Minutes of the meeting held on Monday 09 th November 2015 at 2.00pm in the Lymington Town Sailing Club, Bath Road, Lymington.

Transcription

1 LYMINGTON HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS Minutes of the meeting held on Monday 09 th November 2015 at 2.00pm in the Lymington Town Sailing Club, Bath Road, Lymington. Present: Geoff Holmes (Chairman) (GWH), Clifford Jakes (Vice Chairman) (CJ), Brian May (BM), Bill Peach (BP), Peter Mills (PM) Richard Jenner (RJ), Paul Martin (PMa), Geoff Stokes (GS). Officers present: Ryan Willegers (Harbour Master & Chief Executive) (RW), Frances Moores (Treasurer) (FM), Sarah Maynard (Administrator) (SM) In Attendance: Andrew Wilkes (Chairman LHAG) (AW) 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE None 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS GWH invited Commissioners to declare if they had any interests related to matters itemised for consideration on the agenda. PM, RJ, CJ, BM, GWH & RW all declared that they were members of the RLymYC (Agenda Item 12.2). 3. MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING (PUBLIC SESSION) The minutes of the public session of the meeting of the 21 st September 2015 were approved. 4. COMMISSIONERS 4.1 RW confirmed that the vacancy arising from Jon Shiner s retirement had been re-advertised seeking candidates with an accountancy/finance background or commercial shipping experience. Five applications had been received, two with an accountancy/finance background with the rest in the commercial marine sector. Interviews were programmed for the 25 th November and 7 th December. GWH thanked the Lymington Times for doing an editorial on Jon Shiner leaving and the surrounding vacancy which he believed help attract applicants following the re-advertisement. GWH highlighted that if two strong candidates with differing skillsets were identified by the interview panel then it was open to the Commissioners to consider appointing one to fill the immediate vacancy and to co-opt a second Commissioner for twelve months prior to full appointment in November 2016 when CJ and BM retire. RW indicated that if LHC were fortunate to be in that position, a logical approach (subject to discussion and agreement with the prospective candidate) would be to co-opt the finance applicant prior to full appointment on the basis they would use the co-option period to have a handover with CJ before his retirement. Action: Await recommendation from interview panel. Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 1 of 7

2 BM noted that if the non finance applicants did not have commercial shipping experience, this was not as important as them having the right attributes to make a strong contribution to the Board; particularly as RW came from a commercial shipping background and GS also came with experience from this sector. 4.2 RW referred to his report which indicated that Colin Wise had stepped down as the independent member of the interview panel after many years of service for which the Commissioners were grateful. The Commissioners had agreed that the recruitment process would have greater independence and transparency if the independent person was appointed by the Lymington Harbour Advisory Group (LHAG). This was discussed with LHAG at their October meeting and they agreed to take on this role. The Chairman of the Advisory Group subsequently wrote nominating Cllr Michael White as the independent person. The Commissioners welcomed Cllr White s agreement to take up this role. The full panel would consist of CJ, RJ, Cllr White (Independent) and R. Wagstaff (LHAG). 5. MATTERS ARISING 5.1 Agenda Item 5.1 (Declaration of Interests) - At the July meeting the Commissioners agreed to expand (with input from legal advisor) the existing guidance note on the circumstances when it is appropriate to declare an interest. RW reported that the document entitled Note for Guidance of Commissioners on the Disclosure of Financial and other Interests had been expended to provide additional guidance and that this had been reviewed and endorsed by LHC s legal advisor. RW invited the Commissioners to adopt the new guidance. Proposed: CJ Seconded: PM Vote: 7 in favour / 1 abstained 5.2 Agenda Item 5.2 (Direct Debit Payment Terms) - At their meeting on the 2 nd November the Finance Committee considered the provision of a Direct Debit payment facility. It was concluded that LHC should offer Direct Debit payments as a voluntary alternative to payment methods as this together with the other electronic mechanisms available for payment (eharbour online payment portal/bacs) would serve to reduce administration. However, it was not felt that compulsory Direct Debit for persons who had paid their invoice late previously was the best solution. PM queried why the Finance Committee were not advocating compulsory Direct debit for persons who had previously paid their invoice late. RW and CJ explained that LHC get very few late payments and at their last meeting the Mooring Committee agreed a shortened administration process for chasing these culminating with the (very persuasive) final sanction being loss of the mooring license. This sanction was felt to be greater than placement on Direct Debit which could be cancelled and would still require some follow up to establish why payment had not been made. 5.3 Agenda Item 5.3 (Visitor Survey) The results of the visitor survey questionnaire undertaken between mid-july and the 30 th September were considered. The Commissioners acknowledged that it offered useful feedback but recognised that the feedback was biased towards customer s visiting on weekdays because of the limitations on officer time at weekends. As such, certain elements of feedback could be expected to be different at weekends. For example, booking is Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 2 of 7

