UPTON PARISH COUNCIL

Draft Minutes of the Meeting held on Wednesday 24 June 2026 at 7.00pm

Upton Village Hall, Upton, Oxfordshire

Present: Cllr Françoise Yates, Cllr Peter Head, Cllr Matthew Talbot, Cllr David Beckles, Cllr Chris Seelig.
Also present: Benjamin Shaw, Clerk & RFO, and members of the public.

 

1. Apologies for Absence

There were no apologies received.

2. Declarations of Interest

No declarations of interest were made.

3. Approval of Minutes

The minutes of the deferred May Annual Meeting of Upton Parish Council held on 3 June 2026 had been circulated to all councillors.

It was noted that any councillor who had not read the minutes or been in attendance at the meeting should abstain from voting.

RESOLVED: To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3 June 2026.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Matthew Talbot
Vote: 3 in favour, 0 against, 2 abstentions.

The motion was carried. The Deputy Chair was asked to sign and initial the approved minutes as the Chair had not been present at the meeting.

4. Open Forum

The Chair opened the public forum. The Clerk reminded those present that the public forum was limited to 15 minutes.

Members of the public addressed the Council regarding the proposed storage container. Representations included both concern about the proposed siting and support for the Council’s previous decision.

Points raised included:

• whether alternative locations or storage arrangements had been properly considered;
• whether previous Council discussions had rejected or supported the provision of a storage container;
• concern about the visual and environmental impact of the proposed location;
• suggestions that planting could assist with screening and provide wildlife benefit;
• support for the need for additional storage to protect Council and community assets;
• the poor current storage conditions for marquees and other equipment;
• the need for a flat, accessible site for delivery and future use;
• delivery constraints, including the proximity of an electricity transformer near the tractor shed;
• the potential future need for additional storage connected with Chapel Furlong land;
• concern that the matter had been debated on social media following Council decisions.

It was stated by one speaker that the Council and community should engage with the formal Parish Council process through agendas, meetings and minutes rather than through social media after a decision had been made.

The Chair thanked members of the public for their contributions.

5. Finance and Administration

5.1 Bank Balances as at 31 May 2026

The Clerk & RFO presented the bank balances as at 31 May 2026:

• Treasurer’s Account: £25,477.26
• Business Bank Instant Account: £93,430.94
• Total Funds: £118,908.20

The Treasurer advised Members that since the end of May:

• £9,000 had been transferred to reserves in accordance with previous Council decisions;
• £4,900 had also been transferred to the Business Bank Instant Account;
• current operational balances had reduced following payment of invoices and stood at just over £10,000;
• the Council’s VAT reclaim remained outstanding despite HMRC acknowledging receipt of the documentation;
• funds relating to the private lender for the Chapel Furlong acquisition had now been received;
• although legal costs exceeded the level of donations received, sufficient reserves remained available to meet these costs.

Members noted the financial position.

5.2 Payments for May 2026

Members considered the schedule of payments circulated with the agenda.

A question was raised regarding the final payment to TFM.

The Clerk confirmed that:

• the payment represented the final outstanding invoice;
• payment had been withheld until all Council keys had been returned;
• all keys had now been recovered and the contract was concluded;
• any remaining TFM identification stickers on Council bins would be removed.

RESOLVED: That the payments for May 2026 be approved.

Proposed: Cllr Matthew Talbot
Seconded: Cllr Peter Head
Vote: Unanimous.

5.3 Authorisers for Next Month’s Payments

Members considered authorisers for July payments.

RESOLVED: That Cllr Matthew Talbot, Cllr David Beckles and Cllr Chris Seelig be appointed as payment authorisers.

Proposed: Cllr Matthew Talbot
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

5.4 Bank Reconciliation to 31 May 2026

Members reviewed the May 2026 bank reconciliation previously circulated.

RESOLVED: That the bank reconciliation to 31 May 2026 be approved and signed.

5.5 First Quarterly Internal Financial Control Review Checklist

The Clerk reminded Members that the quarterly checklist had been introduced following the recommendations of the Internal Auditor to formally evidence financial controls already being undertaken by the Council.

Printed copies were provided for signature.

RESOLVED: That the First Quarterly Internal Financial Control Review Checklist be approved and signed.

Proposed: Cllr Matthew Talbot
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

6. Village Matters

6.1 Recreation Ground

1. Uptonogood Event Risk Assessments

The Clerk confirmed that both the pre-event and post-event risk assessments had been received.

Members noted that:

• the event had been delivered successfully;
• the Recreation Ground had been left secure;
• no further follow-up actions were required;
• the post-event inspection satisfied the Council’s insurance requirements.

RESOLVED: To note the successful completion of the event, receive both risk assessments and record that no further action was required.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

 

1. RoSPA Play Area Inspection

The Clerk advised Members that the RoSPA inspection referred to on the agenda had been postponed by the contractor until July 2026.

RESOLVED: To defer consideration of the inspection report until the July meeting.

1. Action Plan Arising from RoSPA Inspection

Deferred pending receipt of the July inspection report.

1. Weekly Playground Inspections

The Chair Cllr Yates confirmed that weekly inspections continued to be undertaken.

Members noted that the Clerk had not yet received copies for electronic filing and requested that future reports be forwarded for record keeping upon completion.

6.2 Storage Container

During discussion Members noted that:

• previous discussions during 2025 had explored alternative storage solutions;
• no agreed alternative had subsequently been brought forward;
• at the meeting held on 3 June 2026 the Council had resolved to purchase and site a 20-foot shipping container within the copse;
• the current meeting provided an opportunity to formally review each of the considerations listed within the agenda before confirming the Council’s existing decision.

• there remained a demonstrated need for additional storage to protect Council assets and support community organisations;
• the existing tractor shed was operating at capacity and was not considered suitable for long-term secure storage;
• a number of alternative locations had previously been investigated but discounted because of practical, environmental, access and utility constraints;
• the proposed location remained the most appropriate available site, being naturally screened, relatively unobtrusive and allowing continued access to the newly acquired Chapel Furlong land;
• externally funded groundworks had been offered;
• the container had already been purchased on behalf of the Council, with reimbursement to follow;
• Members wished to ensure that each consideration listed within the agenda was formally recorded to support the Council’s decision-making process.

The Clerk advised Members that planning permission requirements should be reviewed before installation to ensure compliance with any applicable planning legislation.

Members further noted that:

• previous financial assessments had concluded that constructing a replacement garage would cost in excess of £40,000, whereas a shipping container represented a significantly more cost-effective solution with comparatively low ongoing maintenance costs;
• no viable alternative storage solution had been identified that would adequately accommodate Council marquees, event equipment and assets while also supporting wider community organisations;
• existing storage facilities remained insufficient to meet the operational needs of both the Council and community groups;
• the proposed container would provide flexible storage supporting Council functions, the Village Hall, community organisations and community events, rather than serving solely as storage for Council-owned marquees;
• alternative suggestions previously considered had been examined but had either proved impractical, financially unrealistic or operationally unsuitable.

