Rolley Report and Apology – Web Site and Facebook

Source page 1

Extract from the Full Council Agenda – 17th March 2025
2025/23

To Receive the Opinion Of the Chief Executive & Town Clerk (CE &TC) And
Agree And Implement A Recommendation For An Apology Based On The
Minute 2024/41
Issues raised by some Councillors in recent discussions and emails have
resulted in the CE &TC bringing forward his opinion on this matter from the
proposed April cycle date.
Because this has been brought forward, the CE&TC opinion is not complete but
a recommendation to implement Minute 2024/41 will be based on an oral report,
including his summary.
The proposed apology will be detailed and, if acceptable, implemented at the
meeting.

The transcript of the oral report from the Chief Executive & Town Clerk follows.

David Bell
Chief Executive & Town Clerk
Chard Town Council

Source page 2

Madam Mayor,
This may take a while.
By Way Of Introduction
Since my arrival at Chard Town Council on the 23rd December 2025, - yes, it’s
only about 12 weeks - I have been charged with two main tasks.
The first was to set Chard Town Council on the road to stability, openness,
transparency and accountability.
The second was to untangle a past that led to a “toxic and dysfunctional”
reputation in the public arena, with even Somerset Council taking unusual
steps to comment. The two matters, although they can be separated, are
ultimately inextricably linked.
On visiting as a member of the public, mid last year, even the building had a
bad atmosphere and could be classed as the quintessential example of a sick
building. I noticed an oppressive atmosphere, not conducive to efficient
functioning. A cause and effect.
I would now go so far as to say it was noticeable as trepidation. Some people
were not only fearful but exhibited heightened anxiety, particularly relating to
continuing perceived or anticipated reprisals. It will not be lost on you that I
said people rather than just staff.
On the first task, we have made significant progress within the Council where
we have improved staff professional relationships, conditions and expectations
along with responses to our community. With Councillors we have improved
by sharing information formally and informally, aiming to be on the same team
and, at the request of some, informal on-the-job training for day-to-day
matters.
Various subjects and opportunities have been addressed in the day-to-day
running of the council. Many more are under review, investigation or
implementation. We are still under difficult conditions but making solid
progress.
Some brief examples of ongoing matters are a review of capacity and
capability, the needs and efficiency of the reception area from a community
and staff point of view, finally resolving some audit matters, the Guildhall
general experience, the need to improve our Market Town offering, all things
data protection and our IT.

1

Source page 3

The latter is a good example from a long list of matters that should have had
consideration and planning in recent years.
Soon, Microsoft will no longer provide technical support, bug fixes, or security
fixes for our software vulnerabilities. This should have been addressed before
now. I am very grateful for staff who have skills or experience, but it is not
within their role or training. It is not too late, and I am about to start
discussions with external IT providers. Having sought advice and costings, I will
then come back to Committee.
However, the main driver behind this report is the tangled web that relates to
the reason for commissioning, undertaking and subsequent council sessions
along with individual Councillor and Officer comments and actions relating to
the Rolley Report. I am also aware that the public have expressed significant
frustration and concern, particularly in public questions sessions. It is a matter
of significant concern to many that it still lingers, some have said “festers”. The
matter needs to be addressed in order to get to an appropriate apology stage.
There is a rumour doing the rounds that I committed to report to Full Council
in March, but this was not the case. Indeed, I commented in writing, that “I am
unlikely to be in a position to get to the March cycle, but it may be possible for
the next Full Council or appropriate Committee after that”.
This was for a wider reaching formal report that currently resides in draft in
notes and in my head. Instead, in this March meeting cycle, I am now
responding to requests and pressure for an earlier item and, therefore, having
not been given the time I needed, will report a cut-down version via summary
of matters found to date. My apologies for an oral report but this statement
was not concluded until just prior to the Planning & Highways Committee at
6pm today.
Getting To The Minute 2024/41 Itself
Because the content is confidential, I can not reproduce detail here.
However, it is part of the post Rolley Report discussions and reviewed the
findings of a claimed independent, CTC internal review of the Rolley Report.
In my opinion, the understanding of the Full Council of that latter CTC review
does not sit well with the actual content of the CTC internal review of the
Rolley Report. I have seen it, and that review asked even more questions and
was conducted under difficult conditions with the lead investigator under
instruction and probably not allowed access to all the evidence. The Full

