Task and Finish Group members, were considered. Councillor Peter Scott assured members that assessment of all sites had been rigorously carried out by officers. The process had been carried out in 2017/18 when another application for a gypsy and traveller site in a different location had been received. 50-60 sites within Denbighshire had been analysed. To date, the prospective sites had not changed and the Principal Architectural Manager, Gary Richards, had re-assessed the sites for the new Task and Finish Group. It had been established from an early stage that the family had lived in the specific area for many years and that would be the area which would be focused on. There were approximately 40 sites in the specific area which were analysed and only three were shown as being possibly suitable. Following further investigation, it was confirmed that there was only one site which was suitable for the family concerned and that was Site A in the documentation provided. A lot of work had been carried out analysing all the sites and all members of the Task and Finish Group were confident and agreed that Site A would be the most suitable. At this juncture, the CD:EE confirmed that the whole process had been straight forward in terms of the work carried out by the Task and Finish Group. The decision to restrict the search to a specific area did limit the search and meant not every site across the county had been assessed. Once the decision had been made by the Task and Finish Group, officers were asked to look at all potential sites within the specific area and that was what they did. Within Appendix 2 there was a list of every site in the particular area which had been assessed and a majority, apart from one, were deemed unsuitable. All council owned sites had been assessed and, officers had looked on the open market to ascertain whether a site could be purchased but there were none suitable. The Welsh Government Grant would not cover the cost of purchasing land but it had been investigated as the Task and Finish Group requested this to be carried out. Following all the investigations and assessments, the conclusion was there was one site that was potentially suitable for the purpose in the specific geographical area. That was the completion of the work of the Task and Finish Group. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC It was recommended in accordance with Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 that the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business because it was likely that exempt information (as defined in Paragraph(s) 13, 14 & 15 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act) would be disclosed. The Chair, Councillor Karen Edwards PROPOSED to go to Part 2 (Confidential), SECONDED by Councillor Carol Holliday. A vote took place and 4 out of the 7 members voted in favour of moving the meeting to Part 2 Resolved: that under Section 100A(4) of the of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph(s) 13, 14 & 15 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act. During the discussion, it was clarified that the criteria followed for the appropriate site allocation had been a combination of Welsh Government guidance and DCC guidance. The site allocation had been agreed but it was confirmed that the final decision would be taken by Planning Committee. Members were not in agreement that the only suitable site was Site A and requested further work to take place to evaluate another specific site to assess whether it could be suitable. The Chair recommended an alternative recommendation, PROPOSED by Councillor Brian Jones and SECONDED by Councillor James Elson A vote took place by a show of hands and all were in favour of the alternative recommendation as follows – RESOLVED that – (i) the Committee confirms that it had read, understood and taken account of the detail of the process and criteria used to assess “suitability”. (Appendix No. 1a – Part II and Appendix 1b – Part 1) as part of its consideration. (ii) They accept the Task and Finish Group had done what it was asked to do, but were unable to accept that Site A was the only suitable site at this time and requested officers to do further work to investigate a particular alternative site.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED that the Committee noted the contents of the report and recommended it to be presented to Cabinet.
The Lead Member for Housing and Communities, Councillor Rhys Thomas, introduced the Housing Rent Setting and HRA Budgets 2026/27 report (previously circulated) for Scrutiny to consider the process for determining the recommendation on the level of weekly rent increase for Community Housing tenants. The Head of Housing and Communities, Liz Grieve, stated that the report covered the reason for coming before Communities Scrutiny Committee. The report would be presented at Cabinet on 16 December 2025 to authorise the rent setting for 2026/27. Appendix 3 of the report explained in more detail regarding meeting the Wales Quality Standards and the financial pressures etc. The maximum increase to weekly rents had been set by the Welsh Government Rent Policy which had been based on the September CPI figure, plus an additional 0.5% or 1% each year. This year the CPI was 3.8% and the Welsh Government Cabinet Secretary set a CPI (plus 0.5%) 4.3% maximum increase. Due to significantly rising costs and standards, the Housing service believed there had been no option but to seek approval for the maximum increase. Even with the additional income, there would still be a challenge to meet the required standards whilst continuing to deliver much needed new homes. All Local Authorities with housing stock within North Wales indicated they would be seeking a recommendation to increase rents by the maximum figure. Utilising the Joseph Rowntree Foundation “Living Rent” Model, rents had been measured and confirmed with the maximum increase, the weekly rents remained within the strict affordability limits for earned income of the lowest income households within Denbighshire. During discussions, the following points were raised – (i) The question of the use of modular properties was raised and asked whether this would be a more economical proposition when building new council stock. It was confirmed that modular buildings had been built on the new site in Denbigh. Modular housing were part of the options but it was taken on a site by site basis. Modular housing was particularly useful for sites which were difficult to access with traditional building materials. All houses had to meet social housing standards and the modular building providers used in Denbighshire knew those standards extremely well. It was also confirmed that to date, modular buildings were not more financially economical as it was a developing market but in due course, when there was sufficient demand, possibly those savings could come into effect. There was the Corporate Plan ambition around council houses. There was council owned land which could be utilised for building more social and affordable housing. There were a number of partners who worked with DCC to build affordable and social housing across the county and there was a hope to achieve building more social housing in the future. The housing stock business plan showed finances were such that DCC were completely reliant on Welsh Government funding for new developments. (ii) To assist people who were struggling financially, it was asked whether a 4.1% or 4.2% rise in rents had been looked into. It was confirmed that if rents were not increased one particular year then the council would never make up the loss. Figures were checked with the affordability matrix to ensure the increase would be affordable. Officers clarified that 75% of tenants received some form of assistance with housing costs. A lot of the tenants were in employment but also received Universal Credit. No more than 28% of the tenants income should be spent on rent and DCC rents were below that figure. Councillor Karen Edwards PROPOSED accepting the Housing Rent Setting and HRA Budgets 2026/27 report SECONDED by Councillor James Elson. A vote took place by a show of hands and all were in favour to accept the report. RESOLVED that the Committee noted the contents of the report and recommended it to be presented to Cabinet.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED that the Communities Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme be agreed.
The Scrutiny Coordinator guided members through the Communities Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme (previously circulated). The next meeting of the Communities Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for 22 January 2026. The Scrutiny Coordinator explained two items, Denbighshire Youth Services, and Effectiveness of Parking Enforcement Activities had been deferred to the 22 January 2026 meeting. There were three items on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme for 22 January 2026 – 1. Denbighshire Youth Services. 2. Homelessness Temporary Accommodation Assessment process, and 3. Effectiveness of Parking Enforcement Activities. If any members would like to add an item to the Committee Forward Work Programme, they were asked to complete the proposal form included in the Agenda pack or online. RESOLVED that the Communities Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme be agreed.
None.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.