Cllr Head advised that, in their opinion, the Council had already gathered sufficient information to justify its previous decision and that the current resolution approving the siting of the 20-foot shipping container within the copse remained the operative decision of the Council. That that no further evidence had been presented demonstrating a more suitable alternative location.

Cllr Head provided Members with advice regarding the planning position. He explained that, following changes to permitted development legislation affecting local authorities, there appeared to be a lawful basis for the Council to install the container under Part 12, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order, provided it was used for the exercise of the Council’s statutory functions and remained within the prescribed size limitations.

Cllr Head advised that:

• the proposed container fell within the relevant dimensional limits;
• the intended use was ancillary to the Council’s statutory functions, including recreation ground management, storage of Council equipment and support of community events;
• whilst planning permission might not be required, the Council could seek a Lawful Development Certificate to obtain formal written confirmation from the Local Planning Authority that the proposal constituted lawful permitted development.

Members discussed the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining a Lawful Development Certificate.

It was noted that:

• obtaining a Lawful Development Certificate would not create planning permission but would provide formal confirmation of the Council’s interpretation of the legislation;
• such confirmation could reduce the likelihood of future procedural or planning challenges;
• alternatively, the Council could rely upon its interpretation of the permitted development provisions without obtaining a Lawful Development Certificate if Members were satisfied that the proposal was lawful;
• informal enquiries had previously been made with the Local Planning Authority, which had not indicated that planning permission would necessarily be required, although no formal planning determination had been issued.

Members discussed whether obtaining a Lawful Development Certificate represented a proportionate approach given:

• the relatively modest application cost;
• the estimated six to eight week determination period;
• the desire to minimise future legal or procedural challenge;
• the need to install the container within an appropriate timescale to enable the required groundworks and operational use.

The Clerk, acting as Responsible Financial Officer, advised Members to consider the financial risk associated with any future challenge requiring removal or relocation of the container, balanced against the cost of obtaining formal confirmation through a Lawful Development Certificate application.

Members acknowledged that delaying delivery could require volunteers to undertake additional handling of stored equipment and could delay the transfer of equipment from existing storage facilities. It was also noted that the container had already been purchased and that prolonged storage by the supplier could potentially incur additional charges, although the position remained uncertain.

Members discussed the relative risks of delaying delivery compared with proceeding under the Council’s understanding of the permitted development provisions.

During discussion, Members expressed the view that obtaining a Lawful Development Certificate would provide additional assurance that the Council’s actions complied with planning legislation and would reduce the likelihood of future challenge, while recognising that the Council’s legal position remained that the proposal appeared capable of being carried out under permitted development rights.

Following clarification of the wording of the proposal, it was agreed that the Clerk would:

• make further contact with the Local Planning Authority where appropriate;
• prepare and submit the Lawful Development Certificate application on behalf of the Council;
• keep Members informed regarding any supplier storage charges or other financial implications before arranging delivery of the container.

RESOLVED: That the Council:

• authorises the submission of an application for a Lawful Development Certificate in respect of the proposed storage container;
• delegates authority to the Clerk to undertake preparatory discussions with the Local Planning Authority and complete the necessary application;
• defers delivery of the container for as long as reasonably practicable whilst avoiding unnecessary supplier charges;
• reviews delivery arrangements should significant storage costs arise before determination of the application.

Proposed: Cllr Françoise Yates
Seconded: Cllr Peter Head
Vote: Unanimous.

6.3 Information Technology and Website

Cllr Head provided an update regarding ongoing work to improve the Council’s information technology systems and website in response to recommendations made during the Internal Audit, particularly those relating to Assertion 10 and wider governance requirements.

Cllr Head advised Members that discussions had been held with several potential website and hosting providers. One potential supplier had been discounted because its back-office systems duplicated software already in use by the Council, creating unnecessary complexity.

Cllr Head explained that additional work was required to assess:

• alternative website hosting providers;
• document management arrangements;
• email hosting options;
• migration requirements;
• implementation costs;
• longer-term support and governance implications.

Members were advised that a comprehensive options appraisal would be prepared setting out available suppliers, advantages and disadvantages, estimated implementation costs, migration requirements, ongoing support arrangements, and compliance with statutory transparency and accessibility obligations.

Cllr Head advised that, owing to planned medical treatment during August together with the Council’s summer meeting schedule, the options appraisal was likely to be presented to the Council at the September meeting.

Cllr Head further advised that quotations and any specialist advice required would be obtained before any expenditure was recommended.

RESOLVED: That:

• Cllr Peter Head be delegated to continue the review of the Council’s IT and website arrangements in consultation with the Clerk;
• Cllr Head prepare a full options appraisal for consideration at a future Council meeting;
• any quotations or professional advice required be obtained before recommendations involving expenditure are brought before Council.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

6.4 Chapel Furlong Land Acquisition – Legal, Insurance and Planning Matters

The Clerk reported that funds from the private lender had now been transferred and were expected to clear into the Council’s account within the next few days.

Members were advised that:

• arrangements had been made to preserve the anonymity of the lender by routing the funds through the Clerk before onward transfer in accordance with the Council’s previously agreed legal arrangements;
• the Council’s solicitor had advised that completion of the purchase could potentially take place within the coming days, although completion by the end of the month remained the more realistic expectation;
• arrangements would need to be made for the authorised signatories to transfer the funds between the Council’s accounts in readiness for completion;
• sufficient authorised signatories were available to complete the necessary banking arrangements when required.

The Clerk confirmed that arrangements had been made for the transfer of the purchase monies once the lender’s funds had cleared into the Council’s account. Members noted that sufficient funds would be transferred into the Council’s current account to enable completion whilst maintaining adequate working balances to meet ongoing liabilities.

Members noted that:

• approximately £90,000 from the private lender was expected to clear shortly;
• the remaining purchase monies would be transferred from existing Council reserves;
• the Council’s solicitor was awaiting confirmation that cleared funds were available before arranging completion;
• the Council’s authorised banking procedures would be followed.

The Clerk further advised that the Council’s insurance arrangements had now been prepared so that cover could commence immediately upon completion of the purchase.

Members also noted that:

• Gallagher Insurance had confirmed that suitable public liability arrangements could be put in place once ownership transferred;
• permanent signage would be required on the land in accordance with the insurer’s recommendations;
• additional signage identifying the permissive path would also be considered as part of the wider management of the site.

The Clerk advised that work would continue with volunteers and Members of the public to identify suitable locations for signage following completion.

Members noted that the purchase was now largely dependent upon completion of the legal process between the respective solicitors and the transfer of funds.

6.4(b) Receipt and Consideration of Legal Advice

Cllr Head introduced three recommendations arising from updated legal advice received from the Council’s solicitor in relation to the Chapel Furlong acquisition.

 

Resolution 1 – Access Indemnity Insurance

Members considered the solicitor’s recommendation that an Access Indemnity Insurance Policy should be put in place on exchange of contracts to protect the Council’s legal position regarding access to the site.

RESOLVED: That the Council:

• notes the legal advice received regarding access arrangements to Chapel Furlong;
• approves the arrangement of an Access Indemnity Insurance Policy to take effect upon exchange of contracts;
• authorises the policy to be upgraded if required following any future planning permission relating to community use of the land.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

Resolution 2 – Caution Against First Registration

Cllr Head advised Members that earlier Council resolutions had proposed lodging a Caution Against First Registration with HM Land Registry.