2

Source page 4

Council also resolved that something “appeared” to be the case, and this
implies that evidence and facts were not conclusive.
By the term "conclusive", I refer to something that is final and leaves no room
for doubt or further argument. This does not appear to be the case from
either the Item Note or my review of the CTC Independent Report data.
I am having trouble relating that CTC report to the first part of the, let’s call it,
“Confidential Minute”. However, the second and third parts are clear
insomuch as the Officers were instructed to offer an “unreserved apology to
those affected and rescind the Report”. In addition, the instruction was to take
“Legal advice on the wording” for which maximum fees were agreed.
Given that my proposed timescale has been compressed by others, I can report
that (in the timescale I have been allowed) the Solicitor dealing with the
original enquiry has moved on and the replacement Solicitor was in court all
week. It is, therefore, not possible yet to comply with the final instruction to
Officers within this imposed timescale.
Councillors have not agreed the apology wording, as there is no apparent
formal, agreed form. I will, as a result, comply with the instruction with regard
to an apology but based on my findings in this statement. I have endeavoured
to ascertain a more accurate scope of those affected and construct the apology
for approval according to these findings.
Do skills and experience matter ?
My professional background includes Expert Witness, Independent Reports
and Advocacy at Inquiry and Tribunal, so I am well equipped to comment on
the processes and historic outcomes. Indeed, I have a reputation for
developing strategies to take on King’s Counsel at inquiry and come out on the
successful side. I will return to the matter of skills and experience on other
occasions within this statement.
The “Rolley Report”
What is an Independent Report ?
There has been much talk of the Independent Report not being independent,
accusations of injury, attempts to rescind the report and accusations of
bullying or vendettas. The latter, if proven, are contrary to everything that the
Council should stand for in its raison d'être. Put simply, Councillors and
officers are indispensable to one another and mutual respect and
communication between both is essential for good local government.

3

Source page 5

Together, they bring the critical skills, experience and knowledge required to
manage an effective council and, thereby, serve the best interests of the local
community.
Organisations should commission independent investigations and reports from
people with the skills and experience on a range of matters. On this matter,
after enquiry, I have no doubt that Mr Rolley possesses the relevant skills and
experience to take on this type of task.
The main aim of any such report should be to consider the available data and
intelligence to provide an expert understanding of the current situation, with
analysis leading to recommendations for action or, indeed, possibly that
matters can not be mitigated.
I have considered the scoping documents, the final report produced by the
author, Mr Rolley, and a previous draft version.
It is reasonable that an author reports back to the client and may, for example,
request clarification on matters such as factual content. These could be
matters such as a date, minutes reference, details of an organisation that are
not clear and the like.
I understand that the opportunity was given to Councillors to raise any
concerns at an informal meeting run by Chris Rolley.
• Why were no concerns or issues brought up by Members at that time ?
The ultimate reason for commissioning such a report is to support the work of
the council in serving the community it represents.
The expected form of the report is crucial. Good practice, if there is likely to be
confidential information or protected data, is to produce the main body of the
report in a form that can be made public and place confidential information
(such as Councillor or staff names) in an annex document clearly labelled
CONFIDENTIAL.
Above all, the author must use their own words and terminology.
I have checked with Mr Rolley and he has confirmed that the latter applies.
Reasonable Courses Of Action After The Rolley Report Publication
Having commissioned an independent report for the stated use, then there are
only two reasonable, courses of action to proceed.
1. Accept the report, learn from it and progress any agreed
recommendations.

4

Source page 6

Or
2. Decide not to accept the report and move on.
Whichever option is chosen, it is a fact that the report (as published) exists and
that can not be denied.
There appear to have been two attempts (by different people or groups) at
providing scoping information. A question that remains outstanding is “Why
was the Scope of the investigation changed by the Council ?”. This, in itself,
appears to have created confusion, neither does it clearly define the time
frame of “Recent Events”. To further confuse the situation, it appears that the
skills and experience to carry out such a specialist task do not appear evident
with the staff at the time, nor were these skills and experience sought. This
not only applies to the two original scoping attempts but also the internal
review of the report. With regard to the latter, it would have been more
appropriate to have approached an independent source such as, perhaps, a
local Town Council.
To throw in even more confusion, it would be reasonable to expect an Exit
Interview for a Town Clerk leaving the post, whether under a cloud or the
joyous occasion of retirement after a period of service well done. This would
have been a valuable resource, evidence and fact on which the Councillors
could base deliberations on the appointment of a replacement Town Clerk.
I understand that there have been multiple attempts to rescind the Rolley
Report.
To rescind something in law means to invalidate it. Examples of rescission
often come up in contract law, as parties may decide to void, or rescind, a
contract they had previously entered into. This is, in effect, course of action 2,
i.e. to decide not to accept the report and move on.
The problem with that course of action appears to be the damage done in
arguing for and against it.
It is well known that a councillor’s primary role is to represent their ward and
the people who live in it. This can be in daily life and formal meetings.
Councillors provide an invaluable bridge between the community and the
council formal and day-to-day workings. However, unfortunately, during my
deliberations I have found (at times) a rudderless organisation all too eager to
develop into a significant blame and antagonistic culture.