3 likely to be more important to weekend visitors. Also, because summer weekends are busier than weekdays, the number of customers who did not get their first choice of mooring is likely to be higher. It was agreed that more surveys were needed. BP advocated that LHC should have an ongoing online customer satisfaction survey covering all aspects of its business. There was a broad consensus that this should be progressed as part of the new website features. 5.4 Agenda Item 7.3 Treasurers Report (Dredging Provision) - At the September meeting a question was raised over the treatment of dredging expenditure in LHC s accounts. LHC try to smooth the charge to the income and expenditure account so there are not large fluctuations by charging a provision which takes into account the anticipated expenditure over several years. LHC credit this to the provision for dredging and debit the actual expenditure for the year to the same account. This stance is supported by the tax position which allows LHC to claim a deduction for the provision and is not restricted to the actual expenditure. In view of the query, LHC sought advice from its auditors on whether there has been any recent guidelines issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in respect to the treatment of provisions, which should make us reconsider our policy. Their advice confirmed that in their opinion the provision that is included in LHC s Accounts fulfils the relevant criteria under FRSSE. At their meeting on the 2 nd November the Finance Committee recorded receipt of the advice and concluded that LHC should continue to charge a smoothing provision to the Income and Expenditure account. 5.5 Proposed meeting dates had been circulated prior to the meeting. The January meeting was confirmed albeit PMa could not attend as he had business commitments. PM was unavailable for the May and July meetings as he was travelling. The May meeting could not be brought forward to accommodate PM as GWH would be away. PMa was also a doubt for the 11 th July meeting and could not make the 19 th September and 14 th November dates due to business commitments. It was agreed that RW would circulate alternative dates for the July, September and November meetings with a view to trying to accommodate PMa where possible. Action: RW 6. LYMINGTON HARBOUR ADVISORY GROUP 6.1 AW reported that the Harbour Advisory Group had met on the 19 th October and the minutes had been circulated. Their next meeting was on the 12 th January OFFICERS REPORTS 7.1 Harbour Masters Report - Questions were invited on the items within the report that were not listed for consideration as an agenda item. No questions arose. 7.2 Operations Manager Report - Questions were invited on the items within the report that were not listed for consideration as an agenda item. AW noted that 57 new persons had joined the waiting list so far in 2015 and asked if the waiting list was going up or down. RW indicated that since 2013 when a waiting list administration charge was introduced resulting in circa 150 persons falling off the list, numbers Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 3 of 7

4 had steadily been building up again from the low point of around 490 to around 550 when last reviewed. RW did not have an up to date number which would be obtained at the end of the year for comparison but anticipated it was somewhere between 550 and 600. GWH noted that the report indicated that the bridge section and main walkway would remain in place during dredging works together with the emergency landing and ferry pick up point and asked for clarification. RW indicated that dredging works would be co-ordinated in such a way as to maintain a short section of pontoon for an emergency/scoot Ferry landing. BM had not realised that Scoot also landed at this location. RW confirmed that Scoot had recently advised it was their intention to stop using Town Quay landing from the 2 nd January 2016 and operate all their services from the Harbour Master pontoon in view of the better parking arrangements for customers. Scoot had also indicated their intention to also a connecting bus service between Brockenhurst rail station and the Bath Road car park opposite the landing. PM noted that in the Operations Managers report had indicated that the John Deere engine and gear box in the big launch was due for replacement and asked if it was broken or was costing more in maintenance now than it had over the last three years. BM left the meeting as this was a conflict of interest for him as Berthon had tendered for the replacement engine and gearbox. RW indicated that the engine and gearbox which were installed in 2003 were getting tired and had required unplanned attention in recent years which was not the case prior to 2012 when only routine servicing was required. RW further explained that the big launch was LHC s workhorse and was crucial to its ability to lift and relay moorings. While the engine could be kept operating, an increase in unreliability or a failure requiring replacement would significantly compromise LHC s mooring operations. CJ asked whether the 4 tenders were all quoting to supply the same engine and gearbox specification. RW confirmed they were. CJ noted that SAL had offered a part exchange value for the old engine and asked whether others had done the same. RW indicated Jeremy Rogers had indicated they would offer a part exchange in the region of the value stated in the Operations Managers report but this was subject to final clarification. PMa suggested that a check be done to ensure that all tenders were quoting on the same basis as some may be quoting for the provision of ancillaries, i.e. controls, engine harnesses etc. while others may not. RW indicated that he would ask the Operations Manager to confirm but would be surprised if tenders had not all been required to quote based on the same specification. Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 4 of 7