However, following further legal advice, the Council’s solicitor had advised that pursuing a caution could prejudice the proposed indemnity insurance arrangements and was therefore no longer recommended.

Cllr Head explained that the revised advice superseded the solicitor’s earlier recommendation and that, in order to maintain an accurate audit trail, the Council should formally revise its previous decision.

RESOLVED: That, having considered the revised professional legal advice received, the Council:

• will not proceed at this time with an application to register a Caution Against First Registration in respect of Chapel Furlong;
• will instead rely upon the agreed indemnity insurance arrangements;
• keeps the position under review should circumstances change.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

Resolution 3 – Future Planning Application for Change of Use

Cllr Head advised Members that, although the land remained in agricultural use, the Council should begin preparing for a future planning application to change the authorised use of the site once community engagement had been undertaken.

Members discussed the importance of ensuring that any future planning application was sufficiently broad to encompass the range of community uses that may emerge following public consultation.

Cllr Head explained that restricting the application to a single use at this stage could require further planning applications in future if additional community facilities were later proposed. Accordingly, it was considered preferable to prepare an application capable of accommodating:

• community open space;
• formal recreation;
• nature recovery and habitat management;
• associated access improvements;
• ancillary structures and signage necessary to support those uses.

Members emphasised that the purpose of the proposal was not to predetermine the future use of the land, but to authorise preparation of a draft planning application which would return to Council for approval before submission.

Members noted that:

• community consultation would take place before any planning application was submitted;
• no final decision regarding the future use of the land would be made until that consultation had been completed;
• the draft application would return to Council for full consideration prior to submission.

RESOLVED: That the Council agrees in principle:

• to prepare an application to Vale of White Horse District Council seeking planning permission for the change of use of Chapel Furlong from agricultural land to community open space, formal recreation, nature recovery and habitat management together with associated access improvements and ancillary structures;
• that Cllr Peter Head, working with the Clerk, prepare a draft planning application;
• that the draft application be brought back to Full Council for approval before submission.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Françoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous.

6.5 PSGA Membership and Mapping Licence

Cllr Head introduced a report regarding the Public Sector Geospatial Agreement mapping licence.

Members were advised that a request had been received from editor of Upton News, seeking assistance with obtaining permission to reproduce Ordnance Survey mapping extracts within the publication for the benefit of the community.

Cllr Head explained that:

• Parish Councils are eligible to apply for a PSGA mapping licence;
• the licence would enable authorised community use of Ordnance Survey mapping extracts;
• the Council would remain the licence holder, with the Clerk administering access;
• the proposed use by Upton News fell within the scope of permitted community use, subject to compliance with the licence conditions;
• any mapping published would include the required copyright acknowledgements.

Members noted that the arrangement would enable the publication of local walking routes and other community information whilst minimising administrative burden on the Council.

Following discussion, Members agreed that obtaining the licence would provide a wider community benefit and could also support other eligible community organisations in the future where permitted by the licence.

RESOLVED: That the Council:

• authorises the Clerk to apply for membership of the Public Sector Geospatial Agreement;
• authorises the Clerk to obtain the associated Ordnance Survey mapping licence;
• approves the use of the licence for community purposes, including supporting Upton News, subject to compliance with all licence conditions.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr David Beckles
Vote: Unanimous.

6.6 Recreation Ground Hire Policy Review

Members considered a draft Recreation Ground Hire Policy circulated prior to the meeting.

The Clerk advised that the draft had been prepared in response to Members’ earlier request but had only recently been circulated.

Members raised a number of concerns regarding the draft, including:

• provisions relating to mobility aids and potential Equality Act implications;
• proposed restrictions concerning electrically assisted bicycles;
• requirements for public liability insurance;
• the need to distinguish between organised commercial activity and informal recreational use;
• consistency of charging arrangements for organised groups;
• practical enforcement of any revised policy;
• whether separate policies should be prepared covering charging, recreation ground use and organised events.

Members agreed that the proposals represented a significant policy change requiring further consideration and benchmarking against comparable parish councils before any decision could properly be made.

During discussion Members recognised:

• the importance of encouraging recreational use of the Recreation Ground;
• the need for a fair and transparent charging policy;
• the value of creating an additional income stream where appropriate;
• the need to minimise unnecessary administrative burdens upon the Clerk.

Members further agreed that policy development should be Member-led, with officer support where required.

RESOLVED: That:

• consideration of the proposed Recreation Ground Hire Policy be deferred to a future meeting;
• Cllr Matthew Talbot and Cllr Chris Seelig work together between the present meeting and the September meeting to prepare an options report;
• the report benchmark arrangements adopted by comparable parish councils and consider:
  • charging arrangements;
  • recreation ground use;
  • organised events;
  • enforcement arrangements;
  • administrative implications;
  • whether separate policies should be produced;
  • options ranging from retaining the existing arrangements through to more comprehensive policy changes;
• the report be presented to Full Council for consideration at the September meeting specifically considering the following items
• (1) the problem to be solved,
• (2) benchmarking against comparable parish councils,
• (3) whether separate policies are preferable for charging, land use and organised events,
• (4) likely enforcement arrangements,
• (5) administrative implications for the Clerk,
• (6) draft options ranging from no change to light-touch amendment to the current arrangements.

Proposed: Cllr Françoise Yates
Seconded: Cllr Peter Head
Vote: Unanimous.

7. Planning Matters – Enforcement Update: Wattle Cottage Farm / Land to the Rear of The Dragon

Cllr Head provided Members with a verbal update regarding the planning enforcement position relating to the land to the rear of The Dragon Public House, Wattle Cottage Farm.

Members were advised that:

• the planning application had previously been refused by the Local Planning Authority;
• two planning enforcement notices had subsequently been issued;
• the notices required the cessation of the unauthorised residential use together with the removal of caravans, structures, hardstanding and associated residential paraphernalia, and restoration of the land;
• the notices had been due to take effect from 1 July 2026;
• an appeal against the enforcement notices had been lodged with the Planning Inspectorate on 3 June 2026.

Members noted that:

• the lodging of the appeal suspends the effect of the enforcement notices until the appeal has been determined;
• at the present time no further substantive information has been issued by the Planning Inspectorate;
• the appeal process could take many months before determination;
• should the appeal be dismissed, the Planning Inspector may determine an amended compliance period.

Members acknowledged that the Council’s principal concern remained public safety, particularly given the site’s location within an area at risk of flooding.

Members also noted that local residents had reported further activity on the site.

Cllr Head advised that where members of the public observe potential breaches of planning control, they should report these directly to the Local Planning Authority using the existing planning enforcement reference, thereby ensuring any additional evidence is available to the enforcement officers.

Members further noted that, whilst the Council had previously intended to write further to the Local Planning Authority regarding enforcement action, it was considered appropriate to await further information from the Planning Inspectorate before undertaking any additional correspondence.

