Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement Consultation Report, detailed in Appendix 1 of the circulated report, be reviewed. • That the updated Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement, detailed in Appendix 2 of the circulated report, be endorsed ahead of seeking approval from the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee, to submit to Welsh Government. • That the two funding options, contained within the circulated report, and their delivery impact be considered, and that option 1 be endorsed as the preferred option, prior to consideration at the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee.
The Chairperson welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There were no declarations of interests received.
The minutes of the meeting held on 6 January 2026, were approved as a true and accurate record subject to the amendment below: That Cllr C.Jones be marked as in attendance for the meeting.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement Consultation Report, detailed in Appendix 1 of the circulated report, be reviewed. • That the updated Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement, detailed in Appendix 2 of the circulated report, be endorsed ahead of seeking approval from the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee, to submit to Welsh Government. • That the two funding options, contained within the circulated report, and their delivery impact be considered, and that option 1 be endorsed as the preferred option, prior to consideration at the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee.
Members received the Draft Delivery Agreement for the Strategic Development Plan (SDP). Officers highlighted that the circulated report also provided an update following the public consultation on the Delivery Agreement, which has closed on Friday, 20 February 2026. The Committee was informed that approximately 19 organisations submitted responses to the consultation; representations included Welsh Government, Town and Community Councils, Transport for Wales, Health Boards, utility companies, and the constituent Local Planning Authorities. It was mentioned that the detail of the responses, and the proposed actions, were set out in Appendix 1 of the circulated report. Following on from the above, it was stated that most comments did not seek substantive changes to the content of the Delivery Agreement, although several requested clarifications on key points. The key issue highlighted for discussion related to the financial implications of delivering the SDP. Officers stated that the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee (SWWCJC) had recently set a budget of circa £22,000 for the Strategic Planning workstream for the financial year 2026/27; however, through informal discussions, Welsh Government had indicated that this level of financial commitment did not provide sufficient assurance to support continuation of the SDP programme. It was added that these concerns were also reflected in Welsh Government’s consultation response. As a result, it was explained that formal submission of the Delivery Agreement to Welsh Government was dependent on the SWWCJC reviewing and agreeing additional funding for the SDP work programme for 2026/27 and future years; this would need to be incorporated into medium‑term financial planning discussions. Two financial options were presented for consideration; as the 2026/27 SWWCJC budget had already been approved, both options were based on utilising SWWCJC reserves. It was noted that option one proposed releasing £200,000 from reserves, which, combined with the existing £22,000 allocation and the £200,000 Welsh Government incentivisation grant, would provide a total budget of approximately £422,000 for 2026/27; option two proposed releasing £300,000 from reserves, which when combined with the same additional elements, would create a total budget of approximately £522,000. Officers emphasised that the Welsh Government incentivisation grant was a one‑off payment and would not be available in future years; therefore, any ongoing expenditure would need to be funded through the levy on constituent Local Planning Authorities. It was stated that both options demonstrated a financial commitment that would satisfy Welsh Government; however, option one was recommended as it provided greater flexibility for budget planning in following financial years. Officers verbally highlighted minor formatting amendments contained within the circulated report. Members raised the concern of ensuring adequate time for future consultations. Officers confirmed that the Delivery Agreement required a minimum six‑week consultation period, with flexibility to extend where necessary; this would be factored into the overall work programme going forward. A discussion took place regarding the potential levy implications in future years. The Committee was advised that option one was recommended partly due to the significant increase in levy contributions that would arise when the one‑off Welsh Government grant was no longer available; the estimated £400,000 ongoing cost could result in a levy increase of approximately 60% based on current levels. It was explained that the levy across the four constituent authorities currently totalled £658,000, and reserves continued to be used to stabilise the overall SWWCJC budget over a three‑year period. Officers reiterated the need to balance service delivery with financial sustainability and to avoid over‑committing until the SWWCJC undertook its next budget review at the end of 2026; the broader demands of other SWWCJC workstreams also needed to be considered before committing an additional £300,000, as proposed under option two. It was acknowledged that confirming a financial commitment was necessary to access the Welsh Government incentivisation grant, and that other Corporate Joint Committee’s (Cardiff Capital Region and Ambition North Wales) had already made equivalent commitments. Members noted that while the grant would only support the first year, it remained beneficial to secure it. The need to incorporate ongoing SDP costs into the medium‑term financial plan was recognised, alongside continued Officer and political engagement with Welsh Government; particularly considering the anticipated new administration following the May 2026 Senedd Election. A discussion took place regarding whether option two should be considered further. While both options would be presented to the SWWCJC, Officers advised that option one represented a more balanced approach; it enabled progress on the Delivery Agreement without placing undue financial pressure on the SWWCJC ahead of wider budget considerations scheduled for later in the year. It was noted that option one was considered a reasonable compromise, providing additional funding while allowing the SWWCJC flexibility in responding to future budgetary demands across all workstreams. RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement Consultation Report, detailed in Appendix 1 of the circulated report, be reviewed. • That the updated Strategic Development Plan Delivery Agreement, detailed in Appendix 2 of the circulated report, be endorsed ahead of seeking approval from the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee, to submit to Welsh Government. • That the two funding options, contained within the circulated report, and their delivery impact be considered, and that option 1 be endorsed as the preferred option, prior to consideration at the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee.
There were no urgent items received.
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.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.