5 PM asked whether the engines all came with a warranty. RW indicated that new installations will typically come with a manufacturer s / workmanship warranty but he would investigate and report back. PMa also asked if the contractors were all able to provide post installation warranty support as he was aware that the cheapest tenderer did not have a full engineering team behind them. RW undertook to ask the Operations Manager to provide further details. It was agreed that RW would provide the extra information requested by to allow the Commissioners to make a final decision. Action: RW BM returned to the meeting. 7.3 Treasurers Report - Questions were invited on the items within the report that were not listed for consideration as an agenda item. RJ note that LHC had incurred legal costs in relation to the RLymYC request for an agreement to extend their pontoon over seabed within LHC s regulating lease and felt that this should have been met by the RLymYC. RW indicated that LHC had originally agreed to meet its own costs which were expected to be negligible as the intention was to produce a standard licence in house which would be checked by its landlord (Crown Estate) to verify its compliance with the regulating lease prior to issue. However, having agreed with RLymYC and the Crown Estate that this was the basis upon which LHC would be prepared to proceed, the Crown Estates legal advisor subsequently indicated that the terms of the regulating lease would not permit such an approach and that a deed of variation and sublease was required. This in turn required legal input resulting in increased cost. RW acknowledged that with hindsight he should have attempted to revisit the agreement on costs, once it became apparent that the terms of the original agreement needed to be changed. The Commissioners agreed that in future if LHC responds to third part requests of this nature, they should meet their own costs. 8.0 SAFETY & PORT MARINE SAFETY CODE 8.1 Safety Review Meeting - A scheduled four monthly safety review meeting was held on the 30 th September Copies of the minutes and incident review report for the previous four months had been circulated. Questions were invited. CJ noted that incident numbers in the four months May to August 2015 were down but highlighted that there was a discrepancy in the addition of the 2015 column in the breakdown by incident category. (Post meeting note: 2 incidents in the other category had been omitted in error now corrected). 8.2 Oil Spill Response Exercise RW reported that in line with the exercise policy set out in the approved Oil Spill Response plan, a Tier 2 table top exercise (including Tier 1 boom deployment) was carried out on Wednesday 7 th October Wightlink, Berthon, HMCG, NFDC Emergency Planning and the Environment Agency participated. Bill Peach and Geoff Stokes also Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 5 of 7

6 participated on behalf of LHC. GS felt the exercise provided a worthwhile test of the response plan. 8.3 PMSC Compliance Review RW confirmed that on the 11 th November, Peter Nicholson (Designated Person) will be undertaking an interim review of PMSC compliance. 9. STRATEGIC PLAN RW confirmed that in line with the process agreed in the September Board meeting, the Strategic Plan was finalised and circulated to the Harbour Advisory Group prior to their meeting on the 19 th October and was published on LHC s website on the 20 th October. It was intended to draw attention to the publication of the plan in its final form in an enews letter which will be circulated to coincide with the new website launch. 10. AOB 10.1 In view of the large numbers of papers for some meetings GWH asked if in future they could be identified by Agenda item, perhaps in the footer and file name. Action: RW 11. DATE OF NEXT MEETING 11.1 The next meeting is scheduled for Monday 11 th January 2016 Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 6 of 7

7 Minute 09th November IN COMMITTEE 7 of 7