RESOLVED: That the Council notes:

• the lodging of the appeal against the planning enforcement notices;
• that enforcement action is currently suspended pending determination of the appeal;
• that no further formal action is required by the Council at the present time, although the matter will continue to be monitored.

8. Councillor Vacancy

8.1 Local Elections 2027 and Councillor Recruitment

The Clerk reminded Members that the next scheduled parish elections would take place in May 2027.

Members were advised that:

• all serving councillors would retire at that election and would need to seek re-election if they wished to continue serving;
• the Council currently has a casual vacancy;
• additional volunteers and prospective councillors would be welcomed to help support the Council’s increasing workload.

8.2 To consider publicity to encourage residents to stand as candidates at the May 2027 parish council elections

Members discussed ways of encouraging wider community participation and agreed that publicity through Upton News would be appropriate.

Members also discussed the value of encouraging residents to volunteer for practical community projects, reducing unnecessary expenditure where appropriate.

The Chair noted that a future discussion regarding succession planning could be undertaken nearer the election period.

Members noted the report.

9. Contributions to Upton News

Cllr Head advised Members that an article would be prepared for publication in Upton News summarising recent Council activity.

Members discussed including updates relating to:

• recent governance work undertaken by the Council;
• successful completion of the internal audit;
• appointments made at the Annual Meeting;
• the Public Sector Geospatial Agreement mapping licence;
• the current Recreation Ground policy review;
• the casual councillor vacancy;
• opportunities for community volunteering;
• a factual update regarding the storage container project;
• a neutral update confirming that an appeal had been lodged in relation to the Wattle Cottage Farm enforcement matter;
• graffiti removal and wider community projects;
• progress on the Chapel Furlong land acquisition.

Members agreed that any communications relating to planning matters should remain factual and politically neutral, recognising the Council’s role as a statutory consultee.

Cllr Head undertook to circulate a draft article to Members for comment prior to publication owing to the publication deadline.

Members also agreed that a future meeting of the Council’s community engagement working group should be arranged.

Members discussed the graffiti at the Recreation Ground bus shelter.

It was noted that:

• the graffiti consists primarily of red paint on the rear wall;
• repainting the affected area would provide a simple and cost-effective solution;
• the shelter had originally been painted by an external contractor;
• the Council would welcome assistance from suitably willing community volunteers with repainting the affected wall.

Members agreed that community involvement in maintaining parish assets would be a positive message to promote and that requests for volunteers could be included within future Council communications.

Action: Cllr Head to include a request for volunteers within the next Upton News article.

10. Date of Next Meeting

Members confirmed that the next meeting of the Parish Council would be held on:

Wednesday 29 July 2026 at 7.00pm
Upton Village Hall, Upton, Oxfordshire.

 

Close of Meeting

There being no further business, the Chair thanked Members and members of the public for their attendance and declared the meeting closed.

 

UPTON PARISH COUNCIL

Draft Minutes of the Meeting Held on Wednesday 29th April 2026

Held in the Small Meeting Room, Upton Village Hall at 7.00pm

Present

Cllr Francoise Yates

Cllr Peter Head

Cllr Chris Seelig

Cllr Matt Talbot

In Attendance

Benjamin Shaw – Clerk/RFO
Members of the public

1. Apologies for Absence

Apologies were received from Cllr David Beckles.

Cllr Matt Talbot advised that he would arrive late due to prior commitments.

2. Declarations of Interest

No declarations of interest relating to items on the agenda were received at this stage of the meeting.

3. Open Forum

3.1 The George at Upton – Advance Notice of Events

A resident raised concerns regarding noise associated with events held at The George public house, particularly during weddings and weekend functions. It was noted that, during the previous year, advance notice of such events had occasionally been shared with residents via village WhatsApp groups, which had been appreciated by nearby households.

The resident asked whether a more formal arrangement could be encouraged whereby advance notice of larger events would routinely be communicated to villagers.

Members acknowledged the concern and considered the request reasonable. It was agreed that an informal discussion would be held with representatives of the public house to encourage the continued use of local communication channels, including village WhatsApp and Facebook groups, to notify residents of significant upcoming events where possible.

The resident was advised to report any future issues should communication cease after initial discussions.

3.2 Wattle Cottage Farm – Planning Refusal and Enforcement Matters

Residents raised questions regarding the recently refused planning application relating to Land at Wattle Cottage Farm and asked what actions, if any, could now be taken regarding enforcement and associated concerns.

Cllr Head explained that the Parish Council acts as a statutory consultee within the planning process but does not possess direct enforcement powers. Enforcement action remains the responsibility of the Local Planning Authority and other relevant agencies depending upon the nature of the issue.

It was noted that:

• The Parish Council had previously submitted formal representations regarding the planning application;
• The matter would be discussed later in the meeting under Agenda Item 5.2;
• Concerns raised by residents would be recorded within the public minutes and could assist in evidencing local concerns to relevant authorities.

Residents raised concerns regarding:

• Highway and child safety;
• Animal welfare;
• Burning of waste and potential environmental impacts;
• Obstruction of public rights of way;
• Imported fill material and land alteration.

Cllr Head advised that different matters fall under different regulatory bodies and legal frameworks, including:

• Planning enforcement;
• Environmental Health;
• Countryside Rights of Way services;
• The Environment Agency.

Members of the public were encouraged to continue reporting specific incidents, particularly where evidential records such as photographs or dates could assist relevant authorities.

Cllr Head further advised that:

• The planning process is necessarily procedural and can be lengthy;
• The Parish Council would continue to advocate on behalf of residents within its legal remit;
• Ongoing concerns regarding national planning policy, local government reorganisation, and protections affecting the North Wessex Downs National Landscape remained matters of wider concern.

Residents acknowledged that the matter was likely to remain a long-term issue requiring continued monitoring and engagement.

No further questions were raised during the Open Forum.

5. Planning

The Chair (Cllr Yates) proposed, with the agreement of Members, to bring forward Agenda Item 5.2 to allow members of the public present to hear the discussion. This was agreed Unanimously.

5.2 Decision Notice – Land at Wattle Cottage Farm, Prospect Road, Upton

The Council noted the refusal of planning permission by Vale of White Horse District Council in respect of application P25/V2762/FUL, relating to Land at Wattle Cottage Farm, Prospect Road, Upton.

Members discussed the current position regarding enforcement case VE24/201 and related matters. The Clerk reported that no formal enforcement action was currently shown as having been taken, but that this was not unexpected given the recent refusal decision and the procedural requirements that may apply.

Cllr Head advised that the Parish Council had previously objected to the application and that the reasons for refusal reflected a number of concerns previously raised by the Council, including flood risk, impact on the North Wessex Downs National Landscape, highway safety, biodiversity, countryside impact, and the intentional unauthorised nature of the development.

Members discussed the importance of maintaining a collaborative and constructive relationship with the Local Planning Authority, while continuing to represent the concerns of residents. Cllr Head reported that a draft letter had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting, addressed to the Development Management Team Leader at Vale of White Horse District Council, regarding enforcement and related matters.

Members also discussed whether correspondence should be copied to:

• District Councillors;
• the County Councillor;
• the relevant planning case officer; and
• the North Wessex Downs National Landscape Team.