5

Source page 7

In law, Councillors “powers” cease the moment a formal council meeting ends
and Officers run the day to day dealings with an objective of working within
policy and strategy set by the council. For example, the resolved but
undefined apology minute or note 2024/41 should have been actioned.
I do have the ability to include Councillors at day-to-day meetings but,
technically, only in an Observer role. They can interact but must be careful not
to give the impression that they are predetermining outcomes of future formal
Council discussions and decisions. Operationally, I have a wide remit. I
encourage Councillors outside their formal meetings to interact with their
electorate and discuss matters with council staff, but they do not individually
have decision making powers. In this regard, as Town Clerk and Proper Officer,
I need to make it quite clear that if Councillors undertake certain activities or
present in what may be deemed an unreasonable way in the day-to-day
running of the Council then this may be viewed as aggressive (depending on
the individual viewpoint) and, in some cases, illegal behaviour.
I mention this because I have found such instances in my investigation.
I am not prepared to comment on the styles of my predecessor Town Clerks.
When faced with challenges, we all make our own decisions. However, I can
say that on some matters I would not have done it that way.
The impact of, at times, a rudderless ship has in my view compounded or
exacerbated situations that could, and should, have been avoided.
Leadership is about clarity, not a struggle for control. Confused, threatened
teams make mistakes. In my opinion, the Council has been at least
unambitious and, possibly, regressive. Attitudes and likely posturing have led
to unnecessary confusion and incidents with outcomes that do not serve our
community well – either in services or the public purse.
I do not believe it possible to agree a fair or just verdict in this statement for a
situation that has been fundamentally flawed through several stages of both
the independent investigations. Simply, I need to find a recommendation that
will move the Council on.
This situation (over a long period of time) appears to have led to perceived and
entrenched viewpoints (some bordering on obsession and vendetta) that, in
my opinion, have no place in a functional council.
Not acting in an appropriate, considerate manner, can lead to feelings of
embarrassment, antagonism, vendetta and alleged conduct unbecoming of the
post or posts representing Chard Town Council. This creates and fosters the

6

Source page 8

“toxic and dysfunctional” reputation. I would hope that, in future, the maxim
“treat people as you would wish to be treated” applies.
I report to and must protect the interests of the Full Council, not individual
Councillors.
On this basis, I implore you (to the benefit of the community we all serve) to
draw a line and move on. In carrying out this investigation and making this
early statement of findings, I am able to recommend a wording for a suitable
apology that is in the spirit of the Full Council resolution. It would also appear
that I am able to deliver it.
Conclusions
• Much, if not most, of the need to make this apology could have been
avoided. Some actions and consequences appear self-inflicted. Cause and
effect !
• Lack of, or ineffective, Council leadership for long periods has exacerbated
the situation leading to in-fighting and the public perception of a “toxic
and dysfunctional” council. Much of what I have uncovered is posturing
rather than factual, indisputable evidence. Without factual evidence (and
without the support of report author) I cannot see a way in which this can
be reviewed further. This could have been avoided.
• Perceived (some devoid of fact) and entrenched viewpoints and positions
with some bordering on obsession and vendetta have, in my opinion, no
place in a functional council.
• The reality of the situation is a mess where there were, and still are, many
different scenarios unfolding over the weeks and months before and after
some staff leaving Council employment. The disagreements before,
during and after the Rolley Report must be confined to history and
archived, if we are to concentrate on improving and enhancing the future
of our community.
• Much ground has already been covered in the last 12 weeks or so.
Responsibilities are identified and the ambiance in the building is very
different. This part of the problem is well on the way to rectification. The
Council is, in my opinion, moving forward in a positive way and the fact
that we are here to serve our community is nearly fully embedded.

7

Source page 9

With those conclusions in mind, I recommend that:
The following detailed, draft apology should be 1) considered and, if felt
appropriate, 2) agreed with a subsequent instruction for the Chief Executive
& Town Clerk to deliver at this meeting and 3) be followed up by posting on
the Council website and social media.

Draft Apology
Subject to the following two caveats:
a) By accepting the apology, the Council, its constituent Councillors
along with Officers of the Council and other persons affected agree,
in the interest of the community that they serve, to take no further
actions as a Council, group or individuals in relation to the matter of
the Rolley Report, including events prior to, resulting from the
investigation and publication of that report.
b) Lessons learned from the Rolley Report will be considered, as
appropriate, in future Council business and the report will now be
archived.
This Council offers an unreserved apology to the following named people or
groups for, where applicable, not acting in an appropriate and considerate
manner. This includes the way in which the report was handled and any
subsequent feeling of ill-will, embarrassment and any alleged conduct
unbecoming of the post or posts representing Chard Town Council:
1) The Chard wider community.
2) The author of the report, Mr Christopher Rolley.
3) The Full Council.
and
4) The Officer Team.

8