It was noted that, although the North Wessex Downs National Landscape Team is not an enforcement body, its management plan and comments may be relevant to planning matters affecting the protected landscape.

The Council further noted that residents had raised concerns during the Open Forum regarding safety, animal welfare, burning of waste, environmental impacts, public rights of way, and imported fill material. It was acknowledged that these issues may fall under different statutory regimes and may involve different authorities.

RESOLVED:
That Upton Parish Council write formally to the Development Management Team Leader at Vale of White Horse District Council regarding enforcement case VE24/201 and related matters, and that the Council authorise associated correspondence with other relevant authorities and stakeholders as deemed appropriate.

The letter shall be circulated to Members by email for any final comments or amendments before being sent within five days of circulation.

The correspondence shall be copied, as appropriate, to the North Wessex Downs National Landscape Team, Ward Members, the County Councillor, and the relevant case officer.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Seelig.
Carried unanimously.

5.1 P26/V0730/FUL – Maslina, Reading Road, Upton, Didcot OX11 9JJ

The Council considered planning application P26/V0730/FUL for the demolition of the existing house and outbuilding and the erection of a replacement self-build dwelling at Maslina, Reading Road, Upton.

Members noted that the site is located on the A417, adjacent to The George and Dragon, and backs onto land previously known as Wattle Cottage Farm. The proposal was described as a replacement residential dwelling rather than a wholly new residential use.

Members discussed the scale of the proposed dwelling, noting that it represented a significant increase in size compared with the existing property. The Council also noted that the site lies within the North Wessex Downs National Landscape, formerly the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and that the Council had previously agreed to have due regard to the relevant management plan in planning matters.

Members considered the following matters:

• the scale and massing of the proposed dwelling;
• whether the design was in keeping with the surrounding area;
• potential impacts on neighbouring amenity;
• landscape impact within the National Landscape;
• lighting and potential light spill, particularly given dark skies considerations;
• the proposed landscaping and replacement of existing conifers;
• drainage and increased hardstanding;
• potential gravel migration onto the A417;
• construction traffic and highway safety;
• the need for an appropriate Construction Traffic Management Plan.

Members noted that the applicant appeared to have engaged with pre-application advice and that the design had been amended from an earlier, larger proposal. Members were generally supportive of the principle of a replacement dwelling but considered that additional safeguards and clarification were required.

The Council discussed submitting a neutral response of no objection, subject to comments and requested conditions.

The Council considered that the Local Planning Authority should satisfy itself in relation to:

• the adequacy of the landscape and visual assessment;
• lighting design and compliance with relevant National Landscape guidance;
• drainage arrangements and the impact of additional hardstanding;
• tree protection and replacement planting;
• the timing of landscaping works to provide screening at an early stage;
• construction traffic management;
• prevention of loose gravel migrating onto the public highway;
• any ecological or biodiversity requirements.

During discussion, a member of the public indicated that they wished to comment. The Chair proposed that the meeting be suspended briefly to allow public participation.

RESOLVED:
That the meeting be suspended to allow a member of the public to speak.

Proposed by Cllr Yates.
Seconded by Cllr Head.
Carried unanimously.

The meeting was suspended.

[20:03] The meeting resumed.

The meeting was reinstated.

Proposed by Cllr Yates.
Seconded by Cllr Talbot.
Carried unanimously.

Members resumed consideration of planning application P26/V0730/FUL, Maslina, Reading Road, Upton.

Members discussed the need for any response to focus on material planning considerations. The following matters were considered relevant to the Council’s consultation response:

• Construction traffic management, particularly given the site’s access from the A417;
• Prevention of gravel migrating from the proposed driveway onto the public highway;
• Surface water drainage, sustainable drainage arrangements and the increase in hardstanding;
• Landscape impact within the North Wessex Downs National Landscape;
• Lighting impact and potential light spill arising from extensive glazing;
• Retention and protection of trees during demolition and construction;
• Replacement planting and screening;
• Biodiversity net gain calculations;
• Protection and replacement of bat roosting opportunities.

Members noted that the submitted bat survey identified existing bat roosting features and that the Council wished the Local Planning Authority to satisfy itself that appropriate mitigation and replacement roosting provision would be secured and checked.

Members also noted that the application deadline appeared to have been extended to 16th May 2026, although the agenda had recorded the deadline as 29th April 2026. It was therefore agreed that Cllr Head would circulate a draft response to Members for comment before submission.

RESOLVED:
That Cllr Head circulate a proposed consultation response to Members regarding planning application P26/V0730/FUL, and, following consideration of Members’ comments, submit the response on behalf of Upton Parish Council.

The Council’s response would be on the basis of no objection, subject to comments and requested conditions addressing the matters discussed.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Carried unanimously.

Members then returned to the remaining agenda items, it having been agreed earlier to bring forward Item 5 to allow members of the public to hear the planning discussion.

A matter was then raised regarding a previous planning response relating to Prospect Road, which it was suggested may not have been submitted. The Clerk undertook to check the position and, if necessary, request that a late submission be accepted.

The Clerk noted concerns regarding workload and available contracted hours. It was suggested that this matter should be considered separately by the Council.

Cllr Talbot proposed that the meeting be suspended.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Carried unanimously.

The meeting was suspended.

The meeting resumed following the informal discussion.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Talbot.
Carried unanimously.

 

6. Clerk’s Report

The Clerk provided a report regarding progress on the proposed land acquisition and associated legal and financial matters.

The Clerk reported that:

• extensive correspondence and updates had been circulated to Members by email;
• the lender had approved the current documentation in principle;
• the Council’s solicitor had confirmed that the transaction was capable of proceeding, subject to execution of the necessary documents and funding arrangements;
• anti-money laundering checks had been completed satisfactorily;
• source of funds verification remained in progress but no concerns had been identified;
• exchange and completion were currently anticipated within approximately four to eight weeks, subject to all parties being ready.

Members discussed:

• execution arrangements for legal documents;
• correspondence address arrangements relating to the loan documentation;
• insurance requirements;
• access arrangements;
• permissive path considerations;
• boundary matters;
• drainage, easements and utility infrastructure;
• indemnity insurance and caution against first registration;
• land management and future use considerations.

Members noted concerns regarding the use of the Clerk’s correspondence address on legal documents and requested that clarification and advice be sought from the Council’s solicitor regarding whether an alternative correspondence address could be used following completion.

The Council further noted:

• that there appeared to be no significant contamination concerns associated with the land;
• that no invasive plant species had been identified during site inspection;
• that public liability insurance would be required from exchange of contracts;
• that future permissive path arrangements would be considered separately following acquisition;
• that the Community Land Working Group would continue to develop recommendations for future management of the site.

The Council noted the information provided and indicated that the identified risks were considered proportionate and manageable in the context of the proposed acquisition.

 

7. Use of Loan, Donations and Council Reserves

The Council considered the proposed allocation of funding sources in line with the DLUHC borrowing approval.

RESOLVED:
That:

1. The private loan facility (up to £90,000) shall be applied solely towards the purchase price of the land and associated acquisition costs; and
2. All post-completion expenditure shall be funded from donations and/or Council reserves and not from the loan facility.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Carried unanimously.

 

8. Execution of Legal Documents

The Council considered arrangements for the execution of:

• the Contract for Sale;
• the TP1 Transfer Deed; and
• the Loan Agreement.

It was noted that the documents would require execution as deeds in accordance with the Council’s Standing Orders and relevant legislation.

Members agreed that the documents would not be signed during the meeting and would instead be reviewed and executed separately.

RESOLVED:
That:

1. The Contract for Sale, TP1 Transfer Deed and Loan Agreement shall be executed as deeds on behalf of the Council;
2. Execution shall be by any two Members of the Council;
3. The signatures of those Members shall be witnessed by the Proper Officer; and
4. The Clerk be instructed to liaise with the Council’s solicitor regarding the execution arrangements and related matters.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Carried unanimously.

 

9. Authority to Proceed to Exchange and Completion

The Council considered delegated authority arrangements relating to the proposed land transaction.

Members further discussed:

• indemnity insurance;
• caution against first registration;
• access matters;
• funding transfer arrangements; and
• procedural requirements relating to exchange and completion.

RESOLVED:
That delegated authority be granted to the Clerk, in consultation with the Chair or another Member where necessary, to:

• finalise terms with the Council’s solicitor;
• proceed to exchange of contracts;
• arrange payment of the required deposit; and
• complete the transaction,

subject to:

• legal advice confirming readiness;
• funding arrangements being in place; and
• remaining within the period of DLUHC borrowing approval.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Talbot.
Carried unanimously.

 

10. Exchange and Completion Timing

The Council noted legal advice regarding the recommended timing between exchange and completion and discussed arrangements relating to:

• loan drawdown;
• transfer of funds;
• exchange timing; and
• completion dates.

The Council agreed that the advice of the Council’s solicitor should be followed regarding the scheduling of exchange and completion.

RESOLVED:
That exchange and completion shall proceed in accordance with the advice of the Council’s solicitor.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Carried unanimously.

 

11. Anti-Money Laundering and Member Compliance

The Clerk confirmed that:

• appropriate anti-money laundering and due diligence checks had been undertaken;
• no concerns had been identified;
• the Council’s solicitor had also undertaken the required checks; and
• no Member present was disqualified under Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

The information was noted.

 

12. Risk Assessment and Instructions to Solicitor

The Council considered the remaining risks associated with the transaction, including:

• access arrangements;
• utility and easement matters;
• indemnity insurance;
• permissive path considerations; and
• land registration matters.

Members considered the risks proportionate and manageable.

RESOLVED:
That the Council, having considered the solicitor’s Report on Title and associated advice, considers the remaining risks proportionate and manageable and confirms instructions to the solicitor to proceed with the transaction.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Head.
Carried unanimously.

 

13. Insurance and Site Management

The Council considered:

• insurance arrangements from exchange of contracts;
• permissive access arrangements;
• land management considerations; and
• future working group proposals.

RESOLVED:
That:
(a) the Clerk/RFO be authorised to arrange appropriate landowner’s and public liability insurance from the date of exchange of contracts; and
(b) the Council supports, in principle, the continuation of permissive public access arrangements, with detailed proposals to be brought back to Council at a future meeting.

Proposed by Cllr Seelig.
Seconded by Cllr Talbot.
Carried unanimously.

 

14. Exclusion of Public and Press

The Council determined that exclusion of the public and press was not required.

Items 15 and 16 were therefore not considered.

 

17. Finance and Administration

The Council noted the balances as at 31 March 2026:

• Treasurer’s Account: £9,639.81
• Business Bank Instant Account: £93,350.36
• Total Funds Available: £102,990.17

17.1 Authorisers

It was agreed that Cllr Talbot and Cllr Seelig would act as authorisers for the next month’s payments.

17.2 Approval of Payments

The Council approved the payments listed within the agenda papers.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Seelig.
Carried unanimously.

17.3 Bank Reconciliation

The Council approved the bank reconciliation to the end of March 2026.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Head.
Carried unanimously.

17.4 Expenses

No expenses were submitted for approval. Deferred to the next meeting.

17.5 Salary Payments

The Council approved salary payments in accordance with contractual obligations.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Seelig.
Carried unanimously.

The Clerk advised that the forthcoming audit period and associated finance work would place additional demands on Clerk hours during the coming month.

 

18. Recreation Ground

The Council received an update regarding the recent playground inspection. Members noted that:

• no significant safety concerns had been identified;
• a minor issue with play equipment had already been repaired locally; and
• the overall inspection outcome was satisfactory.

The Council discussed access arrangements for preparations relating to the forthcoming Uptonogood event.

Members considered whether temporary access should be granted to named volunteers for access to the recreation ground and garage facilities, subject to appropriate safeguards.

Following discussion:

RESOLVED:
That temporary ad hoc access be granted to named Uptonogood volunteers for a limited period, subject to:

• submission of an appropriate risk assessment;
• compliance with Council requirements regarding vehicle access and safety; and
• return of keys/access arrangements following the event period.

Proposed by Cllr Head.
Seconded by Cllr Yates.
Two votes in favour, with one abstention from Cllr Seelig.
Motion carried.

 

19. Upton News

Members agreed that contributions to Upton News would include:

• an update regarding the Wattle Cottage Farm planning and enforcement matter;
• a brief update regarding progress on the community land acquisition; and
• continued encouragement for residents to consider joining the Parish Council.

 

20. Personnel Committee and Staffing Matters

The Council discussed arrangements for the Clerk’s annual appraisal and noted that advice would be sought from OALC regarding process and timing.

20.1 Personnel Committee Membership

RESOLVED:
That:

• Cllr Yates step down from the Personnel Committee; and
• Cllr Seelig and Cllr Head join the Personnel Committee alongside the existing membership.

Proposed by Cllr Talbot.
Seconded by Cllr Head.
Carried unanimously.

 

21. Date of Next Meeting

The next full meeting of Upton Parish Council will be held on Wednesday 27th May 2026 at 7.00pm in the small meeting room at Upton Village Hall.

The meeting closed.

 

UPTON PARISH COUNCIL

Draft Minutes of the Parish Council Meeting

Held on Wednesday 25 February 2026 at 19:00
Small Meeting Room, Upton Village Hall

 

Present

Cllr Peter Head
Cllr Chris Seelig
Cllr Matt Talbot
Cllr Francoise Yates (Chair)

Clerk & Responsible Financial Officer: Benjamin Shaw

 

County Councillor Rebecca Fletcher

1. Apologies for Absence

Apologies were received from Cllr David Beckles.

2. Declarations of Interest

No declarations of interest were made.

3. Public Participation (Open Forum)

No members of the public were present.

4. Minutes of the Previous Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2026 were considered.

Minor typographical amendments were noted including correction of names and removal of references identifying parishioners.

RESOLVED:
That the amended minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2026 be approved as a correct record.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Chris Seelig
Vote: Unanimous

5. Planning

5.1 New Planning Applications

No new planning applications had been received since publication of the agenda.

5.2 Updates on Previously Considered Applications

P25/V2762/FUL

The Council noted a significant number of public representations submitted in relation to the application.

Members noted the Council had previously submitted comments including concerns regarding the highway assessment and ownership assumptions referenced within the applicant’s submission.

No further action was required at this stage.

P26/V0101/PIP

Members noted that Planning in Principle consent had been granted by the Local Planning Authority.

It was noted that a subsequent detailed planning application will follow and the Parish Council will have the opportunity to comment further at that stage.

5.3 Circulation of Draft Planning Responses

The Council considered a request that draft planning responses prepared under delegated authority be circulated to councillors prior to submission.

Members agreed that circulation of draft responses represents good governance practice and allows councillors an opportunity to comment where time permits.

5.4 Planning Application P26/V0126/HH – Failure to Respond

The Clerk reported that the Council had not submitted a response within the consultation period for the above application.

Members noted:

• The application was received close to the consultation deadline.
• The shortened consultation period limited the ability to convene a meeting within statutory notice requirements.
• No request for an extension to the consultation period had been made to the Local Planning Authority.

The matter was noted and it was agreed that the Council’s planning procedures and delegation arrangements would be considered under Item 9.1.

6. District Councillor Report

No District Councillor was present and no report was received.

7. County Councillor Report

The County Councillor attended and provided an update covering:

• Highways maintenance and pothole repairs
• Impacts of prolonged wet weather on road conditions
• Proposed improvements to the FixMyStreet reporting system
• Flooding issues affecting locations within the wider area
• Planned highway works including closures affecting the A417

Members raised concerns regarding:

• Flooding on local roads
• Drainage issues affecting a public right of way and adjacent ditch
• The condition of certain local roads

The County Councillor agreed to investigate the drainage issue and report back.

The Chair thanked the County Councillor for attending.

8. Village Matters

8.1 Recreation Ground Grounds Maintenance Contract

The Clerk reported that TFM had submitted its best and final offer.

Following comparison of quotations, Scofell remained the lowest cost provider for the required specification.

RESOLVED:
To appoint Scofell as grounds maintenance contractor for the Recreation Ground.

Proposed: Cllr Chris Seelig
Seconded: Cllr Matt Talbot
Vote: Unanimous

8.2 Volunteer / Working Groups

Play Area Working Group

Interest in volunteering will be explored through the forthcoming Village Survey and publicity in Upton News.

Community Land Working Group

Members noted that establishment of this group will follow completion of the land purchase process.

8.3 Tree Works / At-Risk Trees

The Clerk reported on quotations received from Michael Wilson for safety works.

RESOLVED:
To approve expenditure of £1,000 for priority safety works to remove dangerous branches overhanging the playground and recreation areas.

Proposed: Cllr Matt Talbot
Seconded: Cllr Francoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous

Further works will be considered in the new financial year.

 

8.4 Play Area – Maintenance and Safety

Swing Beam Replacement

Quotations are being obtained and will be circulated once received.

Trim Trail Rope Adaptation

Consideration deferred pending further inspection.

Inspection Rota

Routine playground inspections are continuing.

8.5 IT & Website Migration

The Council received an update on the hosting support ticket and progress toward the .gov.uk migration.

It was noted that new requirements under the 2025–26 Practitioners’ Guide (Assertion 10) will require the Council to demonstrate:

• Ownership and use of a council domain for email and website;
• Compliance with accessibility standards (WCAG 2.2);
• Adoption of an IT policy.

The Council confirmed that:

• The Council already owns and uses a .gov.uk domain for email, and councillors have appropriate email accounts in place, placing the Council in a strong position compared to other parishes.
• Full migration of the village website is not required. Only statutory and transparency content (e.g. agendas, minutes, and governance documents) must be hosted on a .gov.uk domain.

Members discussed current issues and required actions, including:

• Inconsistent and outdated domain registration (WHOIS) information across platforms;
• Discrepancies in Clerk and contact details held by external bodies;
• Legacy access, outdated software, and security concerns within existing systems;
• The need to retain historic domains to prevent third-party use.

It was reported that initial improvements have already been made, including email security enhancements.

The Council agreed that:

• A new, standalone .gov.uk website should be created to host Council documents only, with links from the existing village website;
• This approach avoids disruption to the main village website while ensuring compliance;
• Accessibility requirements will apply only to the new Council site.

Further actions were identified:

• Completion of a full audit of domains and hosting arrangements;
• Updating Clerk and Council contact details with all relevant external bodies;
• Updating domain registration records (including via Nominet where required);
• Reviewing ICO registration status;
• Identifying and adopting a suitable IT policy;
• Scoping costs and options for the new website.

It was noted that there is no fixed statutory deadline, but the Council must demonstrate awareness, progress, and a clear plan to the auditor.

Resolved:
To proceed with the outlined actions, including development of a .gov.uk-hosted Council website and associated compliance work, and to receive a further report with costings and options in due course.

8.6 Machinery Servicing and Security

The Council received a report following the February servicing of grounds maintenance equipment.

It was reported that:

• The John Deere ride-on mower has been serviced and returned, having received a light service. An invoice is awaited.
• The strimmer (Stihl) remains with the service provider and may be beyond economic repair. Further updates are awaited.

Members noted that:

• A potential write-off may be required if the strimmer cannot be repaired;
• Any disposal must be properly recorded and reflected in the asset register for audit purposes;
• Both items are currently included on the asset register (as confirmed from the last audit).

The Council discussed budget implications and the need to allocate costs appropriately within grounds maintenance or recreation budgets.

Resolved:

• To note the report;
• To await confirmation on the strimmer condition and associated costs;
• To ensure any write-off or replacement is properly recorded in the asset register and considered within future budget planning.

8.7 Village Survey

The Council received an update on the development of the village surveys.

It was reported that:

• Both the Neighbourhood Plan survey and the Playground survey have been revised, trialled, and condensed (with the playground survey reduced to six questions);
• A parishioner is leading on survey design and has secured a small team of volunteers to assist with delivery and data input;
• Evidence suggests that in-person distribution will achieve significantly higher response rates than online methods, particularly given the village demographic.

Members discussed key considerations, including:

• Whether responses should be collected per household or per individual.
  The general consensus was that a household response would be more practical and consistent;
• The preferred method of distribution, with support expressed for door-to-door delivery and engagement;
• The potential use of printed copies, with printing to be arranged locally and costs reclaimed where appropriate;
• Limited value in paid online survey tools, though email or website links may still be used to supplement engagement;
• Opportunities to encourage volunteer involvement via community groups and online platforms.

It was noted that:

• The final survey content must be reviewed by Council prior to distribution and included in a future agenda as an appendix;
• Draft surveys will be circulated to members in advance for comment.

Resolved:

• To support the principle of in-person survey distribution using printed copies;
• To proceed on the basis of one response per household (subject to final confirmation);
• To receive the draft surveys for review ahead of the next meeting, where final approval will be considered.

8.8 Parish Emergency Plan

The Council considered an initial framework for updating the Parish Emergency Plan.

It was reported that:

• A review has been undertaken of the Oxfordshire County Council Community Resilience standards (2026);
• While there is no statutory requirement, maintaining a Parish Emergency Plan is considered best practice;
• A proportionate, practical, and GDPR-compliant plan is required, avoiding unnecessary complexity.

Members noted that:

• Existing templates (including Government guidance) are available but may be adapted to suit the scale of the parish;
• A concise and usable document is preferred, focusing on key actions and local response arrangements.

A proposal was outlined to:

• Establish a Community Resilience Working Group;
• Comprise approximately three councillors, supported by community volunteers where appropriate;
• Undertake initial drafting, data gathering, and engagement work, before submitting a draft plan to the Clerk for compliance checks and subsequent Council approval.

Members were invited to review the proposed Terms of Reference ahead of the next meeting.

It was further noted that:

• Audit and governance commitments in the coming months may affect councillor availability;
• Volunteer support from within the village may be explored, subject to formal Council agreement.

Resolved:

• To defer formal establishment of the working group to the next meeting;
• That members review the draft Terms of Reference in advance;
• To include this item on the next agenda for decision.

8.9 Recreation Ground Signage

The Council received an update on volunteer-led repair works to signage at the recreation ground.

It was reported that:

• Repair works have been delayed due to adverse weather conditions.

Resolved:
To note the update and await further progress once conditions allow works to proceed.

9. Governance

9.1 Delegated Decision-Making Arrangements (March 2020)

The Council received and noted the Clerk’s Governance Note regarding the delegated decision-making arrangements adopted on 19 March 2020.

Members were reminded that:

• The 2020 arrangements were introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic to enable decision-making (including email voting and delegation to the Clerk) where in-person meetings were not possible;
• Guidance received from Oxfordshire Association of Local Councils indicates that such arrangements have not universally been rescinded, but current legislation requires that formal decisions of a parish council must be made at a properly convened public meeting.

The Council considered:

• Whether email-based decision-making and delegation to a small number of members remains lawful or appropriate;
• The governance risks associated with continuing to rely on pandemic-era arrangements not reflected in current Standing Orders;
• The practical implications for responding to planning applications within statutory timeframes.

It was noted that:

• The Council’s current Standing Orders (as reviewed and adopted in 2025) do not include provisions for email voting or the 2020 emergency delegation;
• There is uncertainty as to whether such provisions existed in earlier versions of the Standing Orders, but they are not present in the current adopted version;
• Email exchanges do not constitute a lawful public meeting;
• Decisions taken outside a properly convened meeting may not be legally robust, particularly where deadlines prevent later ratification.

Members expressed a preference for strengthening governance and ensuring compliance ahead of the forthcoming audit.

Resolved:

• To formally rescind the delegated decision-making arrangements adopted on 19 March 2020 insofar as they relate to decision-making by email or informal member agreement;
• To confirm that Council decisions must be made at properly convened public meetings in accordance with legislation and Standing Orders;
• To note that where time constraints prevent a meeting, the Council may:
  • Request an extension from the relevant authority; or
  • Choose not to submit a corporate response where appropriate;
• To instruct the Clerk to bring forward to the next meeting:
  • Draft options for a scheme of delegation to the Clerk for defined circumstances; and/or
  • Draft Terms of Reference for a Planning Committee (minimum three members);
  • Clarification on procedures for requesting extensions to planning deadlines;
• To require that any future external governance advice obtained on behalf of the Council is shared with all members in full.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Chris Seelig
Vote: Unanimous

9.2 Oxfordshire Unitary / “Ridgeway Council” Consultation

RESOLVED:
To delegate authority to Cllr Peter Head to prepare and submit the Council’s consultation response, with the draft to be circulated to councillors prior to submission.

Proposed: Cllr Chris Seelig
Seconded: Cllr Francoise Yates
Vote: Unanimous

9.3 National Planning Policy Framework Consultation

RESOLVED:
To delegate authority to Cllr Peter Head to prepare and circulate a draft consultation response for review prior to submission.

Proposed: Cllr Francoise Yates
Seconded: Cllr Matt Talbot
Vote: Unanimous

10. Finance & Administration

10.1 Authorisation of Payments

Cllr Matt Talbot was appointed as payment authoriser for March 2026.

10.2 Approval of Payments

The schedule of payments totalling £1,524.65 was reviewed.

RESOLVED:
To approve the payments as listed.

Bank interest of £17.51 was noted.

10.3 Citizens Advice Donation

RESOLVED:
To approve a donation of £100 to Citizens Advice.

Proposed: Cllr Francoise Yates
Seconded: Cllr Chris Seelig
Vote: Unanimous

10.4 SLCC Membership Renewal

RESOLVED:
To approve renewal of SLCC membership (£215).

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Chris Seelig
Vote: Unanimous

10.5 Bank Reconciliation

The bank reconciliation to 31 January 2026 was reviewed and signed.

10.6 Professional Advice Regarding Loan Agreement – Consideration and Next Steps

The Council formally noted the professional advice received from the Clerk & RFO, the Council’s solicitor, and the Oxfordshire Association of Local Councils regarding the requirement for specialist legal advice in connection with the Chapel Furlong land purchase and associated loan agreement.

It was noted that:

• The Clerk signed the engagement letter with Boyes Turner LLP on 2 February 2026 at the Council’s request;
• Confirmation of that engagement was received on 11 February 2026;
• Members stated that the Council had been aligned with the use of specialist legal advice throughout;
• Concerns raised by members had related not to opposition to legal advice, but to questions of value for money, incomplete information, and the timely circulation of key correspondence and advice.

Members discussed governance, legal, audit, indemnity, insurance, and communication issues arising from the handling of the matter. In particular, it was noted that:

• Specialist legal representation had been consistently supported by the Council;
• Clarification that the loan agreement needed to be fully owned and managed by the solicitor had resolved earlier uncertainty;
• Timely circulation of significant correspondence and written advice to all members would assist effective governance and reduce the risk of misunderstanding;
• Some concerns were raised regarding communication processes and professional relationships, and it was agreed that clearer written updates would be beneficial going forward.

Following discussion, the Council considered the proposed next steps and agreed to confirm its existing position.

Resolved:

1. To note that the engagement letter from Boyes Turner LLP was signed by the Clerk on 2 February 2026 at the Council’s request, and that members have been aligned with that instruction throughout.
2. To formally confirm the instruction to Boyes Turner LLP to act on the Chapel Furlong land purchase, including negotiating and documenting the associated loan agreement within the scope of the engagement letter.
3. To note the professional advice received from the Clerk, OALC, and Boyes Turner LLP, and to confirm the Council’s support for the recommended approach.
4. To request that the Clerk provide regular written progress updates to all members on the land purchase, including circulation of significant correspondence as soon as reasonably practicable and normally within two working days of receipt, subject to reasonable officer capacity and working hours.

Proposed: Cllr Peter Head
Seconded: Cllr Chris Seelig
Vote: Unanimous

11. Upton News

Members agreed that items relating to:

• pothole reporting via FixMyStreet
• the village survey
• volunteer working groups

should be submitted for inclusion in the next edition.

12. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting of Upton Parish Council will be held on:

Wednesday 25 March 2026 – 19:00
Small Meeting Room, Upton Village Hall